ME-02: Emily Cain (D) running again

[smoltchanov]

Fantastic news!

Agree. The best chance for Poliquin to hold this district is solid left candidate on Democratic part.

[IceSpear]

Democrats are going to be recruiting alot of the same candidates they did in 2014.

I don't see a problem with that, because they lost so many districts due to low turnout.

In Cain case she essentially lost 58 - 42, because Indie, who got  11%, was even more conservative then Poliquin. Not sure that everything could be attributed to low turnout (which wasn't   especially low in this particular district). Still prefer moderate liberal to "flaming progressive" Cain is.

Not really. A lot of that 11% was likely protest votes, not people who thought Poliquin was a RINO. Considering he was the conservative candidate in the primary, it wouldn't make sense for there to be so much opposition to him from the right.

Nevertheless - it was. You may read Richardson program.

You have no proof whatsoever that most of those who voted for Richardson did so because Poliquin wasn't right wing enough. In 2008, Mark Pryor was opposed solely by a Green candidate, and that Green candidate did the best in strongly Republican areas (i.e., people who would never vote for any Democrat under any circumstances). In 2012, a fringe far right independent in Nevada named David Vanderbeek won 5% of the vote, mostly from people who voted for Obama. I suppose all these Obama voters also didn't vote for Heller because he wasn't right wing enough?

A protest vote means someone voting for someone not because of their ideology (in many cases they may not even know what it is), but as a statement against the two main candidates. That is likely what happened here.

[smoltchanov]

Democrats are going to be recruiting alot of the same candidates they did in 2014.

I don't see a problem with that, because they lost so many districts due to low turnout.

In Cain case she essentially lost 58 - 42, because Indie, who got  11%, was even more conservative then Poliquin. Not sure that everything could be attributed to low turnout (which wasn't   especially low in this particular district). Still prefer moderate liberal to "flaming progressive" Cain is.

Not really. A lot of that 11% was likely protest votes, not people who thought Poliquin was a RINO. Considering he was the conservative candidate in the primary, it wouldn't make sense for there to be so much opposition to him from the right.

Nevertheless - it was. You may read Richardson program.

You have no proof whatsoever that most of those who voted for Richardson did so because Poliquin wasn't right wing enough. In 2008, Mark Pryor was opposed solely by a Green candidate, and that Green candidate did the best in strongly Republican areas (i.e., people who would never vote for any Democrat under any circumstances). In 2012, a fringe far right independent in Nevada named David Vanderbeek won 5% of the vote, mostly from people who voted for Obama. I suppose all these Obama voters also didn't vote for Heller because he wasn't right wing enough?

A protest vote means someone voting for someone not because of their ideology (in many cases they may not even know what it is), but as a statement against the two main candidates. That is likely what happened here.

You have no proof whatsoever and still make a statement. Excuse me - i like my argiments (Richardson position on issies) more. You want Cain? Fine. But don't distort the truth in process.

[IceSpear]

Democrats are going to be recruiting alot of the same candidates they did in 2014.

I don't see a problem with that, because they lost so many districts due to low turnout.

In Cain case she essentially lost 58 - 42, because Indie, who got  11%, was even more conservative then Poliquin. Not sure that everything could be attributed to low turnout (which wasn't   especially low in this particular district). Still prefer moderate liberal to "flaming progressive" Cain is.

Not really. A lot of that 11% was likely protest votes, not people who thought Poliquin was a RINO. Considering he was the conservative candidate in the primary, it wouldn't make sense for there to be so much opposition to him from the right.

Nevertheless - it was. You may read Richardson program.

You have no proof whatsoever that most of those who voted for Richardson did so because Poliquin wasn't right wing enough. In 2008, Mark Pryor was opposed solely by a Green candidate, and that Green candidate did the best in strongly Republican areas (i.e., people who would never vote for any Democrat under any circumstances). In 2012, a fringe far right independent in Nevada named David Vanderbeek won 5% of the vote, mostly from people who voted for Obama. I suppose all these Obama voters also didn't vote for Heller because he wasn't right wing enough?

A protest vote means someone voting for someone not because of their ideology (in many cases they may not even know what it is), but as a statement against the two main candidates. That is likely what happened here.

You have no proof whatsoever and still make a statement. Excuse me - i like my argiments (Richardson position on issies) more. You want Cain? Fine. But don't distort the truth in process.

So in other words, you DO think the Obama voters who voted for David Vanderbeek did so because Heller wasn't right wing enough. If not, then your concept clearly does not apply to some elections, and who is to say this isn't one? Independents did well across the board in Maine in 2014, regardless of their ideology.

[smoltchanov]

Democrats are going to be recruiting alot of the same candidates they did in 2014.

I don't see a problem with that, because they lost so many districts due to low turnout.

In Cain case she essentially lost 58 - 42, because Indie, who got  11%, was even more conservative then Poliquin. Not sure that everything could be attributed to low turnout (which wasn't   especially low in this particular district). Still prefer moderate liberal to "flaming progressive" Cain is.

Not really. A lot of that 11% was likely protest votes, not people who thought Poliquin was a RINO. Considering he was the conservative candidate in the primary, it wouldn't make sense for there to be so much opposition to him from the right.

Nevertheless - it was. You may read Richardson program.

You have no proof whatsoever that most of those who voted for Richardson did so because Poliquin wasn't right wing enough. In 2008, Mark Pryor was opposed solely by a Green candidate, and that Green candidate did the best in strongly Republican areas (i.e., people who would never vote for any Democrat under any circumstances). In 2012, a fringe far right independent in Nevada named David Vanderbeek won 5% of the vote, mostly from people who voted for Obama. I suppose all these Obama voters also didn't vote for Heller because he wasn't right wing enough?

A protest vote means someone voting for someone not because of their ideology (in many cases they may not even know what it is), but as a statement against the two main candidates. That is likely what happened here.

You have no proof whatsoever and still make a statement. Excuse me - i like my argiments (Richardson position on issies) more. You want Cain? Fine. But don't distort the truth in process.

So in other words, you DO think the Obama voters who voted for David Vanderbeek did so because Heller wasn't right wing enough. If not, then your concept clearly does not apply to some elections, and who is to say this isn't one? Independents did well across the board in Maine in 2014, regardless of their ideology.

I state that Blaine Richardson hasmade VERY clear his extreme right-wing position on issues. Hence - no sane moderate or (gosh!) liberal person would vote for him. His votes are votes that came from far right-wingers, who considered Poliquin to be "too establishment".

And i state that ME-02 is far from being a very "progressive" district, contrary to ME-01. The best Democrats can do there with "progressive savoir" - situation like CSP and Guinta in NH-01. No one calls for moderate Democratic candidate in ME-01, but ME-02 is another matter.

[IceSpear]

Democrats are going to be recruiting alot of the same candidates they did in 2014.

I don't see a problem with that, because they lost so many districts due to low turnout.

In Cain case she essentially lost 58 - 42, because Indie, who got  11%, was even more conservative then Poliquin. Not sure that everything could be attributed to low turnout (which wasn't   especially low in this particular district). Still prefer moderate liberal to "flaming progressive" Cain is.

Not really. A lot of that 11% was likely protest votes, not people who thought Poliquin was a RINO. Considering he was the conservative candidate in the primary, it wouldn't make sense for there to be so much opposition to him from the right.

Nevertheless - it was. You may read Richardson program.

You have no proof whatsoever that most of those who voted for Richardson did so because Poliquin wasn't right wing enough. In 2008, Mark Pryor was opposed solely by a Green candidate, and that Green candidate did the best in strongly Republican areas (i.e., people who would never vote for any Democrat under any circumstances). In 2012, a fringe far right independent in Nevada named David Vanderbeek won 5% of the vote, mostly from people who voted for Obama. I suppose all these Obama voters also didn't vote for Heller because he wasn't right wing enough?

A protest vote means someone voting for someone not because of their ideology (in many cases they may not even know what it is), but as a statement against the two main candidates. That is likely what happened here.

You have no proof whatsoever and still make a statement. Excuse me - i like my argiments (Richardson position on issies) more. You want Cain? Fine. But don't distort the truth in process.

So in other words, you DO think the Obama voters who voted for David Vanderbeek did so because Heller wasn't right wing enough. If not, then your concept clearly does not apply to some elections, and who is to say this isn't one? Independents did well across the board in Maine in 2014, regardless of their ideology.

I state that Blaine Richardson hasmade VERY clear his extreme right-wing position on issues. Hence - no sane moderate or (gosh!) liberal person would vote for him. His votes are votes that came from far right-wingers, who considered Poliquin to be "too establishment".

And i state that ME-02 is far from being a very "progressive" district, contrary to ME-01. The best Democrats can do there with "progressive savoir" - situation like CSP and Guinta in NH-01. No one calls for moderate Democratic candidate in ME-01, but ME-02 is another matter.

Voters don't do in depth research of every minor party candidate or independent that will appear on their ballot.

[Maxwell]

I think smoltchanov forgets that not every voter is informed. In fact, there are a lot of uninformed voters.

Still, I'd say Richardsons' support was enough to throw out that argument (that Cain lost because of him) as garbage.

[smoltchanov]

Good. Let's agree at least on that and move on...

[IceSpear]

I think smoltchanov forgets that not every voter is informed. In fact, there are a lot of uninformed voters.

Still, I'd say Richardsons' support was enough to throw out that argument (that Cain lost because of him) as garbage.

Oh, I'm not saying Cain lost because of Richardson. Even if the majority were protest votes, they likely would've split fairly evenly, not voted at all, or only broke toward one of them by a small margin (not enough to really effect the results much).

[Xing]

Unless 2016 is a good year for Democrats, I don't like Cain's chances.

[Clermont County GOPer]

Congrats, Congressman Poliquin.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

A Blue Dog type is the best candidate. I worry Cain is too liberal for the district.  The last thing I want is Poliquin winning again.

[Free Bird]

A Blue Dog type is the best candidate. I worry Cain is too liberal for the district.  The last thing I want is Poliquin winning again.

Why? Because he's a Republican?