• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Specter jumps to the Democratic Party

Brainster said:
He's referring to the well-established fact that the media generally only discovers moderates among the GOP. For example, the New York Times returns about 1,600 results when searched for "moderate Democrat"; when you search for "moderate Republican" there are over 10,000 results. So at the New York Time, sightings of moderate Republicans outnumber sightings of moderate Democrats by at least 6-1.
Click to expand...

So if I claimed that humans had yet to settle in Europe, that would make sense, because humans living outside Europe outnumber humans living in Europe by more than 6 to 1?

Why is that? Because certain Republicans require the "good doggie" label of "moderate" to set them apart from their more partisan fellows in the GOP.
Click to expand...

That's one way to spin it. I can think of several others. Does this one have something to do with that old "liberal media" myth?
 
Whiplash said:
That seems to have been the case with the Dem's treatment of Leiberman as well. Would you agree?
Click to expand...

No. There are plenty of Blue Dog Democrats around. Leiberman was went after because he
A.Lost the Democratic Nomination then ran ..and won...as an indepedent and
B. He supported McCain in 2008. Supporting the other party's presidential candidate is going to have repercussions.
Whereas there seem to be a systematic purge going on in the GOP of those who are not pretty far to the right. There is a group in the GOP called "The Club for Growth" that is targeting those who are not "conservative enough" in primary elections. I don't see anything like that going on in the Democratic Party.
And the GOP is not going after Ron Paul, despite his endorsement of a wackjob Third Party for President, and his open contempt for most Republican in office. Maybe the fact that Paul is a right wing wackjob has something to do with this?
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
There is a group in the GOP called "The Club for Growth" that is targeting those who are not "conservative enough" in primary elections. I don't see anything like that going on in the Democratic Party
Click to expand...

There's definitely been a few things like that going on in the Democratic party, I think MoveON was supporting some primary runs against "blue dogs" (this is just from recollection though).

And I know that there was an organization Greenwald was involved in that was specifically targeting pro-warrantless wiretap/pro-torture democrats but the coalition behind that wasn't just "looney left" - it was a pretty bipartisan group composed of libertarians from the right and civil liberties peeps from the left. The defining feature wasn't party affiliation but dedication to civil liberties.

The difference with the Club for Growth is that these initiatives were not as successful and widespread. The Club for Growth managed to unseat some incumbents in the primaries - I have not heard of similar success against a democrat save Lieberman.

I also happened to agree with them so of course, they're legitimate and valid and the Club for Growth peeps are a bunch of clowns..;) That being said, I wish the Club for Growth much future success in hastening the dwindling of Republican support in their quest for purity.

EDIT: after some brief investigoogling it seems that its more like the groups on the left like MoveOn have been adding "pressure" on key issues rather than supporting primary challenges.

Here is the PAC that came out of the Strange Bedfellows campaign Greenwald was involved in: http://accountabilitynowpac.com/

And a blog post that mentions the group and its work.
 
Last edited:
tomwaits said:
What's funny is that at Specter's press conference he basically said that he was doing this because he wouldn't be able to win as a Republican.

I'm not sure if I should be mad at the blatant display of politicking or if I should feel pleased by his honesty.
Click to expand...

Arlen Specter: Proudly representing Arlen Specter in the United States Senate since 1981
 
dudalb said:
Spector switched because he could not win the GOP nomination,no doubt about that. But that makes him so much worse then any other politician out there?????
Click to expand...

Don't ask me, that's not my position. I'm the one pointing out that the right is vilifying Spector because he dared to vote with his feet, after all.
 
ahhh that explains it...

damn westie!

[proceeds to shake my eastern fist]
 
Cleon said:
Instead of whining about a one-party state, how about you try to take the Republican party back from the religious-right nutjobs and try to make it something people want to vote for?
Click to expand...

First... I don't think you would vote for the republicans in any circumstance... which leads to my next point, the republicans aren't going to get any traction by turning into another democratic party when the "real" democratic party still exists.

Cleon said:
You ignore Meghan McCain at your peril.
Click to expand...

