AL-05

Let's all hope Sparks gets into the race and shows Griffith and any other party switchers a lesson or two. SHall we resume SParksmania where we left off in 2008?    

17, Gay Male, Democrat, NJ-8  

---

by: GayTeen4Obama @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 19:52:24 PM UTC

Sparks

is a little bit of a carpetbagger here.  Is that going to be a problem?  He is from Fort Payne, which is in the 4th CD but is very close to the 5th.  He lives in Montgomery, which is in the 2nd and 3rd and nowhere near the 5th.

BTW, I have been to Fort Payne.  It is the "Sock Capital of the World."  I saw more sock stores in Fort Payne than in all of the other cities I have been in combined.  It is also the hometown of country music's "Alabama," and there is a museum there dedicated to the band.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:06:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

SParks

So the district will either be represented by a teabagger, a carpetbagger, or a turn coat who only cares about his own political ambitions. It's a sad note on how politics is run these days, which is why I so respect Tom Perriello with his votes on tough bills in our favor. Perriello should defiantly be one of the campaigns we help out the most, along with Grayson and others.  

17, Gay Male, Democrat, NJ-8  

---

by: GayTeen4Obama @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:25:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Absolutely

Sparks defeating Griffith in the General would be fantastic!

---

by: TXMichael @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:08:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

EVen better

Even better would be that Griffith loses to a teabagger in the primary and Sparks goes on to beat the teabagger in the general. Im unsure on which I would rather see since the teabagger might have strong party support but lose moderates while Griffith would lose the far right while having a good chance of earning more moderate Republicans and moderates in general.    

17, Gay Male, Democrat, NJ-8  

---

by: GayTeen4Obama @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:15:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Whoever wins the GOP primary will be equally strong......

Republicans will unite behind the winner.  They might chew each other up enough that the winner is close to mortally wounded with the broader electorate heading into the general, but it's pretty easy to project that if Griffith wins, he's validated, and if he loses, the winner gets unified support as a "real" conservative.  Garden variety conservatives, even in Alabama, are not going to reject Griffith vs. a Democrat in November over Griffith's vote for S-CHIP expansion--that's too small-time.  I think even today most partisan wingnuts still aren't that demanding of purity.  Griffith's voting record is right-wing enough to defend among the right.

I actually think it's Griffith's donations to Dean and Reid that hurt him much more in the primary.  It really raises big questions about his past politics that as a private citizen he gave money to those guys, neither of whom ever had even a remote personal or political connection to Alabama.  I'm far to Griffith's left myself, and even I never gave money to Dean, even as I spent much of 2003 as a "Dean leaner."

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:48:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Reid donation hurts Griffith badly

Dean donation hurts, but not as much.  Griffith can claim that as a doctor, he wanted to support another doctor.  I'm willing to bet that had Dean won the nomination in 2004, a many conservative and Republican doctors would have voted for Dean and possibly donated to him.

---

by: JSmith @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 01:12:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

True

Check some FEC reports for doctors and psychiatrists that are in the House like Charles Boustany and Judy Chu and you'll see there is a lot of crossover appeal.  However, while we may be able to make that delineation, I don't think a liberal-hating teabagger is going to be as sympathetic to Griffith giving money to a man that epitomizes the liberal wing of the Democratic Party.  

---

by: DFLer @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 01:21:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey

It seems like Parker Griffith might have a hard time getting through the general election. Maybe he should think about switching parties. :D

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09

---

by: Bob Bobson @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:34:35 PM UTC

haha

honestly that would be hilarious if he switches back. He would be a the worst disgrace on capital hill since DOllar-Bill Jefferson  

17, Gay Male, Democrat, NJ-8  

---

by: GayTeen4Obama @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:38:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sparks

I love Sparks as much as the next guy, but shouldn't someone who lives in the district get the right away and Sparks should wait for them?  I don't understand why he refused to take on Figures in a contested primary, but instead waited for the better known Artur Davis.   Also,a nyone want to take a shot at Shelby just so we have someone strong up and down the ballot?  

Please donate to amcharities.org to help build more after school centers in the Miami area.  

23, Democrat, IA-2

---

by: ModerateIADem @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:38:20 PM UTC

District residency doesn't matter at all......

