Should Schumer, Menendez and Cardin all be primaried?

[Figueira]

Manchin is terrible but he's the best we can expect from West Virginia. New York, New Jersey, and Maryland can do better though.

[Figueira]

Dear God, Progressives are as ideologically rigid as the Tea Party.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[Figueira]

Manchin is terrible but he's the best we can expect from West Virginia. New York, New Jersey, and Maryland can do better though.

I reject this. Sure, the current Democratic Party is not a good fit for West Virginia, but the state is not inherently conservative by any means. The right left-wing arguments could sway it.

Oh, I would welcome a way for left-wing, environmentalist ideology (that doesn't destroy the local economy) to take hold in West Virginia, but I don't think primarying Joe Manchin is the most strategic way to do it.

Manchin is terrible but he's the best we can expect from West Virginia. New York, New Jersey, and Maryland can do better though.

I reject this. Sure, the current Democratic Party is not a good fit for West Virginia, but the state is not inherently conservative by any means. The right left-wing arguments could sway it.

The problem is when West Virginians realize that what you're telling the other states (for example the states that like environmentalism more), isn't the same as what you're telling their state.

I think PJ is saying that a left-wing ideology (including environmentalism) can appeal to West Virginia, not just the Democratic Party. If the Democratic Party can't win anything in West Virginia, then Manchin is in serious trouble, primary or no primary.

[Figueira]

Anyway, what is it about Bill de Blasio that conservatives hate so much?

[Figueira]

I don't see why "primarying" should be considered some kind of cruel punishment reserved for the worst politicians ever. If the party's voters want someone other than the incumbent to be their nominee, they should be able to make that happen..

[Figueira]

I don't see why "primarying" should be considered some kind of cruel punishment reserved for the worst politicians ever. If the party's voters want someone other than the incumbent to be their nominee, they should be able to make that happen..

The problem is of course, that this can backfire. Namely, that if you primary, and lose, then the congressman finds will get the idea that they have even freer reign to be right wing/terrible, because you've shown your hand, and they've proven they can beat it. Furthermore, it sends the signal to other questionable congressmen that they don't need to worry about a successful primary challenge. This is why if you are going to primary someone, you need to make sure to win. And one thing Democrats literally never win is a primary challenge. And even when they win, they still manage to lose (ex. Lieberman).

Also, this is just my view, but there are maybe 10-15 issues that I'd prefer to put as litmus tests over this. If the deal somehow got blocked maybe it would have been different, but in the end, nothing bad actually happened.

I never said it was a good strategy, but it needs to be viewed in a more neutral-to-positive light.

I don't see why "primarying" should be considered some kind of cruel punishment reserved for the worst politicians ever. If the party's voters want someone other than the incumbent to be their nominee, they should be able to make that happen..

The problem is of course, that this can backfire. Namely, that if you primary, and lose, then the congressman finds will get the idea that they have even freer reign to be right wing/terrible, because you've shown your hand, and they've proven they can beat it. Furthermore, it sends the signal to other questionable congressmen that they don't need to worry about a successful primary challenge. This is why if you are going to primary someone, you need to make sure to win. And one thing Democrats literally never win is a primary challenge. And even when they win, they still manage to lose (ex. Lieberman).

Also, this is just my view, but there are maybe 10-15 issues that I'd prefer to put as litmus tests over this. If the deal somehow got blocked maybe it would have been different, but in the end, nothing bad actually happened.

It's because a good chunk of the left (the base, not the actual politicians) is deeply anti-semitic and views Jews as inherently suspect in terms of loyalty. That's why politicians like Casey or Barrow are allowed to differ from Democratic orthodoxy in terms of major issues, but the second Jewish politicians dare to differ from the President - by taking a position long held by the party before this President completely altered our foreign policy, mind you - the calls come for their heads.

I'm Jewish. Casey is in a swingy state (although I'd be okay with primarying him too if the primaryer is electable) and Barrow was in a swing district. Zionism is already a terrible and bigoted ideology; defending bigotry by accusing other people of bigotry just makes it worse.

[Figueira]

If a strategy is not good, why should it be perceived in a neutral to positive light period? Also, among other things, learn what the term bolded means.

Sorry for not being clear. It might not be strategically a good idea all the time, but it shouldn't be seen as evil or insane like some people in this thread think it is.

I think that ethnic-based nation states, in general, are a bigoted concept.

[Figueira]

If a strategy is not good, why should it be perceived in a neutral to positive light period? Also, among other things, learn what the term bolded means.

Sorry for not being clear. It might not be strategically a good idea all the time, but it shouldn't be seen as evil or insane like some people in this thread think it is.

I think that ethnic-based nation states, in general, are a bigoted concept.

I mean I don't think it's evil to primary people you don't like, but if primarying someone makes them stronger, it could be seen as insane.

I would be more willing to discuss the second part via PM, but to note one thing: one could discuss "ethnic states" all day, but more importantly this isn't relevant to the point.

To be honest, I shouldn't have brought up the Zionism thing. I was just really angry at the time.