I have a Blue Dog Congressman who doesn't deserve my vote but

[JamesA1102]

I don't want to see the GOP take control of the House.

My Congressman is Mike McMahon who is the bluest of blue dogs. He voted against every version of healthcare reform, against financial reform and was one of the first Dems to call for an extention of Bush's tax cuts for the rich.

Unfortunately, no one ran against him in the primary so the Dems are stuck with him in November. I really don't want to vote for this guy so I'm not sure what I should do.

[WillParkinson]

1. IF you vote for him...

Make sure you call his office and express your disappointment in him.

[SharonAnn]

242. He's still a +1 when counting Democrats to determine majority party.

But I understand what you're saying.

Blue dogs are so disappointing.

But they still count as a Dem when deciding which party is the majority and who is Speaker of the House.

[Maru Kitteh]

248. That sounds like sound, wise, constructive and practical advice. I'm sorry but you'll have

to leave DU now.



:-)

[Sherman A1]

2. I am lucky with my Congressman

Lacy Clay- MO 1st. The Candidate for Senate, Robin Carnahan is disappointing in wanting to extend the Bush Tax Cuts.

[TreasonousBastard]

3. Vote for him to prevent Speaker Boner, if nothing else.

[COLGATE4]

8. K&R. We can't have a H.R. with Boner as Leader and

committee chairpersons like Michelle Bachmann.

[Mimosa]

34. ^ K&R 'Vote for him to prevent Speaker Boner...^ n/t

[quiller4]

128. Agree completely--better to elect Blue Dogs than make that fool speaker.

[Dappleganger]

4. If a democrat won't vote with dems on the most BASIC of issues.

They're not a democrat. What good are they if they won't caucus with us?

[Jackpine Radical]

28. Even if they're total deadheads,

their mere party label is sufficient to help maintain leadership of Congress. And maybe they won't jam up Obama's nominations to the Court.

[prolesunited]

36. +1,000

This is the crux of the whole issue.

[Dappleganger]

40. You mean, like they're jamming it up now??

[Jackpine Radical]

54. Well, I DID say "Maybe."

Meaning, some of the time some of them will go along with their nominal leadership. That's marginally better than what you ever get out of any Republican who doesn't come from Maine (or rarely Massachusetts).

[alfredo]

86. If the pigs take the house, look for never ending investigations

into every little thing Obama has done or said. Look for some to push for his impeachment.

The Reps have never gotten over the Nixon impeachment and will find any excuse, no matter how flimsy, to impeach a Democratic president.

[BlueDemKev]

46. Amen!

Blue Dog Democrats are more reasonable than ANY modern Republican.

[Ter]

143. House members don't have a say on Court appointments

It's all the Senate.

[still_one]

5. I am so glad I don't have that situation. In all honesty I don't even know what to advise

[Pirate Smile]

6. In the House, the most important vote any of them makes is for Speaker.

Vote for him for Nancy.

I had Jim Leach as my Representative. He was a Republican who was more liberal then a lot of the Conservative and Blue Dog Dems BUT that didn't matter because he was a vote for Republicans to control the House and who controls the House has all the power. He got booted in 2006.

He endorsed Obama in 2008.

In the House, unless it is the Primary, you are voting for who will control the gavel.

Consider it a vote for Nancy and vote for the jackoff.

[Erose999]

15. Do you really think the Blue Dogs are gonna vote for Nancy though? Their corporate sponsors will

certainly not approve.

[Pirate Smile]

17. Yes, enough would for her to stay as Speaker if Dems are 218+.

[BlueDemKev]

47. Yes, they would

I think they would. However, my gut feeling tells me that IF the Democrats maintain their majority in the House, Pelosi will face a lot of pressure to step down as Speaker.

[zipplewrath]

7. Call and ask him

Ask if he'll vote for Nancy for speaker. Ask if he'll continue to be a member of the Blue Dogs. And ask how voting for him will be different than voting republican. The answers don't matter as much as him knowing that people are paying attention and that his behaviors in this area make people question their vote for him.


Then go vote for him.

[nyc 4 Biden]

13. He's actually a New Dem not a Blue Dog, but that's pretty damn close. n/t

[BlueDemKev]

48. Hey, I'm a New Dem!

I think we're a far cry from the Blue Dogs. Many of the BD's are adamently pro-life and pro-gun. New Dems are more the likes of Bill Clinton, Russ Feingold, and Tim Kaine. Blue Dogs are more along the lines of Heath Shuler, Stephanie Sandlin, and Charlie Melancon.

[PassingFair]

91. Russ Feingold is no New Dem....

He's a progressive.

New Dems are DLC.

[Dr.Phool]

97. New Dems are jerk-offs.

Jim Davis, retired to run for Florida Governor 4 years ago was one.

Loved the Patriot Act.
Signed petition to rush the Bankruptcy Reform Act, with other New Dems, so they could vote for it.

And a host of other atrocities.

[PassingFair]

98. No argument from me on that. n/t

[PassingFair]

99. What makes you a New Dem? Membership?

Agreement with the works of From and Reed?

Do you agree with the policies and speeches of your leader,
Harold Ford?

This midterm election is TEXTBOOK DLC.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_dlc_flunks_politics_101

[blondeatlast]

51. +1

:thumbsup:

[LoZoccolo]

9. Ooooops.

Hang on.

[LoZoccolo]

10. Michael McMahon votes with his party 92.2% of the time.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m001174/

[nyc 4 Biden]

14. I saw that as well.

I think of this statistic when I think of the obstructionist GOPer that could take his place in congress.