It's always an attack line that gets used when a candidate doesn't live in the district, but it rarely succeeds.  People run for seats outside their district of residence all the time, and they win more often than some people realize.  And even more often they'll move right before running for a seat, and that, too, is seldom attacked successfully.  You really have to be from out-of-state for a carpetbagger label to stick these days, or at least from such a radically culturally different part of the same state that it seems like you're from out-of-state.

Sparks is the strongest possible candidate and should run.  And, on top of that, he actually has deep roots in North Alabama even though he doesn't live there right now.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:52:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You are correct

I just worry that our perfect candidate keeps injecting a possible candidacy into nearly every race and it seems to cheapen what he brings to the table.  

Please donate to amcharities.org to help build more after school centers in the Miami area.  

23, Democrat, IA-2

---

by: ModerateIADem @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 21:08:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Tom McClintock

was labeled as a carpetbagger, a charge that he couldn't deny since he served in the state senate in SoCal while running for a house seat in NorCal. He still won, though by a razor thin margin.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 23:07:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed

Itd be like someone whos lived all their life in Manhattan but running in an upstate NY district just because 'he owns a summer home there'. Or someone from the TX suburbs running in a rural TX district just because they own a hunting ranch there (and just go to a couple times a year).  

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 00:17:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

To some extent, a "summer home" worked for Pat Moynihan

His summer home in Pindar's Corners enhanced his upstate appeal. Sure, he ran statewide, but NY is unusually open to "carpetbaggers," e.g. RFK, Hillary, etc.  

---

by: tietack @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 02:40:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wonder if that's just a function of size

Since California seems to have a few carpetbaggers of their own. Actually, this lets me bring up an interesting anecdote: my father, who happens to be a Brooklyn Jew, just loves pointing out whenever he sees a Jew on TV (particularly a Brooklyn Jew) and whenever he sees Barbara Boxer he never fails to mention that she went to Brooklyn College (like my father). Although this raises the question of why there are so many Brooklyners who feel compelled to leave Brooklyn... (no offense to anyone living in Brooklyn ;))

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

---

by: DGM @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 04:54:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I guess

when you're a state of immigrants and transplants, "carpetbaggers" are probably not as frowned upon, and in fact might even be welcome. Transplants as well as immigrants have had very strong influence in California's history dating all the way back to the 49ers, and maybe even further back.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)

---

by: californianintexas @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 05:43:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

There's also something about the southwest

Albuquerque's new Mayor Richard Berry (right-wing tool) is actually from a small town in Nebraska (the number of New York and Midwestern transplants would surprise you).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

---

by: DGM @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 05:50:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

They won't campaign on "repeal"......

They'd be stupid to campaign on repeal.  The reform law will inch up in popularity through 2010 until it's no benefit to run against it in the general.  Only the conservative base will remain solidly opposed by November.

And I think Republicans know that, so they won't do it.

Newt, for his part, is stupid.  I marvel at how stupid he is politically and struggle to grasp how far he's fallen in political acumen since the early 90s.

But I hope dearly that the teabagging dumbasses do, indeed, force the issue through next year.  It's a fratricide that will just kill the GOP.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 20:40:36 PM UTC

I think it is hazardous to underestimate the stupidity and extremism

of today's Republican Party.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  

---

by: Pan @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 21:53:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Scozoffavva

Scozofavva bring memories to anyone?  

17, Gay Male, Democrat, NJ-8  

---

by: GayTeen4Obama @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 21:56:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

2010 Plan

The GOP Plan may be the tea bag party plan which consists largely of using the words "communism, taxes, freedom, death, socialism, liberty, downfall, anti-, pro-, fascism, plan, secret" in various combinations.

"The anti-freedom Democrat Party is working to socialize the death panels so the secret pro-communist tax plan can bring the downfall of liberty"

Sounds a lot like the current tea bag party platform, but expanded to fit on three or four bumper stickers.

---

by: TXMichael @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 22:32:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

With

the promise that Jim DeMint becomes senate majority leader and Michelle Bachmann becomes the speaker of the house. (Sorry to put that dreadful image in everyone's minds.)

