Johnathan Tasini has enough signatures to challenge Hilary in PRIMARY!

[Terran1212]

I'm not sure if this is 100% accurate, but it's on Tasini's website:

http://www.tasinifornewyork.org/node/575

Jonathan Tasini has apparently collected the signatures he needs to enter the Democratic primary against Hillary Rodham Clinton. This afternoon, his campaign announced that he plans to appear at the steps of the State Capitol next week before delivering signed ballot-access petitions to the State Board of Elections.

So now the question becomes this: will the Clinton camp or its allies in the Democratic Party move aggressively to keep him off the ballot by legally challenging the validity of the signatures. In anticipation of such a challenge, Mr. Tasini and his supporters collected 30,000 signatures, even though he needed only 15,000 to get on the ballot.


---

Primaries have EXTREMELY low turnouts. In Virginia the Democratic primary only had 3% turnout of voters. If all the antiwar, progressive new yorkers show up and VOTE at the primary -- well, we can topple Hillary in an instant.

[porphyrian]

1. She's better than a republican, but she's no progressive.

Oust all the corporate whores.

[Terran1212]

2. Now is the time for NY liberals to get out and VOTE in the primary!

And not vote for the wife of a good politician but for "what you believe in" -- that was Paul Wellstone's slogan and Tasini wears it proudly and honorably.

[readmoreoften]

62. When is the primary? I'm out of town. I LOVE TASINI!!!! /nt

[Stephanie]

63. September 12

[Robbien]

3. Hillary believes it is okay to ignore Progressive views and cater to

right wing corporate lackeys. She needs a primary challenger to wake her up to the fact that many people are very very unhappy with her stances.

[Freddie Stubbs]

124. So if she wins, would that justify her actions?

:shrug:

[The Magistrate]

162. Victory At The Polls, Sir

Makes it awfully hard to argue the person who has won it is not popular, and when they have won in a primary, to argue that they do not really represent the views of the Party's voters.

On edit:it was intended this be addressed to No. 124 by Mr. Stubbs.

[Stephanie]

4. It's accurate

and you're right, if New Yorkers who oppose the war come out and vote, it will make the difference.

[cal04]

5. Bring On Hillary

Jonathan Tasini’s campaign says it has collected the signatures the candidate needs to enter the Democratic primary against Hillary Rodham Clinton. This afternoon, his campaign announced that he plans to appear at the Board of Elections next week to deliver signed ballot-access petitions.

So now the question becomes this: will the Clinton camp or its allies in the Democratic Party move aggressively to keep him off the ballot by legally challenging the validity of the signatures. In anticipation of such a challenge, Mr. Tasini and his supporters say they have collected 30,000 signatures, even though he needed only 15,000 to get on the ballot.

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/?p=293

[The Magistrate]

6. Two Points, Sir

First, Sen. Clinton's organization has every right toscrutnize signatures, and would be remisss not to do so.

Second, Tassini is really a Green, only flying a "flag of convenience" as a Democrat. He is far from a serious political figure.

[Terran1212]

8. Sir, do you come about every now and then to just bash progressives

And order us all to line up behind the Establishment figures like Good Democrats?

He's running as a Democrat in the Primary and he is running with the positions that the majority of New Yorkers hold, something Hilary sees as taboo.

He should have the vote of every progressive.

[The Magistrate]

19. My Political Allegiance, Sir

Is to the Democratic Party.

The claims of those who cry up the line that Sen. Clinton is not a "real" Democrat, is a Republican in Democrat's clothing, and the like, do not impress me in the slightest.

[Terran1212]

22. The important thing is she doesn't represent New York at all

And thus is acting undemocratically by continuing to support things New Yorkers don't -- a tyrant.

[The Magistrate]

28. That, Sir, Is Simply Nonesense

Sen. Clinton is widely approved of in New York, particularly by Democrats in that state.

You might widh it were otherwise, but that will not make it so.

[Stephanie]

29. she has name recognition and celebrity status

but her stance on the issues does not represent the majority of New Yorkers

[tavalon]

92. But, she isn't the worst there is

I don't want her as the Democratic Presidential nominee but I don't see her as a big problem in the Senate. Lieberman, yes, but her not so much. Now, I don't disagree with her having a challenger. She needs to deplete that war chest of hers so she doesn't get into the Presidential race.

[KoKo]

113. Schumer might be worse..........n/t

[mdmc]

194. lol

:)

I think that progressives have to take their victories where you can find them.

Hillary having a primary challenge would be a victory in itself. A serious challenge would be even more interesting. I'll vote for Tanasi if he is on the ballot.

[Terran1212]

30. What is "approved" is that a DEMOCRAT is in office

What she DOES is not approved of. The majority of New Yorkers don't approve of her positions or policies or votes in the Senate.

Whenever there's an approval poll of HER, what the people responding are saying is, "We prefer her to a Republican."

Please, anyone who understands elementary democracy can tell the difference. Don't insult our intelligence.

[LostinVA]

106. My very liberal friends in NY like her as a Senator

They don't want her as the Presidential nom, but they think she does a good job. THEY live in NY.

[im10ashus]

120. No, she's not "widely approved of in New York."

Your saying so doesn't make it any more true either. Why are you afraid of her being challenged. In the PRIMARY for crying out loud?

[rinsd]

131. Does using actual surveys make it more true?

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollTrack.aspx?g=77ca4b7e-ec24-4213-a4d6-f5053467ebf4&x=1205,2

I guess she isn't widely approved of as self identified Republicans and Conservatives give her bad marks.

[The Magistrate]

134. Why Do You Imagine Me To Be Afraid, Sir?

Sen. Clinton will certainly win the primary by a thumping margin, and go on to win re-election to the Senate. You have supplied no good reason for anyone to think the oitcome will be any different, nor any real reason why anyone should think these are bad outcomes.

[im10ashus]

142. And I agree.

I believe she will win the primary too. It doesn't mean I won't support her if/when she gets the nomination. I would just like to see her have a discussion on the many issues that I know Tasini will raise in a debate. She doesn't get a free pass does she? Is it wrong to want to hold her accountable for her vote and continued support of Bush and his illegal "war" on terror?

[dogday]

144. That is where my problem

lies with her as well.. With 2/3 of this country saying they want an end to this war.. I want to know why she feels as she does about her position....

[im10ashus]

146. Good luck getting any type of answer.

My letters, e-mails and phone calls are all met with the same canned/prepared response.

[Mr_Spock]

40. "a tyrant"?

What?

How can I take you seriously when you say that.