[LoZoccolo]

16. I kind-of know what the response is going to be already though.

They'll say that the differences weren't about important issues, but I'd challenge them to make a list of what they think are unimportant issues.

[JamesA1102]

30. This site has a list

http://www.stupidvotes.com/

[JamesA1102]

18. That is just a number

On the big issues like Healthcare, financial reform and Bush's tax cuts for the rich, he has consistantly voted with the GOP.

[LoZoccolo]

20. Which of the bills that on which he voted contrary to the Republicand do you feel is unimportant.

What you bring up are primary issues; the primaries are over.

[JamesA1102]

26. He only vote contray to the GOP on Cap & Trade. nt

[LoZoccolo]

32. He voted contrary to the GOP on ten bills on the first page alone. n/t

[JamesA1102]

41. But on the really important bills

like Healthcare, Financial reform and extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich; he votes with the GOP.

[LoZoccolo]

42. Again, which of the bills do you consider unimportant? n/t

[JamesA1102]

53. Again, the site has a list

http://www.stupidvotes.com/

[LoZoccolo]

57. That site is not your site. Which bills do you personally think are unimportant?

This was your assertion, that he did not deserve your vote. Why aren't you standing by it?

[JamesA1102]

59. But it has a good list of frivolous bills and votes take by congress

And I still think McMahon doesn't deserve my vote. I am standing by that.

[LoZoccolo]

61. Why doesn't he deserve your vote?

It doesn't sound like you have a reason, because he does vote against the Republicans on important bills. If any of them are unimportant, then which ones are they?

[JamesA1102]

62. He didn't vote against the GOP on

Healthcare or Financial reform. And he was one of the first Dems to call for extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich.

[LoZoccolo]

64. You probably feel that those bills are important.

Which of the bills on which he opposed the GOP weren't important?

This is the fourth time I've asked this question; is there a reason that you do not want to answer it?

[JamesA1102]

66. Why are you trying to pick a fight with me?

I have my problems with this man which is my right as an american. You keep coming back as if I don't have the right not to vote for him.

[LoZoccolo]

67. I did not say that you did not have a right not to vote for him.

But I'm trying to find the reason not to vote for him. I would think that you'd prefer one candidate over the other based on their stance on the issues. You mention a number of issues that are important to you. Are they the only issues that are important to you? Also, there is a record of this candidate differing from the Republicans on a number of issues. Are all of those issues not important to you?

It may sound like I am picking a fight with you, but you did post your own opinion and solicit advice, so you've made yourself the subject of your thread and put this decision up as a topic of discussion. Am I going off-topic?

[JamesA1102]

68. Yes you are.

I stated the votes that were important to me in which he voted with the GOP. I don't have to justify my opinion to you. This is America. I can decide what issues are important to me whether you approve or not.

[LoZoccolo]

70. Does that mean that the other votes are unimportant?

And why would you post your opinion if you didn't want others to be convinced of it? Wouldn't you want to justify it to others?

And if other people think that the votes that you think are unimportant are important to them, aren't you picking a fight with them by claiming that your issues are worth so much to you that you don't mind working against theirs?

Most of what I've posted is just questions that you are free to answer and ignore, isn't it?

[JamesA1102]

71. I don't have to justify that to you.

You don't make the rules here. I stated what votes were important to me.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I started this thread to voice my dilemma not to deal with an arrogant, judgemental prick like you.

[LoZoccolo]

72. Let's not fight.

Did I pass judgement? Or just ask questions?

[JamesA1102]

75. You questions were judgemental and confrontational

I gave you answers but you wouldn't accept them. You're the one who picked this fight, not me.

[LoZoccolo]

76. Did you answer the question of which bills you think are unimportant?

Could you give me just the bill numbers?

Are you judging and confronting your representative in this thread?

[JamesA1102]

77. Bill numbers???

Like I said you're questions are confrontational and judgemental. I don't have to justify myself to a condensing prick like you. Buh-bye!

[LoZoccolo]

79. Is it judgemental to call somebody a prick?

How is asking a question and allowing an open response judgemental?

Wouldn't it be better to identify the bills that you think are unimportant with their unique identifier so that there is no ambiguity as to which ones are unimportant?

[JamesA1102]

80. You ask for bill numbers and deny that you're being a prick.

Not only are you a prick but you're also a self-deluded liar too.

[LoZoccolo]

82. What did I lie about?

And if I am being judgemental, what was my judgement of you?

What method of identifying the unimportant bills would you rather use?

[JamesA1102]

83. That you're not purposely being confrontational

and that you're being a prick. In fact if you weren't trying to still be a prick you would have let this go already.

[LoZoccolo]

84. For what purpose do you think I'm being confrontational?

Do you think I have a right to disagree with you? Do you think I have a right to question your position? Are you questioning and confronting mine by making statements about my motives? Wouldn't someone who posts that they do not want to vote for a Democrat on Democratic Underground expect to be confronted?

I don't see anything wrong with questioning your view or even confronting it. I was not doing it arbitrarily.

So which bills do you think are unimportant?

[JamesA1102]

85. But you weren't disagreeing. You were playing gotcha games

and trying to pick a fight. In short you were being a prick.

But one thing you did do is help me make up my mind. So thanks to you being such a prick I won't be voting for McMahon just to spite you. So if McMahon loses by one vote and the Dems lose control of the House by one seat, it will be all your fault because you decided to be a prick and pick a fight with me. Hope you are proud of yourself.

But I will make you a deal. I'll change my mind and vote for McMahon if you make a top post apologizing to me and admitting that you were being a prick, playing silly gotcha games and trying to pick a fight. If you make another post in this thread the deal is off.

So now you have a choice between your ego and getting a vote to help secure the Democratic majority in the House. Which is more important to you? I'm guessing it is your ego.

[LoZoccolo]

87. Wouldn't you have your own reasons for voting for McMahon?

If you found at least one important thing on which he voted for the Republicans, wouldn't you rather have someone who voted for that than not?

If you don't vote for him, isn't that your choice?

[JamesA1102]

88. So you chose your ego. Thanks for proving me right.

Nice to know what is really important to you.

Buh-bye.

[LoZoccolo]

92. Could I have a second chance if I posted an original thread that is compliant with your demands?

Who are you voting for now, by the way?

[JamesA1102]

93. No, buh-bye!

[LoZoccolo]

95. How will I know that you've carried through on your threat?

For all I know, you could vote the way you want to no matter what you say, right?

[JamesA1102]

100. I'm a man of my word

You've been such a prick that I'll enjoy not voting for McMahon just to spite you.

And if you continue this thread any more, I must not only not vote for McMahon but I may just vote for the Repubilican just to spite you.

[LoZoccolo]

101. If I have to trust you, as you say, doesn't it mean that it's your responsibility?

Also, if I can use the message board to lie, how do you know that I am not a Republican trying to suppress the vote?

[LoZoccolo]

102. Also, didn't you say that you would "never" vote for a Republican?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9228087&mesg_id=9239751

When you say that you are a man of your word, are you still allowed to change your mind?

[JamesA1102]

104. Wow you are really going for the championship of

prickdom, aren't you.

But you just keep proving me right, it is all about your ego and nothing elst.

[LoZoccolo]

105. If I do it for my ego, why do you to vote a certain way to spite somebody else?

Also, how can you be sure that I'm being spited?

[JamesA1102]

106. You just can't help yourself can you.

You're going for superprick status.

[LoZoccolo]

107. Can you keep yourself from responding after you've declared the conversation over three times?

Did you mean it?

[JamesA1102]

108. But you just keep coming back like a bad penny.

And each time you do you just prove me more and more right. It's all about your ego and nothing else. You don't care about McMahon or anything else. It's just about you being right and proving that everyone else is wrong. How pathetic.

[LoZoccolo]

109. How did you determine that?

Why would I let you make an accusation like that unquestioned?

[JamesA1102]

110. It is determined by your behavior

Even now you can't stop. You keep coming back. And everytime you do you prove me more and more right.

You were purposely being a prick and trying to pick a fight with me and it is all about your ego.

Post again and continue to prove me right.

[LoZoccolo]

111. Why didn't you ask me?

Haven't I allowed you to answer for yourself? Have I stated any assumptions about your motives?

Why do you keep responding? Does it mean that you cannot help yourself?

[JamesA1102]

112. Like I said you just keep proving me right nt.

[LoZoccolo]

113. If I've already proven you right, why do you keep responding?

Wouldn't you expect me to ask more questions if you do not answer them directly?

[JamesA1102]

114. Because I want to see how long it will take before you give up.

And every time you respond you just prove me more and more right.

[LoZoccolo]

115. Why do you want to be proven more right?

Can you rule out that it may be to satisfy your ego?

[JamesA1102]

116. See you just can't help youself.

It's all about your ego. It was never about McMahon or the Democratic majority in the House. It is about you trying to be a bully and a prick. I bet you never even heard about McMahon before reading my OP.

Now you're behaivor has already lost my vote for McMahon and a few others. Keep going and see how many more you can lose.

[LoZoccolo]

117. If you would change your vote because someone asked you a question

that you did not think that people should ask you, is that indicative of an ego problem?

If something that I said to you caused you to go against your own political beliefs at the ballot box, would that mean that you cannot help yourself from seeking revenge when you vote?

[JamesA1102]

120. I changed my vote because of McMahon's voting record

I was looking of good reasons to change it back. Instead I got you being prick and trying to pick a fight with me. And even when I gave you the opportunity to make things right, you chose your ego instead.

Now you've alienated me and others because your behavior. I hope you are proud of yourself.

[LoZoccolo]

121. If I could show you that he voted against the Republicans on an important bill,

would that be a reason to vote for him?

Which bills do you consider to be unimportant?

[JamesA1102]

122. Sorry but you have no credibility left with me

You used that up when you decided to pick a fight.

[LoZoccolo]

123. What have I said that relies on my credibility?

Can't the votes all be independently verified, on the U.S. House of Representatives web site if not the one I've posted?

[JamesA1102]

124. You just can't stop can you.

You just continue to argue whatever pathetic point you can latch on to. It really is all about you and your ego.

[LoZoccolo]

127. What pathetic do I keep arguing?

Haven't I pretty much been asking questions for a long time?

[JamesA1102]

131. That's the sad part

You don't even realize you're still doing it. You just can't help yourself. It's all about you and your ego.

[LoZoccolo]

134. Haven't I shown other people that there are important issues which McMahon voted on?

Doesn't the fact that you won't name any show that there are few if any unimportant ones?

Isn't that perspective useful to informing people who don't see any differences?

If I've shown that the post is useful in another way, how are you sure that your explanation for it's purpose is more likely?

[JamesA1102]

135. No you haven't.

And you're still being an arrogant judgemental prick. You're still putting your ego first. You are really pathetic.

[LoZoccolo]

139. If there is an unimportant issue, what would it be?

Would the fact that no one can give me one lead people to believe that there aren't so many?

