The Left's Challenge now…

Tagged: 

This topic contains 19 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by  radiodork 2 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #38224

    Herb
    Participant

    …is to risk losing voters in states that went overwhelmingly for President Trump by voting against Justice Kavanaugh.

    http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/396380-red-state-democrats-will-vote-on-supreme-court-pick-to-stay-alive

    Here’s the deal. Some of these senators voted for Justice Gorsuch before. It’ll be no big surprise if Schumer loses yet again on this one…especially since a liberal case is now being made that concedes Justice Kavanaugh should be confirmed:

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/396241-yale-law-professor-makes-liberals-case-for-kavanaugh

    Democrats better wake up and smell the covfefe, then work on getting their violent, radical wing under control or risk alienating more centrist voters even more than they already have.

    #38225

    Andrew
    Participant

    Here’s the thing: Gorsuch was going to get approved without votes from any Democrats. It was a politically wise and safe vote for these red-state Democratic senators. Now they can oppose Kavanaugh but hold up their vote for Gorsuch as proof that they aren’t in Chuck Schumer’s pocket. See? We support qualified judges even if they are conservative…but this guy Kavanaugh is too conservative…tainted by the deal with Kennedy to support Kavanaugh as a replacement. Whatever excuse they want to use.

    #38226

    Andrew
    Participant

    What really matters are the votes of Senators Collins and Murkowski – if those two oppose, then the three red state senators have some cover to fall in line with them. If Collins and Murkowski both support Kavanaugh, it’s another irrelevant, safe vote for red state Democrats: they might as well vote in favor and help their re-election chances.

    #38227

    missing_kskd
    Participant

    Voting to confirm anyone Trump picks is not safe, nor wise, unless we want to call big ten Dems Republicans who are for gay marriage and pro choice.

    Just wait. Progressives will unseat some red Dems.

    #38228

    Vitalogy
    Participant

    “Voting to confirm anyone Trump picks is not safe, nor wise.”

    Says the guy who took it to the convention.

    Wouldn’t it be so much better to be watching conservatives crap their pants at the thought of a 5th liberal judge being seated?

    Yeah. You don’t get to complain about Trump. You helped him win and cement an right wing SCOTUS for the next 20 years.

    #38231

    missing_kskd
    Participant

    Going to convention did not impact Clinton.

    On the other hand, “resist” = bullshit, when Dems are validating aGOP policy and nominations.

    #38232

    Vitalogy
    Participant

    “Going to convention did not impact Clinton.”

    Horseshit. Bernie Bots poisoned the election. And you are case #1.

    You have no right to complain about Trump when you helped him get elected.

    #38234

    Andrew
    Participant

    Missing: “Voting to confirm anyone Trump picks is not safe, nor wise, unless we want to call big ten Dems Republicans who are for gay marriage and pro choice.”

    Sounds like you would prefer a larger Republican majority in the Senate.

    “Just wait. Progressives will unseat some red Dems.”

    And how would that happen? Oh, wait – you’re talking about Bernie’s theory that all Democrats need to do to win vast majorities in Congress is to run as left-left populists in red districts all over the country, completely ignoring the local politics. And then suddenly, everyone in that region will start voting for the Berniecrat. Unfortunately, this has yet to happen…ANYWHERE that I’m aware of.

    Look at Doug Jones’s upset win for senate in Alabama: he won (barely) because he’s a conservative Democrat. No left-left populist could have won there. You have to run people who are a fit for their states and districts if you want to win and hold a majority. That’s how politics works. You can’t insist every candidate in every state and district in the country adhere to your personal “progressive purity test” to be acceptable. That’s only going to lead to larger Republican majorities.

    #38246

    missing_kskd
    Participant

    We’ve been through all that.

    I have the right to complain about anyone, same as anyone.

    Democrats helping Trump nominate the wrong kind of people to SCOTUS, tax cuts, etc…

    Just isn’t a good look. It sure as hell isn’t any “resistance”, and frankly, bolsters a case for party reform.

    LONG OVERDUE.

    As for “poisoned” the election.

    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

    Tell me another one. That is so desperate as to be cute.

    😀

    #38248

    missing_kskd
    Participant

    Republican majority: if they vote Republican, it is an effective, larger majority. Jones is not a Democrat in his policy preferences. His votes are showing.

    Rather than dick around with hard cases like AL, maybe the DCCC can think about maximizing much easier ones.

    #38249

    Herb
    Participant

    “Bernie Bots poisoned the election.”

    Bernie and Jill Stein had the combined effect of a Nader candidacy.

    I miss Ralph…

    Of course, Hillary’s email server, plus Huma’s sharing a laptop with a perv only added to the Wikileaks information.

    Were I a Democrat, I’d want her gone, too, despite her stoking up the angry leftist base. That only helps conservatives who are not into shrill.

    But the biggest tipoff that Hillary should be jettisoned? 53% of white females did not vote for her.

    Think about that. Females in Hillary’s own demographic not only don’t connect with her, but chose Mr. Trump instead. Wake up time.

    #38257

    Andrew
    Participant

    Missing: “Republican majority: if they vote Republican, it is an effective, larger majority. Jones is not a Democrat in his policy preferences. His votes are showing.”

    In other words, if he votes with Republicans sometimes, might have just have a Republican in that seat, right?

    See, the problem with that thinking is: if the Democrats pick up two seats in the Senate, Jones will caucus with them and Democrats will control the Senate agenda – including judicial nominations, investigations, etc. That’s why I’d greatly prefer a Democrat from a red state vote with Republicans once in a while in ways that don’t really affect the outcome – much better that now than to have Republicans in those seats making it harder for Democrats to control the Senate!

    #38258

    Andrew
    Participant

    Herb: “Think about that. Females in Hillary’s own demographic not only don’t connect with her, but chose Mr. Trump instead. Wake up time.”

    I agree, it’s pretty sad that a Democratic candidate would receive 2.7 million more votes the Republican and still lose, thanks to the oversized influence of small conservative red states in the electoral college. In a real Democracy, she would have needed to win by only one vote. But clearly, Democrats are going to have to win not just by a majority of Americans but by an overwhelming majority of votes to assure victory.

    But this should make it crystal clear to anyone but an unbiased partisan that Republicans DO NOT represent views of the majority of Americans.

    #38269

    Herb
    Participant

    You should be mad at Hillary for being not as smart as her media handlers suggested.

    Mr. Trump worked with the Constitutional method of electoral college votes.

    Hillary didn’t.

    Now how smart was that?

    Advantage…and Presidency…Mr. Trump.

    #38281

    Brianl
    Participant

    I gotta say, Herb’s spot-on here.

    Trump ran a fear-based, mudslinging campaign. He stuck to it, never derived from it, and he was successful. His team did the work.

    Hillary never stepped foot in Wisconsin, which anyone with a pulse knew was an important swing state. She did NOT do the work.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.