Support NeoGAF

[Barzul]

So...why?

Like, that's the point of this argument! Clearly we agree that there is an amount of white supremacy that is too much for the Democratic Party.

Many people seem to think that "voting for a white supremacist for Attorney General and saying he supports the nomination" is not too much. That's basically an okay amount of white supremacy.

I would like that justified at greater length than just waving your hands at it like you folks are doing! So far it just seems like people don't want to think too much about the fact that Joe Manchin is a Democrat that supports white supremacy, rather than that they have an actual reason why the situation is importantly distinct.



I mean, if your position is that white supremacy is a "symbolic issue" then I see why you're fine with Manchin.

What state do you live in? I understand if you don't want to disclose.

 

[pigeon]

I'm not playing your dumb game that lacks context and nuance and is willfully ignorant of electoral realities.

Why waste your time posting if you don't actually want to discuss things?

 

[whyamihere]

Why waste your time posting if you don't actually want to discuss things?

Because I don't think you're being intellectually honest about Gorsuch and you're making an ass of yourself.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

For the record, I'm fine with Heitkamp or Donnelly or McCaskill. They're all fine and do what they have to do to stay elected. I hope when the Democrats have the power to pass legislation they won't be too conservative for fear of keeping their seats because they'll probably lose them anyways, but they're useful and good.

I think drawing a line with Manchin is perfectly justifiable.

 

[whyamihere]

For the record, I'm fine with Heitkamp or Donnelly or McCaskill. They're all fine and do what they have to do to stay elected. I hope when the Democrats have the power to pass legislation they won't be too conservative for fear of keeping their seats because they'll probably lose them anyways, but they're useful and good.

I think drawing a line with Manchin is perfectly justifiable.

That's okay. I don't think drawing the line at supporting Gorsuch is justifiable at all.

 

[pigeon]

Because I don't think you're being intellectually honest about Gorsuch and you're making an ass of yourself.

So make that case instead of just pouting obnoxiously. Cmon.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

For the record, I'm fine with Heitkamp or Donnelly or McCaskill. They're all fine and do what they have to do to stay elected. I hope when the Democrats have the power to pass legislation they won't be too conservative for fear of keeping their seats because they'll probably lose them anyways, but they're useful and good.

I think drawing a line with Manchin is perfectly justifiable.

This is basically where I'm at

Manchin supporting Sessions was the breaking point for me. Prior to that, I thought he was a homophobic racist but respected him at least a little bit for trying to get something done with gun control in response to Newtown.

Him being the only Democratic Senator to not support same-sex marriage is pretty bad, too

 

[royalan]

I think Democrats drawing the line at supporting Gorsuch as a party while Manchin, Heitcamp are seen as outliers would help them in their elections more than not.

I'm not much concerned about how a handful of Senators vote so long as the filibuster is maintained and Democratic opposition remains firmly anti-Gorsuch overall.

 

[pigeon]

That's okay. I don't think drawing the line at supporting Gorsuch is justifiable at all.

The argument I was outlining was actually about the specific question of primarying Manchin.

I have said we should primary senators who break the filibuster on Gorsuch, but I would probably make a different argument. The white supremacy thing is specific to his support of Sessions.

 

[kirblar]

The Alternative to D-Manchin is R-Manchin

That would be objectively worse.

 

[Roland_Gunner]

I would like that justified at greater length than just waving your hands at it like you folks are doing! So far it just seems like people don't want to think too much about the fact that Joe Manchin is a Democrat that supports white supremacy, rather than that they have an actual reason why the situation is importantly distinct.

I mean, if your position is that white supremacy is a "symbolic issue" then I see why you're fine with Manchin.

If Manchin is such a supporter of white supremacy then why doesn't he just become a Republican? Surely you don't think he benefits from being a Dem in West Virginia so why do it? You keep ignoring any counter arguments and just repeating that everyone a shade to the right of you is willing to accept white supremacy and calling it a discussion.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

No, I agree with you in much the same way I agreed with Pigeon earlier when he said that the people don't give a shit about SCOTUS. They don't. We're on the same page here.