[JamesA1102]

147. You're really sick

You're still trying to win some imaginary arguement. You need help.

[LoZoccolo]

151. How is the argument imaginary?

Isn't there a real answer to the question of which bills are unimportant to you?

[JamesA1102]

154. You are sick

You've lost the arguement and you refuse to give up.

[LoZoccolo]

156. Where did you list the unimportant bills?

Wouldn't you need that to prove that McMahon did not cast a good vote on any important bill?

[JamesA1102]

160. I gave you a link

And whole unimportant bills thing is just a gotcha game that you're playing. Instead of trying to convince me to vote for McMahon you disrepsected my reasons for not wanting to vote for him because you put your ego first. Now you lost my vote for McMahon.

[LoZoccolo]

163. Does the link contain a list of all of the bills that McMahon voted against the Republicans

which are unimportant to you? Every one?

[JamesA1102]

166. You lost the damn arguement. Give it up.

You're really pathetic.

[LoZoccolo]

171. Why would I search through the site if you won't assure me that it contains the answer?

If you won't assure me that it contains the answer, can you say that you've given me the answer?

[JamesA1102]

172. The answer is You've lost. Give it up.

[LoZoccolo]

176. Do you think that people will think that you've won when you dodge questions?

What is your criteria for winning or losing?

[JamesA1102]

178. The problem is is that you're putting your ego first

You rather win an silly made-up arguement than convince me to vote for McMahon. Pathetic.

[LoZoccolo]

182. If I'm making myself look pathetic, how would that serve my ego?

What about my posts suggests that my ego is a factor, and that I'm not doing it to demonstrate the vacuousness of charges against the Democrats?

[JamesA1102]

185. The fact that you're still here

and trying to win an arguement that you've already lost.

[LoZoccolo]

190. Do you want me to stop, or to keep asking questions?

If I stop, have I won the argument? What do I get if I win, and what do I get if I lose?

[JamesA1102]

191. You need to stop.

What you win is hopefully some mental stability.

[LoZoccolo]

196. Weren't you saying that I was helping you by not stopping?

Why wouldn't you want me to help you?

[JamesA1102]

197. No stopping would be the best thing you could do to help McMahon.

[LoZoccolo]

200. Does this mean that you would change your vote back if I stopped?

If not, how else would it help McMahon?

[JamesA1102]

203. It means there would be a better chance of that happening

if you stopped antagonizing me.

[LoZoccolo]

209. Is it more antagonistic to ask questions or to call somebody a prick?

Aren't you just dodging the questions anyways? Why do they bother you?

[JamesA1102]

211. Wow! You still don't get it.

[prolesunited]

125. Are you serious?

You're going to change you vote because someone wasn't nice enough to you on a message board.

If I get him to say he's sorry, will you change it back?

[LoZoccolo]

126. And then there's the question - what would I apologize for?

For asking questions?

[JamesA1102]

130. For asking confrontational questions

that disrepsected my right to decide what issues are impotant to me and just being a prick in general.

[LoZoccolo]

132. Didn't I ask you which issues are unimportant to you?

Couldn't you have responded any way you felt like? Is it disrespectful to give you an opportunity to voice your opinion?

[JamesA1102]

136. And you refused to accept the answer I gave you

instead you decided to be a prick and pick a fight with me.

[LoZoccolo]

141. How am I supposed to know which bills are unimportant from your answer?

Do the bills you mentioned (if any) have specific bill numbers which would identify them, so that I can see how McMahon voted on each of them?

[JamesA1102]

148. You just can't help yourself can you.

Either you're totally clueless or you're just the biggest prick there ever was.

[LoZoccolo]

152. How would you be able to tell if I can help myself?

How do you know that I don't have a premeditated purpose in asking these questions?

[JamesA1102]

155. Because you won't stop.

And the only premaditated purpose you have is being a prick.

[LoZoccolo]

158. Wouldn't my argument that a person who doesn't vote for McMahon is ignoring important issues

get stronger each time they refuse to name unimportant issues?

[JamesA1102]

162. You already lost the arguement

Stop trying to win it because you can't until you shut up.

[LoZoccolo]

164. Haven't I shown that someone not voting for McMahon will not admit

that bills on which he opposed Republicans are important?

[JamesA1102]

168. You're trying to win an arguement you've already lost. Give it up.

You're just putting your ego first again.

[LoZoccolo]

170. In which post do you list the bills where McMahon opposed you that you think are unimportant?

Could you link to it?

[JamesA1102]

174. I gave a link but you put your ego first. Give it up.

You do realize continuing to be a prick will not change my mind. Or are you really that clueless.

[LoZoccolo]

177. Does the link contain a list of bills where McMahon voted against the Republicans

that you think is unimportant?

[JamesA1102]

179. See you're still putting your ego first.

You're not getting that your gotcha arguement is not going to get me to vote for McMahon but you can't help being a prick about it.

[LoZoccolo]

183. Can I assume that the link does not provide a list of bills that you consider unimportant?

Have you checked it yourself?

[JamesA1102]

186. See you are still arguing

a stupid point that you made up in the first place rather than give me a good reason to vote for McMahon. It's all about you and your pathetic ego. You just can't let it go.

[LoZoccolo]

188. Wouldn't his support of issues that you feel are important be a good reason to vote for him?

Are there any that you don't feel are important?

[JamesA1102]

192. Why are you still trying to pick a fight?

You lost this one already.

[LoZoccolo]

194. Haven't I demonstrated that I would be giving you a reason to vote for him?

Aren't I even letting you pick the reason by helping me to find one that is important to you?

[JamesA1102]

198. No.

You've just been disrespecting my reasons for not wanting to vote for him.

[LoZoccolo]

202. Haven't I been asking for your reasons for not voting for him?

What are your reasons for not voting for him?

[JamesA1102]

204. No you've been disrespecting my reasons.

[LoZoccolo]

206. In which posts have you stated the reasons that I disrespected?

Could you link to or give the numbers of the posts?

[JamesA1102]

208. That you have to ask shows how clueless you are

either that or you're just being a prick again.

[LoZoccolo]

212. Could you still show a clueless person where the posts are?

Do they exist?

[JamesA1102]

213. Again you are either clueless

or being a prick.

[LoZoccolo]

220. Wouldn't it make a stronger case that I was a prick if you pointed out your evidence

despite the fact that I'm here not able to find it?

[JamesA1102]

221. You really don't get it

nor can you stop yourself. You're still trying to win an arguement that you've already lost. Get a grip and seek help soon.

[LoZoccolo]

222. Have you convinced me of that?

If so, don't you still seemed determined to do so?

If not, should you try the same approach?

[JamesA1102]

224. I'm not here to convince you of anything.

[JamesA1102]

129. No I wasn't going to vote for him to begin with

I was looking for someone to give a good reason of why I should vote for him and instead this guy decided to pick a fight with me. And he had his chance to apologize but he blew it because he put his ego first.

[LoZoccolo]

133. If I'm giving you a reason to change your mind, aren't I naturally confronting your opinion?

Wouldn't I have to challenge it to change it? Weren't you asking for someone to do that?

Isn't it disrespectful of the other people who have given you reasons to use your vote to spite me?

[JamesA1102]

137. No not if you disrespect my right to have an opinion

which you did repeatedly. You're problem is you need to feed your ego by winning the argument instead of winning my vote. You rather be right than to do right. Pathetic.

[LoZoccolo]

140. If I thought you had no right to an opinion, why would I ask you to elaborate on it?

Is there a way to win your vote without winning the argument?

[JamesA1102]

150. You still haven't realized the only way for you to win this

is for you to shut up!

[LoZoccolo]

153. What if I wanted to show that people who don't vote for McMahon are ignoring important issues?

Couldn't I show that by demonstrating that someone who plans to not vote for McMahon will also not publicly state which issues are unimportant to them?

[JamesA1102]

157. You didn't even know who McMahon was a week ago.

And you're just playing a gotcha game. I answered you're question twice but you chose to be a prick and not accept my answer. Instead of trying to give me a good reason to vote for McMahon, you put your ego first and decided to pick an arguement with me.

[LoZoccolo]

159. Don't I have access to his voting record?

Can't I see that some of the issues on which he opposed the Republicans are important to me?

[JamesA1102]

161. You don't get it

The arguement is over. I'm not voting for McMahon. You lost. Stop trying to prove yourself right because that just won't happen until you STFU.

[LoZoccolo]

165. Did I argue that you were going to vote for McMahon?

Are you being confrontative by telling me to shut up?

Didn't you say that I was proving you right by posting more messages?

[JamesA1102]

167. You lost the damn arguement. Give it up.

You really need to STFU if you ever want me to even consider voting for McMahon.

[LoZoccolo]

169. Didn't you already say that you weren't going to vote for him?

How do you know that's not my purpose?

[JamesA1102]

173. Yes which means you've lost. Give it up

Anything else is an exercise for your ego.

[LoZoccolo]

175. If I apologize and start an original post where I call myself a prick

will you vote for McMahon?

[JamesA1102]

180. I doubt that you'd do it

But I'll consider it depending on what you say in the OP and provide that you post no further messages in this thread ever again.

[LoZoccolo]

181. So doesn't that mean that it's ultimately your decision?

And that I am not responsible for it?

[JamesA1102]

187. You're responsible for picking a fight

to satisfy your ego instead of giving me a good reason to vote for McMahon.

[LoZoccolo]

189. If I were to find an important issue where he voted according to your opinion, would that be a good

reason?

What would be a better reason than that?

[JamesA1102]

193. No that's not the point anymore.

You really are a clueless prick.

[LoZoccolo]

195. Why isn't it the point anymore?

Aren't you still saying that you do not have a reason to vote for McMahon?

[JamesA1102]

199. Wow! You are really clueless.

[LoZoccolo]

201. Could you give me a clue?

If not, why announce that I am clueless?

[JamesA1102]

205. Here's a clue

STFU!

[LoZoccolo]

207. Why do you think I should STFU?

Does it hurt your case against McMahon for me to ask questions about it?

[JamesA1102]

210. My case against McMahon??? You are really clueless.

[LoZoccolo]

223. Has it already been established that I am in need of a clue?

If not from you, where should I get one?

If I should never find one, why is there still a need for a reminder?

[JamesA1102]

225. So I see that you've decided

to go down the being a prick road again.

[LoZoccolo]

226. Have I called you names?

Which is more the tools of a prick - calling names or asking questions?

[JamesA1102]

227. See you still don't get it

You're still putting your ego first and trying to win some made up arguement. Get a life!

[LoZoccolo]

228. If I made it up, how can you tell what it is about?

And how do you know that it's about my ego?

[JamesA1102]

229. Because you keep trying to argue nt

[LoZoccolo]

231. Is keeping state election officials from working in campaigns important?

McMahon voted against the Republicans on this:

Vote 563: H R 512: To Amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to Prohibit Certain State Election Administration Officials From Actively Participating in Electoral Campaigns

Do you think that that's an important issue?