Megan McCain has the right to her political views, but I'm sorry to say this, she simply isn't a Republican.

Her March 17th Specter-style twitter cheerleading aside, she still voted for Kerry in '04 and didn't bother switching to the GOP until well after her old man clinched the nomination.
 
jj said:
And the vilification proceeds.
Click to expand...

jj said:
Don't ask me, that's not my position. I'm the one pointing out that the right is vilifying Spector because he dared to vote with his feet, after all.
Click to expand...


He flat out said that he was doing this because it would be easier to win the election as a Democrat. You can't understand why people would have a problem with that?

Or are we just vilifying him?

ETA: In fact, Democrats should be a little worried. He has indicated some reluctance with voting the party line. If he wins the primary and the election, the dems might end up wishing that they had let a real democrat run rather than a DINO.
 
Last edited:
tomwaits said:
He flat out said that he was doing this because it would be easier to win the election as a Democrat. You can't understand why people would have a problem with that?
Click to expand...
I understand how a jingoistic bigot who insists on party loyalty above doing one's duty to the people and country would regard that as a problem.

That makes it a benefit in my eyes.

Your smearing sounds a lot like Courtier's treatment of Millicent Fenwick back in NJ, bringing in divisive issues like abortion, accusing her of being indicted in the house bank scandal (she was not involved at all, and was so rich your brain won't really digest the numbers), and accused her of being an apostate republican.

Then, as now, it was "adhere to the party line or else" for the republicans, and if someone doens't, "teach them a lesson". It's all about totalitarian behavior and "staying on message" and not a bit about voting one's logical conclusions, concience, or about considering the good of the country, the constituents, or even one's own individual self.

That's not american politics, that's 1930's Russian politics. How you go, Joe?
Or are we just vilifying him?

ETA: In fact, Democrats should be a little worried. He has indicated some reluctance with voting the party line. If he wins the primary and the election, the dems might end up wishing that they had let a real democrat run rather than a DINO.
Click to expand...

He is a moderate, he votes independently, always has, and I expect always will.
 
Sword_Of_Truth said:
Megan McCain has the right to her political views, but I'm sorry to say this, she simply isn't a Republican.
Click to expand...

Please allow me to put take this out of party-line-speak:

plain english as she is spoke said:
Megan McCain has the guts to argue and vote her own mind, rather than listening to a collection of unhappy old men who don't think women have rights, who want to establish a religious state, and who are opposed to minorities, civil rights, and freedom. Therefore, she is not a (modern) republican.
Click to expand...
 
headscratcher4 said:
Breaking news.....
Specter says he's switching from GOP to Dems
By DAVID ESPO Associated Press Writer
Apr 28th, 2009 | WASHINGTON -- Veteran Republican Sen. Arlen Specter disclosed plans Tuesday to switch parties, a move intended to boost his chances of winning re-election next year that will also push Democrats closer to a 60-vote filibuster-resistant majority.

------
Click to expand...
Opportunist. Politician. Big surprise.

Seems he feels entitled to his Senate Seat. Sorta like Joe Lieberman.

I find it interesting that he thinks he'll get support from Dems. Maybe he knows his state very well. IIRC, from a couple of years ago, this guy was on Rush Limbaugh's shiznat list, as 'not being conservative enough' or some such. If my memory is correct, seems Rush got what he wanted.

Sort of.

Snort.

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
Opportunist. Politician. Big surprise.

Seems he feels entitled to his Senate Seat. Sorta like Joe Lieberman.

I find it interesting that he thinks he'll get support from Dems. Maybe he knows his state very well. IIRC, from a couple of years ago, this guy was on Rush Limbaugh's shiznat list, as 'not being conservative enough' or some such. If my memory is correct, seems Rush got what he wanted.

Sort of.

Snort.

DR
Click to expand...

While it's not entirely clear, I think he does understand his constituents pretty well, with the exception of the middle of the state, perhaps. I suspect this will avoid his being defeated in the primary, while remaining the best candidate in terms of winning the actual election.

This method of destroying good candidates in the primary is how we would up with little Bush and Barbie, among other things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom