Bloomberg loses another one in Milwaukee County to a pro 2nd Sheriff

[DonP]

“I’ve left it up to the voters:” David Clarke defeats Chris Moews in Milwaukee Co. Sheriff’s race"

Clarke cast his ballot in private on Tuesday. His primary election night party was held at the Brewhouse Inn and Suites. About 50 supporters were expected at the party, along with Sheriff Clarke’s family.

Clarke ran as a Democrat, but is a staunch supporter of Second Amendment rights and is known for his outspoken radio ads. Clarke was honored in 2013 with the “Sheriff of the Year” award from the Constitutional Sheriff’s and Peace Officers Association.

What made this race different from Clarke’s past races is the large amount of money spent by outside groups to influence the outcome — especially to unseat Clarke.

Clarke’s campaign manager said the campaign wasn’t sure what the outcome of this primary election would be. He said they were relying on a strong conservative cross-over crowd — people who typically vote Republican, but voted in the Democratic primary on Tuesday so they could specifically vote for Clarke.

Later Wednesday morning, the race results showed Clarke marked as the victor in the race — with 59,191 votes (52%). The results showed Moews with 54,549 votes (48%).

http://fox6now.com/2014/08/12/money-at-the-heart-of-the-milwaukee-county-sheriffs-race-will-big-spending-unseat-david-clarke/

Bloomberg spent around $400,000 on a County Sheriff's race to put another of his gun control meat puppets in. With Colorado and the 2nd district in Illinois that makes him what? 1 for 5 attempts. FYI, this is Moews second loss running against Clarke

[PeaceNikki]

1. Clarke is not a Democrat. He claims to be, but is a tea bagger.

[DonP]

2. Funny, why was he running in a Democrat primary then?

Or do you really mean he's not a Democrat you approve of?

[PeaceNikki]

3. lol, I am not the only one who 'doesn't approve' of him and it's not even his 2nd Amendment stance.

He's a fucking piece of shit.

http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/does-anyone-still-think-sheriff-david-clarke-is-a-democrat-apparently-one-b99319030z1-268812281.html

http://urbanmilwaukee.com/2013/06/18/murphys-law-the-decline-of-sheriff-clarke/

http://prairiebadger.wordpress.com/2014/08/11/david-clarke-supporters-reportedly-displayed-impeach-obama-signs-on-overpass-over-interstate-94/

http://plaistedwrites.blogspot.com/2010/09/breaking-news-david-clarke-is-not.html

[DonP]

5. Feel free to vote for the Indepenent or the GOP in the general election then

Or will you sit home and whine about the results?

[PeaceNikki]

6. Thanks for the total shit advice, but I don't live in Milwaukee County.

I'm one county over. And I don't sit out.

Clarke is still totally not a Democrat. We WI Dems know this. As do the Koch brothers and NRA who support him. And all of the Republicans urging each other to cross-over vote to elect him.

[friendly_iconoclast]

15. It would seem WI Dems need to 1)learn how to GOTV, 2)...

...realize that gun control isn't really all that popular there, and 3)
figure out that Michael Bloomberg is far more disliked than you realize
and makes a convenient villain

[PeaceNikki]

29. 1) I wholeheartedly agree, especially in Milwaukee county

2) Totally disagree
3) meh

[Scuba]

4. Clark's victory is not a victory for gun owners ...

... or anyone else. The man is a dangerous nutjob, much more closely aligned with Tea Party conspiracy theories than the Democratic Party or anything else resembling reality.

[samsingh]

7. 'gun control' people are not meat puppets. it's insulting and actually shows lack of

concern for human lives regardless of the position you are on.

[DonP]

8. Yes, yes they are

They choose to do the bidding of a Billionaire that pays to put/keep them in office, in the case of Colorado, to the point of actively and openly ignoring their own constituents at the bidding of Bloomberg and the promise of more $$$ support.

When you ignore your own voters you're a meat puppet and deserve to lose.

I guess if "meat puppet" offends you I could just call them assholes?

Nah, meat puppet is more accurate for their behavior.

[samsingh]

9. well gun lovers are puppets of stupid corporate masters like

the nra and gun manufacturers.

they love their guns more than people which makes them what? stupid? monsters?

your argument is unintelligent.