[JamesA1102]

233. No

Stop trying to argue this. I defined what votes were important to me.

[LoZoccolo]

235. So it is just as well that the people working on a campaign are trusted with counting the votes?

You would not vote for someone who tried to put a stop to that, all other things being equal?

[JamesA1102]

236. You are really clueless

You're tactics make me less inclined to vote for McMahon not more.

[LoZoccolo]

237. Do your feelings about being asked questions on the Internet

take precedence over the possibility of election fraud?

[Lucky Luciano]

238. Seriously Amazing! This has got to be a record for longest flamewar between two people!

Congrats!

:toast:

I have no patience to go more than 2 to 3 comebacks myself. I getbored after that no matter what.

[JamesA1102]

241. Thanks! nt

[JamesA1102]

240. You still don't get it.

It's all about your ego. You'd rather win a manufactured argument than give me a good reason to vote for McMahon.

[LoZoccolo]

243. What sort of reason are you looking for?

If you aren't looking for a bill that you support, what are you looking for? If you can't or won't answer that, do you expect people to think you were really looking?

[JamesA1102]

244. Others gave me good reasons.

Your problem is you decided to be a prick and pick a fight with me. And the more you drag this out the less inclined I am to vote for McMahon.

But it is not about McMahon it's about your ego as you've proven over and over again.

[LoZoccolo]

245. Like what?

Are you going to disrespect their efforts on account of me?

[JamesA1102]

246. So you admit that it is all about you

and you don't give a damn whether I vote for McMahon or not.

[LoZoccolo]

247. Haven't I demonstrated that your vote ultimately has nothing to do with me?

Isn't that evident in the fact that you continue to threaten to not vote for him even after I refused to give in to your ultimatum? Isn't the ultimatum your choice to make? Do you think that other people wouldn't notice that it's really not my fault?

[JamesA1102]

249. Yes and that it is all about your ego.

You'd rather win some made up argument with me than convince me to vote for McMahon.

[LoZoccolo]

250. Is it more egotistical than claiming that prevention of vote fraud doesn't matter to you?

Would that make you more important than disenfranchised voters?

[JamesA1102]

251. See you don't learn

One vote doesn't outweigh the others. You're not giving me a good reason to vote for McMahon, you're just trying to win an argument that you made up.

[Ter]

144. Staten Island doesn't want the Healthcare plan

He had to vote against it or he might have lost. He still may.

[JamesA1102]

149. I'm sure if you put it up for a vote

Staten Island would reject civil rights but that doesn't mean McMahon shouldn't do the right thing.

[Hippo_Tron]

78. Health care, financial reform, and tax cuts aren't the only big issues

They're just the ones that the media talks about. There are hundreds of votes that are taken in congress every day that effect peoples lives that the media doesn't talk about. Why do you discount these as unimportant?

[JamesA1102]

81. Because they aren't important to me.

Which is my right as an american to decide what bills are important to me and what ones are not.

[Ikonoklast]

22. I'd take that over a Repub EVERY TIME.

Then work on him to raise that number.

[southernyankeebelle]

11. I have one of those too. In the primary I voted Mickey Mouse but now I will hold my

nose and vote for him because I don't want the republican to get in. Although there really isn't much difference on some issues.

[nyc 4 Biden]

12. I instantly thought of McMahon when I saw this OP title.

He is my Rep as well and I couldn't be more disgusted. He brags about voting against the Healthcare reform bill and against Dems in general. I've written his office several times in disgust.

I'm not going to be able to hold my nose and vote for him because I will be wearing a paper bag of shame over my head when I vote for him. Vergogna!

Sad to say he is still better than the nutbag the GOP is running, Grimm (thats really his name).

Chances do not look good for McMahon. Lawn signs for Grimm outnumber his by 4 to 1 by my estimate. Most McMahon signs are on buses or other places which a paid for by his campaign.

[LiberalAndProud]

19. So sorry.

I know how disheartening it is to vote for a representative who doesn't represent. But you won't be better represented by a Republican so there's no payoff for withholding your vote, especially with a Democrat in the White House.

To repeat myself from an earlier post, zero is an important number. If you don't reserve a place with the zero when multiplying, you get a totally wrong answer. That is how I reconcile myself with my especially offensive Blue Dog.

[madokie]

21. I'm in the same fucking boat

Danny 'boy' Boren and there is no need for him to be the way he is if it wasn't that he has aspirations of running for the senate in the future. My district is not all that conservative by any stretch so he is more out of line than he is in line with his constituents. But vote for him I will because I'm not going to stand by and watch the pukes take the house without at least me doing my part. A sick blue dog is better than a well :puke: anyday in my book

[asdjrocky]

23. I know how you feel.

I have Dennis Cardoza, he's completely useless.

[Hubert Flottz]

24. We have a blue dog running for Robert Byrd's seat.

But I'll vote for him over a republican pig any day!

[Tatiana]

25. Vote for him and work at the grassroots level to find someone better to run against him in the

next primary.

[mkultra]

27. Vote for the best of the two options availble

And try to vote him out in the primary.

[JamesA1102]

29. There was no primary.

I wish there had been but no one ran against him.

[mkultra]

31. doesnt change the system.

Hope for a primary challenge next time or run yourself.

[Telly Savalas]

119. Democracy is a participatory process

If there's a lot of room for improvement for your representation, then it shouldn't be too difficult to find others who feel the same way. Find such people, organize, choose a qualified candidate, and try to get her/him nominated and elected. The process may be an uphill battle, but it's the only way to affect change.