[pnwmom]

78. How indeed?

[Stephanie]

25. Are you in favor of the death penalty? She is.

Do you support marriage equality for same-sex couples? She does not. Do you think it was wrong to invade Iraq? She won't say it was. Should we leave troops there indefinitely? That's what she advocates. Where do you stand on the First Amendment? Because she introduced legislation to criminalize flag-burning. Tonight she is attending a fundraiser in her honor hosted by Tom O'Gara of Idaho, who in 2003 hosted a similar fundraiser for George Bush, headlined by Dick Cheney. Next week Rupert Murdoch will do the honors. What is a real Democrat, in your opinion?

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Magistrate]

33. The Question Of Belief In Democracy, Sir

Must include the expression of the whole people's views. It is quite possible for a person to disagree with you or me, and still be reflecting quite adequately the general view of the people. "Democracy" is not a synonym for "agrees with me"....

[Terran1212]

35. Just recognize this is about New York and not you nt

[pnwmom]

54. Like you do?

[The Magistrate]

31. Several Items, Ma'am

First, it is not my expectation, nor a requirement for my support, that someone agree with me completely on all items.

As you led with the death penalty, it does not trouble me to see a murderer executed. Unjust prosecutions, which sometimes occur in murder cases, trouble me, and would trouble me whatever the penalty of unjust conviction was.

Several of your other items are matters that require a degree of political expediency and trimming, because the views of many here are not widely held, and therefore energetic espousal of them is a recepie for defeat at the hands of the general electorate.

Where money comes from does not bother me much: better it is available to be spent by one of ours than one of theirs....

[Terran1212]

34. Hey it's not about you, it's about New York

And she should as an elected official follow the positions of her constituents.

She prefers the positions of lobbyists.

So she will soon say goodbye if democracy gains hold in New York.

[The Magistrate]

41. It Is Not About You Either, Sir

We are all free to express opinions here, and to express our support of what political figures we do support.

[Name removed]

117. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pnwmom]

47. You're telling New Yorkers that Hillary isn't progressive enough

to suit them. You're telling Washingtonians that Maria Cantwell isn't progressive enough to suit us.

Why don't you spend more time talking to other Georgians about what you can do down there?

[Stephanie]

48. I'm a New Yorker

And she's not progressive enough for me. Am I allowed to speak? What about CT? Can I comment on that race? Or should I move there first?

[The Magistrate]

51. Which Is Far From Demostrating, Ma'am

That she is not quite progressive enough for many New Yorkers, and even more than progressive enough for many others....

[Stephanie]

55. DEMOCRATS

We are discussing the Democratic primary.

[rinsd]

130. Her approval ratings from Democrats and Liberals is around 80%

Here's SurveyUSA tracking poll so you can break it down more easily.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollTrack.aspx?g=77ca4b7e-ec24-4213-a4d6-f5053467ebf4&x=1205,2

[Stephanie]

36. She is running for Senate, to represent NEW YORK

And the majority of New Yorkers DO oppose the death penalty, they do oppose the war, they do not favor discrimination, and they see Rupert Murdoch for what he is, the PR arm of the Republican Party.

[Terran1212]

38. Damn Straight!

Magistrate, you aren't going to be the Magistrate of New York, are you -- deciding who should be the Senator of the state based on your personal opinion?

[pnwmom]

75. I'm curious. Why do you keep saying she supports the death penalty?

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm

"On the Issues" says that she strongly opposes the death penalty.

[Stephanie]

98. Has she changed her position? She was all for it.

-----------

Though painted as a liberal by her adversaries, Hillary Clinton advocates the death penalty, is personally opposed to abortion and believes homosexuality is not natural, says Gail Sheehy, author of a new book on the first lady.

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2000/04/26/hillary.html

-----------

She feels her efforts are helping make a difference, noting that overall public support for the death penalty has declined. On the state level, she observed that Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver was formerly in favor of capital punishment.

"We had hearings before the assembly and to our great astonishment, Sheldon Silver changed his opinion," she said.

Now, she said, she would like to see a similar change of heart in Sen. Charles Schumer and Sen. Hillary Clinton, both of whom support the death penalty.

http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/ncadp/news.jsp?key=2182&t=

-----------

A Barbaric Solution

It is somewhat startling to realize that in this election year, New
Yorkers, who like to think of themselves as a fairly enlightened,
educated and ethical bunch, nevertheless are faced with four major
candidates - George W. Bush, Al Gore, Rick Lazio and Hillary Clinton
- who favor the death penalty. The political calculations that went
into each candidate's pro-death penalty stance are not difficult to
understand. A majority of Americans favor this barbaric solution.
The harsh truth remains that most New Yorkers will be pulling the
lever in November for candidates who will use the power of the
Presidency or the Senate to support the death penalty in this country.


http://venus.soci.niu.edu/~archives/ABOLISH/rick-halperin/jun00/0352.html

[onenote]

118. new york is not as progressive as you think

I'm not currently a New Yorker (I'm a former New Yorker), but the evidence is pretty clear. Just taking the death penalty -- the polls I've seen show a pretty even split on whether the death penalty should be reinstated in NY. It certainly doesn't seem to be a huge issue, since Governor Pataki has managed to get himself elected as Governor three times while endorsing the death penalty. How do you square the statewide election of Pataki with your perception of the overall progressiveness of the state?

[pnwmom]

Hillary Clinton strongly opposes the death penalty.

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm

She supports civil rights for gay people and thinks we should be replacing U.S. troops with U.N. troops in Iraq. She's voted against the reauthorization of the Patriot act and is a supporter of abortion rights.

She takes the progressive position in her votes 90% of the time, and is more progressive than 90 out of 100 other Senators, according to Progressive Punch.

www.progressivepunch.com

The same people who say that she isn't enough of a Democrat thought her husband wasn't enough of a Democrat. And it's even more ridiculous to say it about her than it was to say it about him.

[Stephanie]

59. "Civil rights for gay people" is not the same thing as gay MARRIAGE

which she opposes - that phrase is designed to obfuscate the question

she advocates leaving U.S. troops in Iraq indefinitely:

http://www.clinton.senate.gov/issues/nationalsecurity/index.cfm?topic=iraqletter

It is not RIDICULOUS to oppose an immoral, illegal war, and to vote based on that belief. She has been a huge disappointment to many, many New Yorkers. The day she voted for the bankruptcy bill, the day she voted for the IWR, were bitter disappointments to me. We have elections in this country, not coronations. I vote based on what matters to me. And what matters now is this war, the lies and the perverted think tank manipulations that got us into it, the lives lost, the maimed and ruined. She supports that, and don't tell me she didn't know better. ONE MILLION of us marched in the streets of New York before the invasion of Iraq. She could have chosen to vote with Paul Wellstone, Bob Graham, Barbara Boxer, Ted Kennedy, and oppose the war. She could have RENOUNCED her vote as Kerry and Edwards have done. She will not. And I won't support her.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/senaterollcall_iraq101002.htm

Alabama Jeff Sessions (R): Yes Richard Shelby (R): Yes
Alaska Frank Murkowski (R): Yes Ted Stevens (R): Yes
Arizona Jon Kyl (R): Yes John McCain (R): Yes
Arkansas Tim Hutchinson (R): Yes Blanche Lincoln (D): Yes
California Barbara Boxer (D): No Dianne Feinstein (D): Yes
Colorado Wayne Allard (R): Yes Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R): Yes
Connecticut Christopher Dodd (D): Yes Joseph Lieberman (D): Yes
Delaware Joseph Biden (D): Yes Thomas Carper (D): Yes
Florida Bob Graham (D): No Bill Nelson (D): Yes
Georgia Max Cleland (D): Yes Zell Miller (D): Yes
Hawaii Daniel Akaka (D): No Daniel Inouye (D): No
Idaho Larry Craig (R): Yes Mike Crapo (R): Yes
Illinois Richard Durbin (D): No Peter Fitzgerald (R): Yes
Indiana Evan Bayh (D): Yes Richard Lugar (R): Yes
Iowa Charles Grassley (R): Yes Tom Harkin (D): Yes
Kansas Sam Brownback (R): Yes Pat Roberts (R): Yes
Kentucky Jim Bunning (R): Yes Mitch McConnell (R): Yes
Louisiana John Breaux (D): Yes Mary Landrieu (D): Yes
Maine Susan Collins (R): Yes Olympia Snowe (R): Yes
Maryland Barbara Mikulski (D): No Paul Sarbanes (D): No
Massachusetts Edward Kennedy (D): No John Kerry (D): Yes
Michigan Debbie Stabenow (D): No Carl Levin (D): No
Minnesota Mark Dayton (D): No Paul Wellstone (D): No
Mississippi Thad Cochran (R): Yes Trent Lott (R): Yes
Missouri Jean Carnahan (D): Yes Christopher (Kit) Bond (R): Yes
Montana Max Baucus (D): Yes Conrad Burns (R): Yes
Nebraska Chuck Hagel (R): Yes Ben Nelson (D): Yes
Nevada John Ensign (R): Yes Harry Reid (D): Yes
New Hampshire Judd Gregg (R): Yes Bob Smith (R): Yes
New Jersey Jon Corzine (D): No Robert Torricelli (D): Yes
New Mexico Jeff Bingaman (D): No Pete Domenici (R): Yes
New York Hillary Clinton (D): Yes Charles Schumer (D): Yes
North Carolina John Edwards (D): Yes Jesse Helms (R): Yes
North Dakota Kent Conrad (D): No Byron Dorgan (D): Yes
Ohio Mike DeWine (R): Yes George Voinovich (R): Yes
Oklahoma James Inhofe (R): Yes Don Nickles (R): Yes
Oregon Gordon Smith (R): Yes Ron Wyden (D): No
Pennsylvania Rick Santorum (R): Yes Arlen Specter (R): Yes
Rhode Island Lincoln Chafee (R): No Jack Reed (D): No
South Carolina Ernest "Fritz" Hollings (D): Yes Strom Thurmond (R): Yes
South Dakota Thomas Daschle (D): Yes Tim Johnson (D): Yes
Tennessee Bill Frist (R): Yes Fred Thompson (R): Yes
Texas Phil Gramm (R): Yes Kay Bailey Hutchison (R): Yes
Utah Robert Bennett (R): Yes Orrin Hatch (R): Yes
Vermont James Jeffords (I): No Patrick Leahy (D): No
Virginia George Allen (R): Yes John Warner (R): Yes
Washington Maria Cantwell (D): Yes Patty Murray (D): No
West Virginia Robert Byrd (D): No Jay Rockefeller (D): Yes
Wisconsin Russell Feingold (D): No Herb Kohl (D): Yes
Wyoming Mike Enzi (R): Yes Craig Thomas (R): Yes

[The Magistrate]

69. The Letter You Link To, Ma'am

Written towards the end of last year, actually expresses the desire to begin bringing soldiers out of Iraq during this year, and denouncing open-ended and indefinite deployment of U.S. forces there....

[Stephanie]

93. Read it again. It's designed to confuse.

I do not believe that we should allow this to be an open-ended commitment without limits or end. Nor do I believe that we can or should pull out of Iraq immediately. I believe we are at a critical point with the December 15th elections that should, if successful, allow us to start bringing home our troops in the coming year, while leaving behind a smaller contingent in safer areas with greater intelligence and quick strike capabilities. This will advance our interests, help fight terrorism and protect the interests of the Iraqi people.

Enduring bases, anybody?

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pnwmom]

74. Believe me, I know it's not the same. But I also think

an incremental approach, rather than an all-or-nothing approach -- might accomplish our goals a lot faster. I still wish that the Massachusetts decision could have occurred in December rather than May of that year. I'm not blaming anybody. I'm just saying that the timing of the decision was a wonderful boone to the Republicans and their nastiness.

[H2O Man]

94. Great post!

Those are all very important issues that NY democrats need to consider .... and they need to get out to vote in the primary.

I am not impressed by arguments that the senator is a republican, or that her challenger is a "green." That's just plain silly. They are, in fact, two parts of the democratic party. We need to decide who best represents our views, our values, our beliefs, and our hopes for the future.

It is fair to ask if Clinton has the ability to take the stands necessary for meaningful change in our country. Minister Malcolm X used to tell us that it was impossible for a chicken to lay a duck egg. It is simply beyond its nature to do so. Many honest and sincere democrats question if Clinton is so much part of the political machine that she is incapable of making institutional changes. I am concerned that her ties to AIPAC make it impossible for her to oppose the chicken-hawks in Washington who are making a fortune on the Cheney policy in Iraq.

[KoKo]

114. Yes...those would be problems I would have with her, also.

Her loyalties are to laying "chicken eggs."

[Terran1212]

181. A great post yourself nt

[leftchick]

99. she is a corporatist

beholden to her corporate donors. As an ex-NYer I am following this primary and hope to see Hillary exit the Senate. It is time for a progressive change not more of the same support of chickenhawk/neo-con policies. It is interesting to note she is protested where ever she goes in NY. By Democrats! :)

[Tom Joad]

42. My Political allegiance is to stopping illegal, insane wars.

I see political parties only as means, not as ends.

[Stephanie]

9. that's ridiculous

He is not a Green - on what basis do you say that?

[Terran1212]

11. The basis being he's a progressive so we must destroy him

And line up behind Wall Street's candidates -- even if they aren't doing what the people want.

[benburch]

12. Sir, the same argument could have been made about Bill Clinton.

His policies would have been moderate Republican policies in the 60s, but he ran as a Democrat because the GOP was not in the business of electing Moderates any more.

