Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 39
Thanks Tree26Thanks

Thread: Progressives angry at getting "steam rolled" in New Jersey

  1. #1
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28363

    From
    New Hampshire

    Progressives angry at getting "steam rolled" in New Jersey

    Jeff Van Drew has voted against raising the minimum wage and gay marriage. He often sides with industry on environmental issues and carries an A rating from the NRA. And he’s the odds-on favorite to be New Jersey’s newest Democratic congressman.

    In the party’s first real crack at winning the South Jersey-based district held by retiring Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.) for more than two decades, the Democratic Party establishment — at every level — is throwing its collective weight behind Van Drew, leaving local progressives baffled, frustrated and more than a little angry. Nationally, the Democratic Party has seen a surge of progressive activism in the wake of Trump’s election, and New Jersey’s 2nd Congressional District is no exception. So liberal activists, who frequently gathered in front of LoBiondo’s office to demand a town hall meeting that never came, have turned their ire on Democratic leaders.

    Van Drew will almost certainly win the primary and is heavily favored to win the seat in November. “The DCCC needs to take a look at themselves in the mirror and make sure we’re reflective of who we’re sending to D.C.,” Cunningham said of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which has all but officially thrown in with Van Drew after trying for at least a decade to recruit him to run there. “We as the Democratic Party, if we’re going to talk the talk, we’ve got to walk the walk.”

    The anger has spilled out into public forums. At one, high school student Emily McGrath confronted Van Drew — who had one day earlier told her class he did not accept donations from the NRA — about a $1,000 donation she had discovered. The videotaped confrontation, in which McGrath said “Senator, you lied,” made headlines around the state.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...essives-523117

  2. #2
    Chaos in fourteen lines Minotaur's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    21,754
    Thanks
    18066

    From
    USA
    I got a kick out of this part:

    "Van Drew will almost certainly win the primary and is heavily favored to win the seat in November." Followed by this: “The DCCC needs to take a look at themselves in the mirror and make sure we’re reflective of who we’re sending to D.C.,”

    If Van Drew is heavily favored to win then he is a good match for the area he is running for. Not sure why so-called progressives seem to know so little about having to represent constituents, not Washington flavors of the month. At a time when Congressional leadership is what is most important to keep this country from imploding with Trump, there should be no mystery.

    I think it is not the DCCC that needs to look at itself. lol

  3. #3
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28363

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    I got a kick out of this part:

    "Van Drew will almost certainly win the primary and is heavily favored to win the seat in November." Followed by this: “The DCCC needs to take a look at themselves in the mirror and make sure we’re reflective of who we’re sending to D.C.,”

    If Van Drew is heavily favored to win then he is a good match for the area he is running for. Not sure why so-called progressives seem to know so little about having to represent constituents, not Washington flavors of the month. At a time when Congressional leadership is what is most important to keep this country from imploding with Trump, there should be no mystery.

    I think it is not the DCCC that needs to look at itself. lol
    I suppose its easier for those either center left or center right to laugh at this, but I guess it might be worrisome overall. If he is against gay marriage that does carry implications further down the line. I mean some things like abortion can go either way, because one can say its a religious thing. Guns, can also go both ways saying its cultural. But against gays? Thats bigotry plain and simple. He certainly might win, but it could cause friction later on when decisions are made about wedding cakes or LGBTQ issues. Could also give fodder to the GOP when the dems point out one of theirs is anti gay.
    Thanks from Minotaur

  4. #4
    Ignorance Is Virtue BitterPill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    10,618
    Thanks
    7232

    From
    SoCal
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    I suppose its easier for those either center left or center right to laugh at this, but I guess it might be worrisome overall. If he is against gay marriage that does carry implications further down the line. I mean some things like abortion can go either way, because one can say its a religious thing. Guns, can also go both ways saying its cultural. But against gays? Thats bigotry plain and simple. He certainly might win, but it could cause friction later on when decisions are made about wedding cakes or LGBTQ issues. Could also give fodder to the GOP when the dems point out one of theirs is anti gay.
    I think the Democratic party can live with both a progressive wing and a conservative wing. Sure there will be infighting, but we are talking about politics, so it would be weird (and awfully Republican) if there were no infighting.
    Thanks from Minotaur

  5. #5
    Chaos in fourteen lines Minotaur's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    21,754
    Thanks
    18066