Being a passive consumer isn't going to get you the results you want. Do you really think that if you withhold your vote that "They" (whoever the fuck "they" are) will psychically register the source of your unhappiness and adjust their approach next time around?

[treestar]

33. Vote for him to keep the majority and keep Pelosi speaker

The majority party at least determines the agenda. If the Repukes get to do that, we're more screwed than we are by having Blue Dogs amongst us. If that's your choice, then it's OK to make it.

[DevonRex]

35. You have to vote for him unless you want the Pukes to take over.

It's much more important than just one congressman. I'm sorry you have him as your Rep. I wish you had a better choice. One thing for sure is that the puke would be much, much worse if your Dem Rep is that bad.

I've never seen a Puke running against a blue dog that wasn't way further right than the blue dog.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

37. "No one ran against him in the primary"

Well, that's where the suckage resides. That needs to be corrected.

[TreasonousBastard]

38. This district is STATEN ISLAND and you want a more liberal...

Congressman? Give it up and be happy with what you got. Staten Island, Bay Ridge, Bensonhurst... the 13th has been Republican so long it's amazing this guy got out of the gate.

From the Wikipedia entry on McMahon:

"The 13th is considered to be the most conservative district of the 13 that divide New York City. It is based in Staten Island, which is the base of the city's Republican Party. However, the Republicans had considerable difficulty finding a replacement for Fossella on the ballot, eventually settling on former state assemblyman Robert Straniere. As a result, nearly all major pundits believed McMahon was almost certain to win the seat. Although Democrats have a 17-point edge in registration, the 13th is by far the most conservative district in the city. Voters are somewhat conservative on social issues and matters regarding "law and order", which kept Republicans in the seat for over a quarter century."

[JamesA1102]

39. I live in the Brooklyn part and I want a Dem Congressman

who votes like a Dem.

[TreasonousBastard]

43. And I want a weekend with Sandra Bullock, but it ain't gonna happen.

[JamesA1102]

52. Hey Sandra just got divorced and might be lonely nt

[Uzybone]

60. LOL

[Ter]

145. Then your only options are to either move or let SI secede

It was a huge mistake to let them stay in 1993 when 65% voted yes.

[JamesA1102]

216. I live in the Brooklyn part and I want a Dem Congressman

who votes like a Dem. My hope is after the next apportionment that the Brooklyn part of the district will outnumber the SI part.

[Rhythm]

44. We're in the same position here in WV, in both the Senate race and our HoR district

We have our soon-to-be-former governor DINO Joe Manchin (who's already blabbering about repealing HCR and ignoring support for the repeal of DADT) running against Repuke John Raese.

In the WV-1 race for the House, we have DINO Mike Oliverio (who defeated Alan Mollohan in the primary), who is anti-choice and homophobic, against Teabagger David McKinley.






Holding my nose at the polls is the least of what i will be doing... more likely holding an airsick bag.

[BlueDemKev]

45. I feel your pain, however you are doing the right thing

...you are doing the right thing. As much of a headache the blue dogs are, their presence allows us to keep the majority as well as control of the House agenda. I live in a rural conservative district and believe me, I'd take a blue dog Democrat ANY DAY over the tea-bagging fanatic I have right now. Vote Democratic (even if it's a democrat with a small "d").

Otherwise, it's Speaker Boehner & Majority Leader Cantor.
:puke: :puke: :puke:

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[LoZoccolo]

50. Which blue dog would you say is just like the Republicans? n/t

[BlueDemKev]

55. Blue Dogs = Republicans?

Well, that's a tough one to answer, because with almost any blue dog, you can find at least ONE thing in which he/she voted on. Accept them as the best we can get for ultra-conservative rural areas (esp. in the south) and know that they--if nothing else--will vote to install a Democratic/progressive-leaning leadership.

[Greyhound]

56. The only way to get them out is to let the republiks in.

It sucks and it is the only reason Democrats are winning anything at all, but there is no alternative. If the NewBlue3rdWayDLC is allowed to remain, it will continue to get worse.

[NorthCarolina]

218. Unfortunately, you may be correct, but I could never vote for a GOP candidate.

The DLC is dug in like a tick. They have served their purpose well by assuming control of the Dem party, ensuring that both viable political parties advocate for the corporatocracy. Election rules are cleverly designed to prohibit any third party that advocates for the people from forming or gaining a foothold. Vote for the DLC New Dem...vote for the GOP candidate...it's a catch 22...damned if you do, and damned if you don't. Even the nations voting equipment is compromised. Unreliable/unverifiable voting machines...simply a design oversight, or working as intended? Let's face it, we're screwed.

[Stevenmarc]

58. The Teabaggers in your district love Mike Grimm, that should be enough

[Ter]

146. Do they? Many think he is a big government Republican, like Bush

The new breed is more anti-government, and Grimm's love of the UnPatriot Act and unnecessary wars won't help his image.

[BzaDem]

63. If you think the Republican running against McMahon would vote with Democrats MORE OFTEN

then vote for the Republican.

Otherwise, vote for McMahon.

Elections are not so that you can feel good about yourself, or for you to "vote your conscious," or for you to "send a message." They are a choice among viable candidates for which such candidate you want to govern. If you would prefer the Republican, vote for the Republican. If you would prefer McMahon to the Republican, vote McMahon. There is no other viable choice, and voting for any non-viable candidate or not voting is equivalent to helping the Republican relative to what you could have done.

[JamesA1102]

69. I would never vote for the Republican but

I'm really not sure the Dem deserves my vote either.