[Terran1212]

14. Absolutely

I don't know why any DUer would not get out and vote for Tasini. He's much closer to our positions than Hilary. And there's no chance of a Republican winning just because he gets the nomination.

There's no reason not to vote for him unless you are one of those who want Hilary in office in the Presidency in 2008 (which is too far away, we need a REAL progressive senate first!).

[benburch]

18. Which is not to say that I hate Bill Clinton or anything.

I have a lot of respect for him, but he was no Progressive.

[The Magistrate]

21. The Claim Presidenmt Clinton Is Not A Democrat, Sir

Is, in my view, a species of party humor, and nothing more.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

45. Are you suggesting The Magistrate is a fan of Hitchens?

That's an insult and a lie. He has never supported Hitchens, even back when the "looney left" embraced him. Did you?

You keep telling TM this is not about him, yet smear him as an opponent of democracy and an admirer of Hitchens. Stop making it about him, yourself.

[benburch]

26. A Democrat in fact, yes.

But his policies were pure moderate Republican.

[The Magistrate]

39. There Is Not Really Much Meaning To That Term, Sir

The views of moderates have a certain convergence, after all: it is only radicals who sharply fifferentiate. At bottom, you are pressing the claim that the Democratic Party is really a radical organization, but that is not the case. It is a party of the center left.

[Skidmore]

83. This is the first statement that I can agree with you on in this thread.

I find your style abrasive and offputting so I've never responded to your posts before. I would point out that the "center" is so far to the right now that "left of center" means "me, too". The great squishy center would suck us all into a pit through sheer inertia. I prefer the more humanistic approach of the liberal camp, and believe that those on the right are solely concerned with manipulating the rest of society for pure economic gain that they cannot respond to other people as more than economic units. The center very much needs to be dragged leftward again.

[LincolnMcGrath]

140. Well Stated Friend!

[readmoreoften]

66. Sir, are you a NYer? It's our decision, not yours.

[The Magistrate]

68. If, Ma'am

It is not your own custom to refrain from ever expressing any opinion on primary and general elections anywhere outside New York State, that is what we call in the trade a cheap and shop-worn ploy no one can be expected to take seriously.

[Mr_Spock]

103. I'm telling you - what a bizzare argumentative

It's like the ultimate way to simply say "SHUT-UP, can't I hate Hillary without having to explain my hate!?" Suddenly it's all about the wellbeing of New York :eyes:

[readmoreoften]

172. I can't SUPPORT TASINI without HATING Hillary?

Way to put words in my mouth. Can't I just have a preference? I just want to know why his Majesty is so damn insistent on slandering a Democrat and calling him a green.

And, yes, as a New Yorker in a pitched progressive battle with institutions in NYC specifically it IS about the well-being of NY for me. Go :eyeroll: elsewhere.

[Stephanie]

193. precisely

It is NOT PERSONAL. I prefer the progressive DEMOCRAT. I will vote for him in the primary because his POSITIONS on the ISSUES reflect mine. That is democracy, folks. That's what elections are FOR.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SaveElmer]

110. Poster down the line...

Says Tasini has never been a Green and has always been a registered Democrat. I had always thought like you do. DO you have any link showing him as a member of the Green Party?-

[Stephanie]

166. Never been a Green, but was for a time a member of Working Families Party

WFP has no relation to the Greens, at all. Tasini was Dem, then WFP, then switched back to Democrat.

[yodermon]

111. So you're worried that, what,

should Tassini win the primary and be elected to the senate, he'd Not caucus with the Dems because he's really an evil Green?? *gasp*.

Yeah, you're right, having a "Green" in the Senate under the Dem flag could only help the Republicans. :eyes:

[napi21]

7. He doesn't stand a chane! I don't live in NY, so I shouldn't say anything

but Hillary is very popular in NY! She has one of the highest approval ratings in the Senate!

Hillary will win the Senate reelection!

[Terran1212]

10. She has a high approval rating

Because she's the Democrat in office. I'd think any Democrat would have a high approval rating in a blue state in NY -- just for not being a republican.

But if you look at the stances New Yorkers are taking in opinion polls, she's far to the right of them.

Her name is what her popularity is, not her actions. Tasini is much closer to what NY's base actually wants as far as policy.

[napi21]

13. We'll see what happens in the primary. I can't argue with you.

As I said, I don't live in NY, so I can't vote there, and can't get a strong feeling for what the locals are saying. I think you're wrong about her just having high approval ratings because of Bill being her husband. I didagree with her sometimes too, but I would be proud to have her as MY Senator!!!!!

[Terran1212]

15. I really wouldn't! nt

[Stephanie]

20. 38% of NYers would vote for her, 32% for an "unnamed antiwar Democrat"

Zogby poll

[Terran1212]

24. Just invigorate the massive New York antiwar movement

And Hilary will get smoked in the primaries unless her people do something to block their votes.

[Selatius]

32. It will likely force her to abandon her previous position on the war

A politician will try to act like a chameleon if possible if the winds of change say you should change your colors. If she were facing the same situation Lieberman is facing with Lamont, she would either a) fight it to the end or b) play the switching game and try to find new positions that keep you from being rolled out of office.

[Terran1212]

37. As a fellow Chomskyite, you probably understand what I mean

when I refer to a "democratic deficit"; this is exactly what exists with this Hilary Clinton.

Can it be patched in a battle of big people vs big money in New York (much like the Conneticut campaign which is a little of both)?

[Selatius]

53. The problem is she isn't in the same straits as Lieberman is right now

Lieberman pretty much painted a target on himself and went for a walk in front of rank-and-file Democrats saying they were weak on defense and a bunch of out-of-touch liberals, especially now that it seems he will circumvent the primary process altogether. He found out the hard way what he really did by picking the wrong fight in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Unlike Lieberman, Hillary never attacked Democrats as heavily as he has over Iraq. The question for Tasini is how to make Hillary's position on having no timetable for withdrawal of troops radioactive and ultimately unsustainable if she wants to win the majority of votes in the primary.

[Terran1212]

177. She generally seems to ignore the issue

with a few rhetorical touches on it here and there. I saw a speech by her in person where she talked about how womens rights were being advanced in Iraq. I knew she was full of bullshit at that moment.

[pnwmom]

49. Have you ever been in Westchester County? Or upstate New York?

My sister lives upstate, and I visit there frequently. Outside of Manhattan, there are plenty of moderates and conservatives.

[Stephanie]

60. most of whom won't be voting in the Democratic primary

[pnwmom]

76. True. I'm thinking ahead to the general, and how to

carry the whole state.

I guess what you're saying is that the Republican nominee is so weak that you're not worried about carrying the election statewide?

Unfortunately, that is not the case in my state.

[readmoreoften]

87. Bush has a 28% approval rating in NY. Extreme low chance of a (R) senator.

http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2006/50StateBushApproval060613Approval.html

NY does have Republican governor, but he has one of the lowest approval ratings in the country for governors

http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2006/50StateGovernor060615Approval.htm

I'm not saying that Tasini will win. I'm saying that it's a shame he won't.

[Stephanie]

104. can you name the Republican nominee?

most New Yorkers can't either

[pnwmom]

143. LOL! n/t

[Terran1212]

190. I doubt they'll vote in the primaries and if they will

they may vote against Hilary -- because she's some kind of left wing demon to most of the right (despite the fact that she's not very progressive -- must be because she's married to Bill!).

[Bridget Burke]

96. This Texan is not an expert on New York Politics.

But you seen to be a Georgian....

[rinsd]

121. Let's test your theory.

"Because she's the Democrat in office. I'd think any Democrat would have a high approval rating in a blue state in NY"

Well Schumer does well.

ON edit: When I started this I was reading from an older poll, I have chnaged the parts to reflect numbers from the most recent poll in June 2006.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=3b216c54-dab1-48f9-bbf6-39d27de0f892

Hillary Clinton receives an 79% approval rating from Democrats, 80% from self identified Liberals.

It would stand to reason based on your theory that a more progressive Senator from an even more Progressive state like CA and Barbara Boxer would have a higher approval rating, wouldn't it?

She doesn't. Actually her approval rating isn't all that great at 50%.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=aedf85c5-ee42-4600-8835-d4c0841a1093

Her approval rating from Democrats is 68% and 69% from self identified Liberals.

Hillary is popular. And I believe Hillary will almost certainly win the primary and general elections.


Here's Hillary's tracking poll for Democrats.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollTrack.aspx?g=77ca4b7e-ec24-4213-a4d6-f5053467ebf4&x=1205,2

Approval rating has bounced between 79% and 85% in the last year. Her dispproval sees brief jumps in two months. June was one of them, her disapprove #'s are 19% rising from 13%.

And last but not least here is Hillary's tracking poll for self identified Liberals.

This has bounced between 72% and 80% in the last year. Her disapproval #'shave seen more dips and jumps than with Democrats though almost counterintuitively her disapproval #'s are down to 17% from 23% the month prior.

[The Magistrate]

123. That Is An Interesting And Helpful Bit Of Data, Sir

"It ain't what you don't know, it's what you know that ain't so, that'll get you every time."

[rinsd]

126. Old data ignore part of it, I have updated the post.

[The Magistrate]

127. Same Tune, Different Scale, It Seems, Sir, Is All

The relations and proportions seem about the same....

[rinsd]

129. Schumer improved his ratings, that's about all that changed (nt)

[WhiteTara]

16. it might just wake her up. n/t

[Terran1212]

17. If nothing else, it WILL do that!

Get out there, NY liberals!

[Stephanie]

43. Listen to his interview on Mike Malloy >

copy and paste link, close space after http:

http: //server4.whiterosesociety.org/content/malloy/MalloyShow-(17-05-2006).mp3

[pnwmom]

44. Hillary Clinton's positions are more progressive than 90 other Senators

according to Progressive Punch.

www.progressivepunch.com

But members of the Green party have a vested interest in portraying her as more conservative than she is.

[Stephanie]

46. This race has nothing to do with the Green party

We are discussing the Democratic primary. The Green candidate is Howie Hawkins.

[pnwmom]

50. Members of the Green party are writing many of the posts on these

boards that attack Hillary Clinton and Maria Cantwell as too conservative.

[Stephanie]

52. I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the Green Party

but what if I had been?

[pnwmom]

64. One of the posters here was advocating in another thread that DU'ers vote

against Maria Cantwell (Washington State) and for the Greens in the general election. (Her primary opponent has now dropped out of the primary and is endorsing Cantwell.)

This person was calling Cantwell foul names and urging DU'ers in Washington to vote for the Green instead of Cantwell. That is against the DU rules.

Now this same person is in here telling New Yorkers who they should be voting for.

I don't have any problems with people who urge Democrats to take progressive positions. I urge my own Senators to take more progressive positions, and I've been protesting the war in Iraq since before it began. But I do have a problem with Greens who come here to try to get Democrats to leave the party and join theirs instead. I do have a problem with Greens who don't care whether the Republican or the Democrat wins, because all they really want now is to get 5% of the vote. They can post all they want somewhere else, but not in the Democratic Underground. This is not supposed to be a place where Greens come to peel votes off the most liberal end of the Democratic party.

[Stephanie]

65. All of which is irrelevant to this discussion

we are talking about two democrats - a democratic primary - a chance to vote for what you believe in. no spoilers here. the republicans are in disarray. whoever wins the primary will win the seat.

[pnwmom]

67. You're right. But the same poster will be back

after Tasini loses, telling New Yorkers that they should vote against Clinton and for the Green instead.

I'm glad to hear that this seat is safe for the Democratic nominee, whoever that person turns out to be.

That is NOT the case here in Washington, where the race is likely to be very tight, and the Green is definitely a spoiler.

[readmoreoften]

170. That's one person. So what? One green comes here? /nt

[itzamirakul]

88. Perhaps there would be no chance of Greens or anyone else

"peeling votes off the most liberal end of the Democratic Party" if the "moderate" and "centrist" Democrats would stop with the nastiness and snideness and "looney-ization" of those of us who believe in a more Progressive stance for the Democratic Party.

Some people are ripe to be picked off because they do not see the Democratic party as reflecting their ideals and evidently the centrist Dems don't care. For the "let's not rock the boat" crowd, it is "my way or the highway" to the Progressive left, so no one should worry if some of those "looney-left fringe" votes are lost to the Democratic Party. They aren't respected in the Party anyway.

[Terran1212]

179. Well let's not red-bait err Green-bait

There's nothing wrong with demanding that your leaders do as the people want -- which Cantwell and Hillary are not doing.

[w4rma]

58. Woah buddy. This is a primary challenge and has nothing to do with

any other political parties.

And it appears to be handled in exactly the way it should be handled: in the primary.

[pnwmom]

71. Good. But if Clinton does happen to win the primary

don't be surprised if there is a loud outcry from certain DU'ers telling New Yorkers that they should vote Green in the general instead of for Clinton.

That is what they have been telling Washingtonians since Cantwell's primary opponent (a former Green) dropped out of the primary race and endorsed Cantwell.

Here in Washington, where the race will be very tight, the end result of increasing the Green vote would be to swing the election to the Republicans.

[w4rma]

56. I'm about as anti-Iraq war as it gets and I'd be voting for Clinton for

Senator over just about anybody else. Very very good that he's going after her in the primary and not the general. This is a very good way to get her attention.

[pnwmom]

72. Do you know he won't continue his fight into the general?

Pulling a Lieberman?

[oasis]

57. When Tasani loses, will he pull a Lieberman and run as an independent?

:shrug:

[Stephanie]

61. No

He has said he will not.

[pnwmom]

73. Okay good. May the best candidate win.

[Liberty Belle]

70. Good! Tasini is a strong labor leader & writer, who I know personally.

He championed the cause of protecting freelance writers from copyright ripoffs, sued dthe NY Times and won in the Supreme Court.

When he was president of National Writers Union and I had a problem with a newspaper in our town, he came here, helped me organize the writers and found us a class action attorney to take our case.

Our case got joined with cases filed by ASJA and Author's Guild. It recently settled, and pending appeal, will cost the publishing industry $12-18 million.

Jonathan is a true progressive we should all support in the primary.

[readmoreoften]

82. Tasini is the real deal. He has helped me as well.

I mean, two people on DU who can say that John Tasini has PERSONALLY come to their aid. What does that say about the man? He is amazing.

[Terran1212]

173. You have my hopes here from Georgia!

Godspeed!

[don954]

77. i have to wonder if all these primary challengers are worth it

right now i think we need to worry more about getting the party votes in the house and senate to elect our own majority leadership, which will set the priority to a democratic agenda instead of a republican one. All these challengers to incumbents are taking resources and money away from the focus of getting our majority back. A couple of hundred thousand donated to a challenger of a seat we already have diverts $ that we could have used to take a seat we do NOT currently have.

No, now is not the time to try to kick conservative dems, even if they dont support 100% of democratic issues, they are still a vote for our leadership chairs, which we can use to control the direction of the senate or house.

After we control the house and senate, then we can worry about weeding out undesirable politicians in our party.

[pnwmom]

80. You're right. You shouldn't start weeding out until you actually have

a lawn to weed -- and we're still growing our grassroots now.

What a lot of people don't seem to understand is that the reason that the Republican far right has so much power is that the Republicans are in the majority, and they're trying to hold the majority together.

When and if the Democrats attain a majority, then our progressives will be in a much better position to make their demands heard -- because the party leadership will need their participation to accomplish anything.

[readmoreoften]

86. Why is anyone against having a choice of dems in a primary?

This is baffling to me. Don't have primaries until we win back the Congress? Do we only go with incumbant Democrats until we get a presidency? Why not get some Wellstone Dems in there?

[readmoreoften]

81. There is no way NY will send a republican to the Senate.

Bush has a 72% disapproval rating in the state. NY is against the Bush agenda.

[don954]

85. im not saying they will

but i think all the time and money spent on these challengers would be better spent on efforts to unseat incumbent republicans.

[Robbien]

89. But a Dem majority means we get stuck with a DLC led agenda.

if we don't challenge the DLC candidates.

Under the DLC every bill will be written for corporate fun and profit, the same as it is now under the GOP. DLC Foreign policy will also be the same as it is now, with the only difference being we will drop the Cowboy bravado.

To get any voice in this political system we need to get Progressive representatives. Getting a Dem majority full of DLCers means nothing.

[Stephanie]

95. Why don't you ask her for some of her $40 million warchest

If you're so worried about resources, why is she sitting on all that money?

[don954]

165. Actually, i have written her to ask that she spread the wealth around

a bit to help out the party to gain a majority, since her seat is "safe" and she really doesn't need that much cash to win.

[itzamirakul]

79. New Yorkers sending another signal to the DLC?

To the DLC: We are sick and tired of you choosing losing candidate after losing candidate for us.

To Hillary: Understand how Lieberman feels NOW, Ms. Hillary? Still love the war? Still support the Bush regime when it comes to "staying the course?"

There was a time when Hillary could do no wrong IMO...but she lost me some time ago and I cannot think of anything that she can do now to get back my support. And I am a dedicated, 40+ year, straight ticket voting Democrat.

[Skidmore]

84. The DLC candidates all need to get sharp rebukes, particularly those who

are incumbents. If they regain their seats, they need to understand that they will not be allowed to go back to business as usual. As much as I would like to see a woman president, I will not lend my support to Hillary for some time. First, we need to lose dynastic aspirations. No more Bushes or Clintons. I don't want any Bayhs, Kerrys, or anyone else who rides in on the name of their family connection. At this point, the only one I would really give serious consideration to is Gore, who has stood up and spoken truth without weasel words.

[itzamirakul]

90. The argument that some posters give for keeping incumbents

regardless of their rw-leaning positions is simply foolish. It makes no sense to say, "Let's just vote for Democrats regardless of their positions on the issues, just so that we can have a majority."
Dem leaders who already have rw positions are not likely to lose them when we are in the majority, so that is not a reason IMO for us not to vote for challengers in the primary.

At this point, there is no one that I am excited about. I feel more comfortable with John Edwards right now, but that is not an absolute for me depending on who else new joins the race.

I really think that it is more important that we focus on who the Repubs will be running in 08 because as long as they keep the question focused on our candidates, they have the time and opportunity to tear down and swiftboat ANY potential Democratic candidate we might be considering. We need to turn the table and focus on THEIR potential candidates so that we can begin to give them the same kind of intense investigation and grief that is focused on our own.

[KoKo]

115. Well said......both of you......agree........n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

91. .

:rofl:

[robbedvoter]

97. yeay! I have 2 more pages for him - just in case!

(I mean signature pages)
Funny his this race is not covered at all - even in the blogosphere - although it's identical in significance with Lieberman/lamont!

[warrens]

100. Yawn

Yeah, right, he's gonna beat Clinton. Yadda, yadda.

[SaveElmer]

101. Prediction...

Hillary tops 80% in the primary...

Tasini is a Green, not a Democrat

[Name removed]

105. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

107. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SaveElmer]

108. Typical reaction of the "purist"

We don't agree with you so we are the enemy...

[SOS]

112. Prediction probably accurate

20% of the Democrats in NY will abandon Hillary in favor of Tasini.
Result: Hillary easily retains Senate seat, but hopes for White House vaporize as one fifth of her own Party deserts her.

[rinsd]

122. self delete

[Stephanie]

160. Why do I have to say it again? Tasini is not nor has he ever been a Green.

Your assertion is absolutely FALSE.

[SaveElmer]

164. See my reply to other poster...nt

[Terran1212]

176. I wonder what we can call her then if he's a Green because of his stances

Maybe she's a Santorum Democrat?

[SaveElmer]

189. I'll look it up...

But I'm pretty sure Santorum doesn't have a 95% rating viting the Democratic Party position in the Senate...

But I could be wrong! :sarcasm:

[Armstead]

109. Hillary will win -- But she needs to be challenged

The "let 'em eat cake" branch of Democratic corporate centrism must be challenged. A good honest debate with progressive Democrats can at the very least put them on notice that they can't continue to ignore basic liberal/progressive principles and take us for granted.

[iconoclastNYC]

150. Amen to that.

Centrism is by definition conceding to your opponents arguments. It's the ulitimate cut and run.

Centrism is a the reason you have labor unions flirting with the GOP and you have 1-2 percent of the party flirting with the Green party.

We have one party of big business and the status quo. We don't need two.

[Terran1212]

169. I agree completely

Let Hillary know that she has people upset with her, and that isn't just within protest groups at her speaking arrangements.

[iconoclastNYC]

125. He's a better fit for New York

We don't need smartly disguised DINOS in New York.

[The Magistrate]

128. As A Matter Of Curiousity, Sir

How do you account for the fact that between three-quarters and four-fifths of persons in New York state identifying themselves as liberals express approval and support for Sen. Clinton?

[iconoclastNYC]

132. Uhm...because she is married to a President?

Think that might have something to do it, SIR?

[im10ashus]

133. Don't get started with the "sir" thingy.

It's a very touchy area. :-)

[The Magistrate]

136. You Say That Like It Were A Bad Thing, Sir

She is married to a man wildly popular among Democrats: this shows both good taste and good judgement, which are things that incline people to regard a person favoreably in the political arena. An official's authotity, after all, is a delegation of the people's authority, and as it cannot be known in advance what items will come up requiring decision and action, people are actually voting for someone whose judgement and taste they can trust to meet unforeseen contingencies.

[Name removed]

149. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LincolnMcGrath]

147. Bingo.

[im10ashus]

135. Well, SIR, did they interview EVERY liberal?

I can assure you they did not. And why, SIR, does every liberal I have spoken with, have the same reservations about Hillary this time around, SIR? I mean, I live here in NYC. Do you, SIR? If you did, you may actually hear firsthand what is being said.

[The Magistrate]

137. In My Youth, Sir

Every single person of my acquaintance expressed the intent to vote for Sen. McGovern. It proved a very poor tool for predicting the outcome of the '72 election....

[im10ashus]

138. Well then, SIR...

What makes you think the people who took the survey were liberal/democrats and were telling the truth?

[The Magistrate]

145. All Such Polling, Sir

Necessarily relies on self-identification. Most people, oddly enough, are inclined to report the truth of how they see themselves, when asked. Persons agreeing to respond in the survey were asked if they were Democrats and considered themselves liberals, and those who answered in the affirmative were the sample on which the reported numbers are based.

[im10ashus]

148. Exactly why the polling holds no water with me.

Sir.

[The Magistrate]

154. How Would You Suggest It Be Done, Sir?

Ought every voter or potential voter submit their views to a national commission and receive some oficial classification to be consulted by polling firms?

[H2O Man]

159. No.

I'm good with the primary system. I haven't said anything that would hint otherwise. What I'm saying is Simply that Senator Clinton is risking losing support much in the manner that Lieberman has. It is not a coincidence that those who are trying to justify her pro-Bush stance on Iraq sound all too similar to those who attempt to justify Lieberman's pro-Bush position. In that sense, I absolutely believe that every voter should submit their views.

The polls that I see do, of course, indicate that the public wants to end the US occupation in Iraq. I would hope that rather than looking to find ways to pretend otherwise, and to advocate the AIPAC-backed aggression in the Middle East, that democrats would lead the effort to get out of Iraq. There are, as you know, some cases where one doesn't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows. Maybe Senator Clinton should ignore the polsters and listen to her conscience.

[The Magistrate]

161. My Comment, Sir

Simply addressed the gentleman's objection to peoiple who say they are liberal Democrats being taken for liberal Democrats by polling firms If self-identification in such questions is not to be taken seriouslty, particularly when it produces results distressing to someone's personal views of what liberal Democrats must necessarily feel, some alternative method must be required, and it is hard to what it could be.

As to your larger point, Sir, it remains a matter of mystery to me why some people, when a person disagrees with their own views of a matter, claim that the person who disagrees is out of step with his or her conscience. That is tantamount to claiming both that there is only possible right thing and that everyone already knows what it is, and if they do not follow it, can only be acting from moral perversity. It woudl be hard to concct a more potent recepie for totalitarian thought and action than that.

Further, to expect a person who has made a career of politics to act without regard to their best judgement of what will be most expedient politically, not only apparently at the present moment, but down the years to come and in future political contests, seems to me to be a waste of effort. Success in the trade demands such considerations, and more often than not rewards them well shrewdly made.

Finally, the repeated assertion that persons who do not hold exactly the view you do on the question of the manner and timing of disengagement from Iraq are "pro-Bush" continues troubling, and it is not improved by raking in the "demon A.I.P.A.C." for emphasis. Calling Sen. Clinton "pro-Bush" is a sure means to irrelevance in any discussion of the Democratic Party and its positions and prospects.

[H2O Man]

141. I think that while

you make a number of valid points on this thread, that it is important to recognize that there is a growing discontent with Senator Clinton. Now, I'm from upstate, in the rural area where Delaware, Chenango, and Otsego Counties come together. Democrats are the minority party in all three counties, but there is a solid core of good people in this area. In recent years, part of the party has become more structured, and well-organized, than it has been since Mayor Burns of Binghamton helped RFK take the US Senate seat. But there is a growing division, too. The organization is pro-Clinton, making it likely that she will carry the area. But her position is not one that can be taken for granted. There is growing democratic opposition to her, primarily because of two things: her position on Iraq, and the perception that she is trying to gain favor with the republican party in order to run in '08.

She may be taking the fringes of the left for granted, and it may be of little consequence on its own. But you add in a number of working class, center-to-left democrats, who do not want more kids from our communities to be wounded or die in Iraq, in a war Clinton supports in an attempt to win possible support of republican women in '08 .... and you will find her negatives are growing.

[The Magistrate]

152. Negative Appraisals, Sir

Necessarily advance in the run-up to an election. But Sen. Clinton enjoys formidable advantages in any primary campaign this summer.

To refer to Sen. Clinton as "supporting the war" strikes me as a simplification pushed well past the point of utility in clarification. Her position on the matter seems tailored to the general electorate, and quite sound on those terms. Most people do want the adventure terminated, but their distaste for it and disenchantment with it are based on a feeling it has been incompetently handled and cannot be won: very few oppose it on principle or on grounds that it is criminal imperialism. The widest popular feeling is that it should be liquidated in an orderly manner, which necessitates a gradual course. Further, those who preside over its liquidation will certainly require some political cover, as there will be unpleasant consequences to withdrawl, and these will certainly be seized on by the opposition to portray those who superintend it with acting against the national interest and security. This is a charge that past experience shows is well received by the people of the country when laid against a Democrat. The people are fickle, Sir, and the opposition at large among them to the occupation of Iraq is not deeply rooted, containing in its ranks a great many people who were quite supportive of the war in its early stages. The views of people who thought it a good idea at the outset could well snap back in a wink against the authors of actual withdrawl, when it produces a degree of increased chaos and triumphant noises from foreign elements the people despise and fear.

[H2O Man]

157. To the contrary,

I think that very few Americans believe that the administration's warnings that we could not wait for the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud, and that Iraq posed a threat to this country due to the WMDs that the president & co. told us existed, were sincere reasons to go to war.

I think that most people are able to break the war down what may seem insultingly simple to you, but which are very clear to many others: one either supports the president's on-going policies in Iraq, or one wants to begin getting the heck out. It really is that simply, and attempts to pretend otherwise are best viewed as support of staying.

[The Magistrate]

158. We Will Have To Disagree On That Point, Sir

By the time the invasion was actually launched, most of the populace supported it. Most people thought and in fact continue to think deposing Hussein was a good idea, and even that it should have been done in the first Gulf expedition back in '91. Doubtless some thought the reasons offered were pretext, but approving the removal, did not much care, but many did in fact credit the idea Hussein represented a potential threat via collaboration with terrorist organizations. Many also were naive enough to suppose that taking over Iraq would cause a drop in fuel prices.

The spectacle of victory presented by the invasion, of course, in line with the proverb that it has many fathers, was quite popular with the people, and cemented in many minds for a while the idea that the endeavor was a good thing, and even a thing to be proud of. It is the unravelling of this sentiment in succeeding years that has given public opinion its current cast, for the trumpeted victory turned out to be no victory, but rather a grim slog it is increasingly difficult to see any good prospect in.

"Beginning to get the heck out" is a flexible formulation, and quite a number of people accused here of "supporting the war" are in fact in favor of "beginning to get the heck out", though perhaps not quite soon enough or rapidly enough for some tastes. But that remains, in my view, far from sufficient to sustain the charge of being in support of the present regime's policies and in favor of continuing the occupation.

[im10ashus]

167. Since you brought it up.

"By the time the invasion was actually launched, most of the populace supported it."

Indeed. But since then, sir, you have seen for yourself the lack of proof that was initially asserted in the buildup for the war. So wouldn't you, sir, take issue with this administration and call them out on their lies and at least admit that your vote, sir, was the wrong one?

[The Magistrate]

174. Had Such Deception Been Practiced On Me, Sir

My inclination would be to admit error and denounce the liar. But acting differntly from me seldom strikes me as grounds to denounce someone as a vile and evil wretch with bloody hands....

[Stephanie]

180. and of course nobody said any such thing

what we did say is that we will vote for the anti-war Democrat over the unapologetic warmonger.

[im10ashus]

185. Who has denounced anyone as a vile and evil wretch? n/t

[iconoclastNYC]

151. I'd love to see a source for that contention.

Seriously.

[The Magistrate]

153. See No. 121 Above, Sir

[rinsd]

155. I posted it so here it is

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollTrack.aspx?g=77ca4b7e-ec24-4213-a4d6-f5053467ebf4&x=1206,3

To be honest I was surprised at how high her approval ratings were from Liberals. I expected it to be around 65% or 70%.

[tomp]

139. heard tasini on npr

he makes a good case that his positions are closer to the positions of ny state democrats than hillary. sorry, i don't have the statistics.

i find it utterly irrelevant that he is a "green" whether in actual affiliation or in his positions. in a system where progressives are generally forced to vote for the democratic party candidate to have any influence at all, it would seem absolutely necessary and within the rights of any progressive to try to push the dem party to the left.

however, if tasini is correct in his assertion that ny state dems are closer to his positions than hillary's, then, in fact, he is not pushing to the left, but hillary is pushing to the right.

[Stephanie]

163. It is a LIE. He has no affiliation with the Greens and NEVER HAS

It's an interesting Rovian tactic in that it's utterly false.

[Terran1212]

168. It's amazing how much support Hilary has

I urge people not to support her just because of the "Clinton" name and to take a balanced look at her and Tasini and decide whose views better match theirs.

[readmoreoften]

171. Tasini is a Democrat.

I really despise all these "he is a Green" posts. Am I a Republican because I'm against gun control? Tasini is a Democrat. He's running as a Democrat. Why are we attacking a Democrat????

[tomp]

175. three posts that essentially missed what i had to say.

i didn't say he was Green. i said i don't care if he's "green" or if he's not. do you see the difference? ONE of the points of my post was that it simply doesn't matter. it was directed at the people who say it does matter.

tasini would be well advised to publish his distinction from clinton the way he did on npr and with the polling data to support how ny dems are closer to his positions: column a (tasini)/column b (clinton)/column c nys (dem voters). the differences are striking. and the message is really effective when done that way.

please try to stop the knee-jerk responses.

[Stephanie]

178. there's a poster on this thread falsely claiming he's a Green party member

just so you understand my kneejerk reply

[tomp]

187. so reply to that poster. nt

[Name removed]

156. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NuttyFluffers]

182. oh good! an interesting primary! :D

nothing wrong with a little democracy in action, now is there? i just find it sad and shameful that in the one place these issues can really be hammered out, the primaries, there's a small group who desire to "stifle dissent" instead of savor conversation, no matter how heated. let the people scream, holler, and cry; if now isn't the time and place to talk about these things, when and where is?

good on NY. i hope their primary is more fun than mine has been in california. have fun actually discussing real issues, instead of fretting over imagined fears of "the future of the party." besides, so much of it is already a fixed game that hasn't been addressed what's the matter if people decide to inject a little meaning back into civil discourse and constituent appreciation? where there's energy there's change, and what this nation needs is change; so i have no fear of any build up in civic energy in whatever form. none of us should. it can only get worse if nothing changes, and that can only happen when hopelessness, apathy, ennui, and paralysis set in. let the cauldron roil and shake and its steam escape where it may.

[im10ashus]

188. Well said. n/t

[texasleo]

183. This is the most polite flame fest ever.

Or is it "politest?"

lol

There's a reason to oppose Hillary for the nomination in 08.
There is no reason to oppose her for Senate.

$0.02

[Stephanie]

184. unless you don't like her views, and prefer a Senator who represents you

that's why we have representative govt. If she wants to run for president, that's fine, but it's not my problem. I don't have to sacrifice my principles in service to her ambition. She wants to warmnonger? Fine. I'll vote for someone else. See how that works?

[Terran1212]

191. Exactly Stephanie

I'm glad to see someone has got the point I am trying to get across here.

[CarolNYC]

186. One of those signatures is mine. :)

I met a guy in the park this weekend collecting sigs for Tasini....I actually also met him at an event earlier in the year. Seems like a good guy.

[Terran1212]

192. Mobilize those new yorkers! nt