[friendly_iconoclast]

10. "your argument is unintelligent." And yours is a strawman. Now what?

[DonP]

11. Yeah, sure, fine LoL!

Awww, you left out the; "You want more dead children" meme.

My personal favorite was the; "President should use drones to kill any gun owners that won't turn in their weapons".

Yuppers, you gun control people are just the nicest people in the world. We all lay awake nights worrying about your respecting and liking us.

In the meantime you still can't seem to get shit done, even with that 90% of voters and 75% of NRA members agreeing with you.

Buy bye.

[samsingh]

16. you're also antidemocratic - "In the meantime you still can't seem to get shit done"

even with that 90% of voters and 75% of NRA members agreeing

[clffrdjk]

12. your argument is unintelligent, nice one.

9. well gun lovers are puppets of stupid corporate masters like the nra and gun manufacturers.

How? The most you can say is that they convince the grass roots to by their product. That is nothing like the way Bloomberg tries to buy politicians.

they love their guns more than people which makes them what? stupid? monsters?

That is one hell of a claim, care to prove it?

[samsingh]

20. the nra uses it's muscle to buy/terrify politicians everywhere as far as i can tell

but like true bullies, someone with money starts on the same game and the crybabies start to complain

[IronGate]

22. Isn't that the same thing M. Bloomberg and his MDA astrotruffed org does? nt.

[samsingh]

23. yes, but they are responding to an nra approach that has caused ridiculous gun ownership

laws like 'stand your ground' to be passed and used for the defense of murder.

[clffrdjk]

25. Where has a stand your ground defense been successfully used to defend a murderer?

[samsingh]

31. zimmerman and many others - google 'stand your ground killings'

[gejohnston]

32. wrong

Since Zimmerman had no ability to retreat (because Martin was sitting on him while pounding his head in the concrete, a fact proven beyond any doubt in court disputed by no one including the Martin family lawyers) duty to retreat requirement would not apply.

[samsingh]

33. he did not know he was going to be killed.

he started the fight as well

[gejohnston]

34. There is no evidence that he started it

There is evidence that Martin made it safely to Dad's GF house and decided to attack.
Please, don't drag out the debunked "was told to get out of the car" and "stalking" canards.
The standard is reasonable belief of imminent death or grave bodily harm. That same standard exists under any duty to retreat.
Also, under Florida law, if the aggressor starts to back away (or cries out for help while getting his head beat in) the defender must stop or become the aggressor. Martin's father told the cops and the court under oath that it was not Martin calling for help on the 911 tapes, therefore it could only be Zimmerman.

Everything you think you know about the case was a lie told by self serving lawyers and (anti Hispanic) racists, which certainly exists in Florida's African American community, especially in Metro Orlando and repeated and embellished on by ideologues.

[samsingh]

35. an armed white man follows an unarmed black youth

the black youth ends up getting shot to death.

there is no reasonable doubt in my mind that Zimmerman is guilty of murder and perhaps even first degree murder.

[IronGate]

36. The jury and law disagrees with you, as do most legal scholars. nt.

[gejohnston]

37. he wasn't white

he is Hispanic. Given his black ancestry, he is actually mixed race.
Do you understand what reasonable doubt is? It has to do with evidence. First you have to prove with evidence. First degree murder is almost impossible to improve outside of contract killings. Second degree is with malice and "depraved heart". No evidence of that either.
That leaves manslaughter. Problem is, two eye witnesses see Martin violently pounding Zimmerman's head in the pavement. Forensics proved it. Zimmerman's voice is on 911 tapes calling for help for forty seconds before the shot is fired. With that, you seriously believe it is murder?

I watched the whole trial. Once the State rested its case, I knew exactly what the verdict was because every prosecution witness exposed the whole narrative as a complete lie. If you want to believe the lies and false narrative created by racists and greedy lawyers, perpetrated by pundits and race baiting con artists like Al Sharpton over facts and evidence, be my guest. If you do, don't expect my to take your arguments seriously.

[clffrdjk]

39. You need to do better than that.

If he claimed stand your ground when was the immunity hearing?
If he was successful in using stand your ground why did the case go to trial?

Google Florida stand your ground law.