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 23:10:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Inhofe

Even worse than DeMint. Infofe as majority leader  

17, Gay Male, Democrat, NJ-8  

---

by: GayTeen4Obama @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 00:11:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Inhofe

is a wackjob when it comes to the environment, but on most other issues he's your mainstream Republican. DeMint though, he's wingnut crazy on all the issues. During his 2004 senate race he said that gay people and single mothers living with their boyfriends should be banned from teaching in public school. Plus the teabaggers just love him...and we all know how the RNC is afraid of pissing them off.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 01:19:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

DeMint as Majority Leader would be hilarious

He's hated by most of his Republican Senate colleagues for being such a grandstander and a general pain in the ass.  At least McConnell has been in the game long enough to be tactful to the press.  DeMint would ruin the GOP brand with his purity bullshit and couldn't be bothered to do the hard work of quarterbacking legislation and running the caucus.  As a Senator, he's all flash and no substance.  

---

by: DFLer @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 01:25:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

As A Practical Matter...

I understand the ideological philosophy of running on repeal, but as a practical matter repeal just won't happen anytime soon. Does anyone seriously think Obama wouldn't veto any attempt to roll back whatever Democrats are going to get through here?

And even if Republicans win back the presidency in 2012, they'd still need 60 votes in the Senate--assuming they don't support efforts to end the filibuster pretty darn soon. Unless, perhaps, it's all part of some plot: obstruct, obstruct, obstruct; motivate furious Democrats to end the filibuster; suddenly join them to do so; then win back the presidency and roll back health care reform in 2013 with simple majorities. Brilliant!

---

by: dsimon @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 22:50:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's a short-term tactic to win votes and seats, not a serious...

...agenda that Republicans believe is realistic even as they talk about it.

And even as a short-term tactic, it won't work.

I think what's hurting Democrats in health care right now is a couple things.

First, there's a natural prejudice in favor of the status quo, as one online writer (whose name I can't remember) put it.  That's "conservatism" with a "lower-case c," a bias in favor of the devil we know over the devil we don't know.  I don't know if this prejudice toward the status quo is human nature or peculiar to American politics, but that question is just intellectual masturbation, since either way it affects attempts at major reform in the United States.  It takes traumatic events to force dramatic change, such as civil war to force emancipation, the Great Depression to force the first major round of nationwide socioeconomic reform, and massive populist civil rights unrest to force civil rights legislation.  We're really NOT in a similar period of trauma, no matter how much it might feel like it in real time.  This recession doesn't have the same gravity of the past major traumas of American history.  So the scale of reform many of us on the left dream of is much harder than some like to think it is.

Second, there is, and has been throughout my nearly-42-year lifetime, a broad cynicism toward government that crosses ideological and partisan viewpoints, and sinks deeply enough into the body politic to reach non-ideological, non-partisan, politically disengaged casual voters.  This ultimately hurts us more than Republicans because they harness this cynicism toward economic libertarianism, while we trust government to help people and correct market distortions.  And, of course, that directly plays into health care.

But once Obama signs the reform bill into law, the game instantly changes.

Prejudice toward the status quo slowly begins to play in our favor, since we'll have manufactured a new status quo.

And cynicism toward government starts to give way because once reform is reality, people want to give it a chance unless there's something they find unacceptably hideous about it, which doesn't exist with the House or Senate bills.  People really don't understand health care reform, they don't have a clue what's in the bill or why, and once competing narratives get out there about the actual reform law, it becomes tough to sell people on a notion that they're screwed because, frankly, they don't really want to believe that without proof that Republicans don't have because it doesn't exist.

All the above is my long-winded way of explaining that "repeal" is a doomed message even before it's tried.  "Defeat a bad bill" can be a winning message, and it was in 1994.  But "repeal" is stupid.

And I repeat, I really don't think the Beltway GOP establishment or most viable GOP House and Senate candidates is stupid enough to campaign on "repeal."  I think they'll examine their messaging options, they'll be dogged by the teabagger wingnuts, they'll see a need to establish some kind of contrast on health care, and they'll end up throwing out vague criticisms of the new law that are a weak shadow of the vitriolic rhetoric they employ now.  And attacking health care reform will end up being secondary to attacking Democrats for the economy and national security, although I think they'll end up being much weaker than today on the economy and their attacks on national security already fall on deaf ears.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 03:28:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Who knows if theyll really attempt a repeal

Even when the GOP had a pro-life majority in the Senate and House, probably from Jan. 2005-Jan. 2007, as well as a Republican President, they never tried to overturn Roe v Wade in Congress and thus send the issue to the states to decide. Because they were afraid of the political repercussions. I can see the same thing with health care reform. Maybe theyre hoping the Supreme Court gets involved like the abortion issue and if the ruling goes their way and the populace hates it, they can just say, 'well it was the court's decision, not ours'.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 04:32:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

But i cant see the Supreme Court ever going after the health care reform bill

And the GOP probably doesnt think they will, either.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 04:34:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think they are trying to scare vulnerable Democrats

to vote against the bill so that it won't pass.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12

---

by: duffman @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 23:05:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bingo

The goal is to let Democrats know that simply passing the bill won't make the issue go away for 2010.  What they're hoping to do is spook the incumbents that had to deal with those townhall circuses last summer into killing the reform bill altogether.  

I really don't think a platform of repealing makes much sense beyond 2010 though.  Entitlement programs tend to gain popularity over time, although that is predicated on them becoming enacted which may not occur for HCR until 2012/13.  The problem for the GOP is that they admitted that there are serious problems with healthcare in this country, so going on a platform of planning to repeal the current proposal while offering nothing as an alternative will only make them look like pissants.  It's not too dissimilar to how a lot of Democrats wanted to repeal the Bush tax cuts back in 2003/4, but didn't really have a clear argument as to what they'd do with that money.  Voters ultimately go with the devil they know than the one they don't.

---

by: DFLer @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 01:17:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Massive tax credits

For health insurance is a start for the GOP (even if it is a govt handout in the form of tax "credits" and thus goes against what the GOP is suppose to be about), but they arent even seriously arguing it. because all they have been saying is, 'no, no, no' without giving much of their own proposals. And i think a reason the GOP hasnt gained much headway this year is precisely because theyre the 'party of no' and dont offer any alternatives. Maybe they are actually afraid theyll be rejected...and they might be right. Afterall McCain's idea of tax credits for health insurance was never accepted. Even if it wasnt hated, either. I think a strategy of 'no' can work in the very short term...as in one cycle (in this case until Jan. 2011 or so). But beyond that the voters will start demanding the GOP focus on solutions. If the 2012 Pres. nominee is someone who runs on 'no, no no' without focusing on what theyll actually do...theyll lose in a landslide. As the voters will go with someone who wants to focus on results and solutions. Doesnt matter if the nominee is Palin, Rommney, Pawlenty, whoever. A far rightie, a mainstream conservative, whatever. Afterall McCain is pretty mainstream for a conservative and even he is now a 'No, no, no' Republican.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 04:27:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

TX-Lt. Gov

Ronnie Earle:

Pro: Tough on Crime as evidenced by his prosecution of Tom Delay.
Con: from Travis County...not a good base to build from in Texas, because you know us, we hate all them gay liberal Jewish abortion ACORNS.

Marc Katz:
Pro: Makes one HELL of a sandwich.  Never Kloses.
Con: Those sandwiches may be TOO good...

---

by: Xochi @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 23:10:34 PM UTC

The only way Sparks wins is if Griffith loses the primary

Sparks is the best recruit we could hope for, but it will still be tough. In a general election Griffith would have the Republicans and the conservative Democrats who supported him 2008. I would give a 50-50 chance that a Republican teabagger defeats Griffith in the primary, and then a 60-40 chance that Sparks beats the Republican teabagger for the open seat in a non-presidential year.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12

---

by: duffman @ Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 23:15:36 PM UTC

CA-03: Dan Lungren gets the quote of the day

Lungren said it was clear to him that the political climate has improved for Republicans.
He cited a recent encounter with a motorist, who waved and gave him a thumbs-up.
"It's awfully nice," Lungren said, "to have people waving with all five digits now."

http://www.latimes.com/news/lo...

---

by: tommypaine @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 00:47:32 AM UTC

Heh

At least he has a good self-deprecating sense of humor.  

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 04:36:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

lol!

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)

---

by: californianintexas @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 05:40:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

MN-Gov

Mark Dayton discusses struggle with depression.

---

by: desmoinesdem @ Tue Dec 29, 2009 at 17:39:53 PM UTC