    From
    USA
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    I suppose its easier for those either center left or center right to laugh at this, but I guess it might be worrisome overall. If he is against gay marriage that does carry implications further down the line. I mean some things like abortion can go either way, because one can say its a religious thing. Guns, can also go both ways saying its cultural. But against gays? Thats bigotry plain and simple. He certainly might win, but it could cause friction later on when decisions are made about wedding cakes or LGBTQ issues. Could also give fodder to the GOP when the dems point out one of theirs is anti gay.
    That is the thing: Try and force a litmus test on districts and your candidate will lose. If the district does not like a candidate's stances they just vote for the other candidate. If his voters are for gay marriage he will be for it and claim he can separate his personal belief from gay issues and be fair. That is what politicians do. Even Obama was against abortion personally but noted he would implement the law of the land.

    This odd concept of running people whose personal belief should be the opposite of the constituents is a flight of fantasy. You can do it but they won't win. Imagine running a KKK wizard in New York. Hey now that I think about it, this could be fun. lol

  6. #6
    Chaos in fourteen lines Minotaur's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    21,754
    Thanks
    18066

    From
    USA
    Quote Originally Posted by BitterPill View Post
    I think the Democratic party can live with both a progressive wing and a conservative wing. Sure there will be infighting, but we are talking about politics, so it would be weird (and awfully Republican) if there were no infighting.
    I agree. They have always worked together in a dysfunctionally semi-functional way. Neither side can impose Washington ideology factions on districts mainly because an imposition candidate will lose every time.
    Thanks from BitterPill

  7. #7
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28363

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    That is the thing: Try and force a litmus test on districts and your candidate will lose. If the district does not like a candidate's stances they just vote for the other candidate. If his voters are for gay marriage he will be for it and claim he can separate his personal belief from gay issues and be fair. That is what politicians do. Even Obama was against abortion personally but noted he would implement the law of the land.

    This odd concept of running people whose personal belief should be the opposite of the constituents is a flight of fantasy. You can do it but they won't win. Imagine running a KKK wizard in New York. Hey now that I think about it, this could be fun. lol
    I get that for the most part but I do think there are certain things that dont fly. Coming out against gay marriage could be one of them. It was used so much as a tool during Obama/Biden and again for dems in 2016 as it was asked that they were on board. I understand this particular district is heavily anti gay and anti immigrant but I dont know thats a good thing to elect someone on. Its just curious.
    Thanks from Minotaur

  8. #8
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28363

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by BitterPill View Post
    I think the Democratic party can live with both a progressive wing and a conservative wing. Sure there will be infighting, but we are talking about politics, so it would be weird (and awfully Republican) if there were no infighting.
    I agree completely, but I prefer to draw the line on certain things like gay rights or civil rights. Most everything else is fluff, but those issues determine moral character.
    Thanks from BitterPill and Coyote

  9. #9
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    38,990
    Thanks
    37219

    From
    United States

    Progressives angry at getting "steam rolled" in New Jersey

    Since when is the most popular candidate winning a primary election referred to as the losing candidates(s) having been steam rolled?

    What is the point in holding an election if the person who gets the most votes loses?
    Thanks from Minotaur

  10. #10
    Chaos in fourteen lines Minotaur's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    21,754
    Thanks
    18066

    From
    USA
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    I get that for the most part but I do think there are certain things that dont fly. Coming out against gay marriage could be one of them. It was used so much as a tool during Obama/Biden and again for dems in 2016 as it was asked that they were on board. I understand this particular district is heavily anti gay and anti immigrant but I dont know thats a good thing to elect someone on. Its just curious.
    There is a test that is as enjoyable as talking about where they once stood and that is hearing where they stand now. I am pretty sure we will find that Democratic Candidate Mr. X will run on bland and more bland followed by the words "separate my personal belief...bla bla bla"

    Apply this to every candidate and this candidate is unlikely to be an exception. I'm just glad he is not running in my district.
    Thanks from bajisima

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 26th October 2016, 04:16 AM
  2. Replies: 74
    Last Post: 3rd January 2016, 06:31 AM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 25th March 2014, 12:03 PM
  4. Replies: 128
    Last Post: 8th August 2012, 02:11 PM
  5. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 7th August 2012, 01:28 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed