MT-AL: Rob Quist (D) vs. Greg Gianforte (R) vs. Mark Wicks (L), May 25

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Our Revolution endorses Rob Quist (& James Thompson) for Congress. Loads of money coming from Bernie's email list.

MT-AL is a winnable seat with a good candidate who can hold a possibly red seat for many number of years. Dems should go all out for this & GA. I remember when Dems kept delaying & cancelling ad buys for Feingold when they though he was too strong/wouldn't need (& spend Millions in Florida wasted on a poor Murphy in an expensive market where Rubio was leading consistently & comfortably). This was while Hillary didn't do a single rally for Russ & Russ was getting slaughtered in TV ads from the Koch Brothers, NRA & other groups.

This is the saddest, most frustrating, most infuriating thing on this forum. I miss Russ Feingold so much

Russ was the man. It's so sad he failed. The man behind one of the better campaign finance reform acts defeated by Ron ing Johnson.

If the DSCC put some money into his race instead of Florida or NC then he'd probably have won, and we'd be in that much better a position. I'm worried we might not have a Senator as great as him for a while, and because of the DSCC's stupidity his name is now too toxic for a Gubernatorial run

You're mad about the money they wasted in FL and NC? What about all the money Schumer pissed away on his own Safe D race in New York?

Anyway, on topic, Republicans could probably dig up some serious dirt on Amanda Curtis. Dems would be smart to look elsewhere. She has some past ties to a communist revolutionary group that weren't really discussed during her 2014 Senate run due to her massive polling deficit against Steve Daines.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

The lack of help from the DSCC seems to confirm their shift from WWC to upscale suburban districts.

I think this is actually a good thing. If he gets money from the DSCC then the GOP can run 'Quist is Pelosi's puppet!' campaign ads

They'll probably try anyway.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Well, there's plenty of evidence that the establishment hates progressives. David Brock's Shareblue is still bashing Bernie on a regular basis, and Hillary hacks like Whitehouse are spouting their batsh**t crazy conspiracy theories.

My comment really had nothing to do with the validity of your statement. It was just that you brought it up in the first place. It's the same reason you had that "but Hillary" label in 2016. Your commentary is often blatantly fixated on a single subject, and you are largely oblivious to that (or don't care either way). If I had to guess, the overall focus of your political thoughts is around the impure nature of the politicians that represent the views closest to your own - aka Democrats. Not that you have any obligation to focus on anything in particular, but you're practically like the IID of a police department. Your entire focus is inwards.

The party had a choice last year between someone who appealed to progressives and would have beaten Trump or someone who seemed designed to piss people like me off and lost to Trump. Trump had a worse favorable rating than Goldwater. He was not a strong candidate. So how's the establishment respond? David Brock is still running his crazy anti Bernie propaganda. Prominent Democrats are spouting off insane Russian conspiracy theories, and Tom Perez was installed at the last minute as DNC chair. As low of an opinion that I had of the Democratic party, I thought they'd have gotten a bit more of a clue from losing to Donald J Trump than they did. One can oppose both Trump and the idiots who promoted Trump because they thought their terrible candidate could easily beat him.

Ugh, do we really have to have this argument AGAIN?