[David Zephyr]

65. Vote for him. Give him hell immediately after the election.

And hope you have a primary alternative next time.

We can't give subpoena power to the GOP and the committee to the GOP.

Vote for him even if it kills you.

[craigmatic]

73. Hold your nose and vote for him. You have to ask yourself who you hate more- him or boehner.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

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

[old mark]

89. My PA Rep is Tom Holden, also a blue dog-but much of his area is

PA redneck RWers who think he is a Liberal, but sometimes tollerable because he is a "social conservative"...He is not my choice, but he is my ONLY choice because he has held the job for many years and his opponent is a REAL RW fucking pig.

So, I will vote for him again - he is better than the other guy which is the best I can do in this situation...I also email his office on specific issues so he KNOWS there are at least some Leftists in his area.


mark

[B Calm]

90. The alternative is too scary to even think about! I have the same problem

as you here in Indiana, but I will hold my nose and vote for the Blue Dog running for Evan Bayh's seat in the Senate!

[datasuspect]

94. the GOP has controlled the house while the democrats controlled it.

[Tsiyu]

96. Mine gets the Pro-Life seal of approval

how's that for a DINO if there ever was one?

His opponent is a doctor who supposedly abused his wife, Repuke terrorist IMO.

Do I even have a choice?


No.

But I've voted for the fool DINO a few times...old white-haired son-of-a-bitch if you ask me...because he occasionally does the right thing and Repukes NEVER do the right thing.

[ThoughtCriminal]

103. Same here, but it's not hard once you...

visit the GOP opponent's web site. Tea-Party Central!

Yeah, I'm disappointed in my pandering blue-dog, but when the alternative is belfry-loads of bat-shit crazy, it's not hard to find motivation.

[leeroysphitz]

118. If you continue to reward him with your vote then you likely never get a chance to

vote for someone better.

[ClassWarrior]

138. Vote for him, then run against him in 2012.

When you declare, I'll be your first (small) donor.

NGU.

[Ter]

142. I clicked on this thread thinking it might be about McMahon lol

Have you seen any polls there yet?

[guardian]

184. Sometimes you just have to hold your nose and vote anyway. nt

[TfG]

214. Interesting thread :)

In a situation like this, maybe the best thing to do is weigh the pros and cons of voting or not voting for him. You might not be happy with his voting record, but when it comes to his voting record versus the GOP taking control of the House, you have to decide which is most important to you and base your decision on that.

[Curmudgeoness]

215. Same problem here. I will hold my nose and vote Dem.

And fight to get someone to run against him/her next election. I will not be responsible for the Repugs gaining control, since I have seen what they will do.

[AmerVoicesUnited]

217. Vote for the BDD...

...then dog his office with phone calls, email, and letters. Get all Dems you know to do the same. Our fight doesn't stop at election day. Let him know what you want him to do and that you're keeping an eye on him EVERYDAY. But we can't have "Boner" as the SOH. We just can't.

[JNelson6563]

219. I'd be grateful to have what you have!

Our districct was drawn to keep Dave Camp (R MI) in his seat and the district, as drawn, will never vote in someone else. My only hope is to be in a different district once the lines are re-drawn (and to hope that it's Dems doing the line-drawing thsi time!).

Julie

[Zorra]

230. The bright side: If you vote for him and if he loses, it's no great loss. nt

[Lyric]

232. Unless he's also anti-choice and anti-gay, he's not Bluer than the one I'll be facing on my ballot.

Mike Oliverio. I've seen Teabaggers who are more liberal than he is. :(

From his Wiki:

Oliverio is considered to be a conservative Democrat and has espoused issues such as reducing the national debt. He is pro-life on the issue of abortion. He also supports an amendment to the West Virginia Constitution to ban gay marriage.

Along with Delegate Jonathan Miller, a Republican, he serves as the state co-chair of the American Legislative Exchange Council, a group which that seeks "to advance the Jeffersonian principles of free markets, limited government, federalism, and individual liberty". Oliverio was also thanked in a 2006 speech by President George W. Bush for his assistance in securing the confirmation of Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court. Bush said, "I appreciate Senator Michael Oliverio, he's here. Mike I think did the country a great service when he worked on behalf of Judge Sam Alito to get him confirmed by the United States Senate. I appreciate your -- I want to thank you for that, Mike."

In October 2009, Oliverio and House of Delegates majority leader Brent Boggs attended a "Pastor's Briefing" sponsored by the Family Policy Council of West Virginia. The Family Policy Council has recently opposed attempts to enact employment non-discrimination laws and regulations as well as anti-bullying legislation. It was criticized for its production of a video advertisement which depicted the gay and lesbian community as "snipers targeting families," a video which Oliverio said "crossed the line".

On March 20, 2010, West Virginia Republican Party chair Doug McKinney referred to Oliverio's conservative political leanings by saying, "Sen. Oliverio has always been a conservative guy. He votes with the Republican on committees. We've joked for years he needs to come over to the party who thinks like he does."

Even the REPUBLICANS here consider him a fellow Republican. He's not just a Blue Dog--he's literally a conservative Republican in EVERYTHING but name. Don't expect him to vote with his party, because I assure you, he won't--and he'll be fucking obnoxious about it and make a big, attention-whoring show of his "defiance", too. The thought of voting for that man makes me want to throw up on my shoes.

[JamesA1102]

234. Then don't wear good shoes on election day. LOL nt

[Odin2005]

239. My Blue Dog Congress-asshole Collin Peterson always wins by a lot, so I'm safe not voting for him.

Peterson is a suck-up to big Ag and he is a homophobic bigot.