[beevul]

41. So many that you cited 1 false example, and declined to cite any others.

Impressive.

[samsingh]

42. so impressive that the gun lovers blame the murdered victim

[beevul]

44. Failure number two, to cite examples.

Going for a hat trick?

[IronGate]

27. So why aren't you condemning them for the same tactics?

Let me guess, could it be because, in your eyes, they're the Knights in Shining Armor coming to the rescue against the big bad NRA?

[Eleanors38]

40. Learn from your enemies, don't emulate them.

This election demonstrates the resiliency of liberalized gun laws as an issue. I don't think a popular candidate needs to worry about losing on the issue alone, but even when conceding a candidate is less than ideal, a pro-2A position can win the day.

The more quickly liberal and progressive Democrats can cut loose the albatross of gun control culture war, the better the Party's chances in future elections.

[clffrdjk]

24. Yep they use their muscle, the voters

Where Bloomberg buys protestors and spend several times as much on adds.

[samsingh]

26. isn't that what bloomberg is trying to do?

[clffrdjk]

28. No what Bloomberg is trying to do

Is buy politicians and voters.
The voters pay the NRA to represent them.

[samsingh]

30. the nra intimidates politicians using membership money

[clffrdjk]

38. Yep

They represent several million voters, I would be intimidated too if I was an elected official.
Bloomberg pays actors to protest and finances attack adds.

[samsingh]

43. clever but it's more incidious and any objective person would see that.

[beevul]

45. What would you know about objectivity?

You have never shown any objectivity on this issue on DU.

Never.

[samsingh]

46. in a gun lover's view - most people who know me would say i'm objective

facts are my concern is to reduce the number of people killed and massacred with guns. Maybe that's unobjective to you.

Gun lover's argue to keep their guns and everyone else's guns and much like the tobacco companies and climate change deniers throw confusion on the subject so that nothing constructive is done about that.

if you want to talk about objectivity - I can draft a paper arguing the benefits and weaknesses of loose gun controls.

How many gun lovers can argue about the benefits of gun control.

those are facts and I'm sure you'll have some unobjective answer.

[beevul]

53. We were discussing you....

We were discussing you, and the fact that you have never shown one ounce of objectivity here on the subject of guns. You, therefore, have no qualifications to claim in any accurate way, what "any objective person would see" where guns are concerned.

Me? I never claimed to be objective.


I value my rights, both in terms of second amendment rights, and in more broad terms of privately owned property. People who feel otherwise can go pound sand as far as I'm concerned.

We are keeping our guns, thanks.

[samsingh]

54. again i don't think you have any objectivity to assess my objectivity

sounds like its too complicated for you.

[IronGate]

13. You claim his argument is unintelligent?

Yet, you post shit like this in GD, where, BTW, it doesn't belong and will probably be locked pretty soon.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025378683

Talk about an unintelligent argument.

[samsingh]

17. yes ha-ha - innocent people getting killed - ha ha

[samsingh]

18. not surprised that you didn't notice - but i didn't start the post.

but if you're referring to my other one - it's as intelligent as the gun lovers argument.

and if pushed through by the nra on legislative terms people like you would be defending it with every inane argument that comes to your mind. Who are we kidding?

[IronGate]

21. Who are we kidding?

You're kidding no one.

[samsingh]

47. do you have any solutions to the two kids that were killed by stray bullets

from another house?

[IronGate]

48. Other than a complete ban,

there really is no solution for that kind of stupidity.
What's your solution, other than a ban?

[samsingh]

50. better education, more respect for firearms

less sensationalism.
I would certainly separate a sense of patriotism from the fact that someone is owning guns. The two don't go together.

tighter gun control so that idiots running around shooting things up will lose the ability to possess firearms and not be able to ruin it for other people.

there should be financial liability for situations like that.

[IronGate]

51. I can wholeheartedly agree with that,

plus pass the UBC.
There's a few other things that can be done in the area of gun control, beef up the BATFE to actually go after the straw purchasers, safe storage laws in all 50 states and maybe, if it can be worked out, a Federal FOID card, like what IL. has.

[samsingh]

52. i think we agree on something!!

[friendly_iconoclast]

14. This is unpossible! Just last week I was assured that gun control wasn't losing...

...around the country