The Democratic base doesn't give a shit about Garland (sorry Garland). What the base cares about right now is seeing our elected officials fight as hard against the Republican agenda as the Republicans spent the last decade fighting against the Democratic agenda, as well as fighting against common freaking sense.

So the argument doesn't really matter. To be fair, all of these arguments have some level of validity (unlike the bullshit Republicans tend to align behind), but at the end of the day they're all just excuses to achieve the real goal: oppose Republicans, keep the base energized, and protect your seats. Pick an argument, coordinate, get behind it and stick to it like glue.

The main point I'm making is that Democrats need to get better at uniting behind a strong message, whatever that message is. Because as of now they're total shit unless that message is "Hope...or something."

Yeah, I get that. I'm saying to oppose the nomination, but it's purely red meat for the base. I don't really buy into anyone saying they're opposed to Gorsuch for any reason other than that.

So...why?

Like, that's the point of this argument! Clearly we agree that there is an amount of white supremacy that is too much for the Democratic Party.

Many people seem to think that "voting for a white supremacist for Attorney General and saying he supports the nomination" is not too much. That's basically an okay amount of white supremacy.

I would like that justified at greater length than just waving your hands at it like you folks are doing! So far it just seems like people don't want to think too much about the fact that Joe Manchin is a Democrat that supports white supremacy, rather than that they have an actual reason why the situation is importantly distinct.



I mean, if your position is that white supremacy is a "symbolic issue" then I see why you're fine with Manchin.

Oh, you're not talking about Gorsuch, I guess? You're kind of hard to follow here.

I mean, if I'm going to make dumb statements about supporting white supremacy to generalize, then thank god FDR died out before he could inter any more Japanese people. I'm glad we're on the same page that FDR should have been opposed and his New Deal should never have even made it to a vote.

That's pretty far from my intention with that statement. I don't think all Democrats need to stand for the same things. I don't think representative government works that way. I'm sure as hell not a purity test liberal.

My point is that it gets frustrating when I see people get so far into the weeds with optics and tactics that they completely lose sight of the basic fact that politicians need to orient themselves around a core belief system.

I am endlessly frustrated with the current, punditry driven, state of American politics where how something looks matters more than what something is. Optics are important and they have a role to play in politics, but too much is driven by them.

I'm not really talking about optics at all since that's mostly a DC term that no one cares about. I'm just talking about cost versus benefit; there seems to be no downside to filibustering, and there might be an upside, so we should do that. There seems to be no upside whatsoever to getting mad at Manchin's throwaway vote, and a lot of downside.

I basically don't see how Manchin isn't our Susan Collins; let him make his dumb votes. To be clear, I think it seems pretty obvious that he'd oppose if it actually meant there was a chance to block GOP action, but this is 100% not one of those times. Gorsuch is going to be the next Justice appointed to the Supreme Court; if you're not working in that framework, then we're just writing fan-fiction.

 

[whyamihere]

So make that case instead of just pouting obnoxiously. Cmon.

People have to do what they need to do to get elected. For deep red state Democrats, that means sometimes taking positions like with Gorsuch that you and I might find Bad but one that 1) will not affect a filibuster's success 2) probably in line with their state 3) something that most liberals don't care about (since conservative voters care more about the SCOTUS).

Would Lugar have beaten Donnelly? Yes.

It makes sense to primary someone like Liberman when the math doesn't change if he loses because it's a blue state. But it's possible for someone like Heitkamp or Manchin to lose their primary, the winner is guaranteed to lose. I'm not willing to take that bet for electoral purity even though I'm not always a fan of the votes they take. And I'm certainly not okay with making that purity test over Gorsuch's filibuster.

 

[metalslimer]

I don't think Manchin is doing these things to win in a red state. He's a just a conservative who is running as a democrat because economically republicans are too far to the right for him. I mean maybe we can get an even more economically liberal racist elected? Unfortunately as a minority party, I can't advocate trying to primary him when that 1 vote on things like healthcare can/will prove so vital.

Depending on his approval rating, we might be better off dumping him by 2018 anyway though

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

This is basically where I'm at

Manchin supporting Sessions was the breaking point for me. Prior to that, I thought he was a homophobic racist but respected him at least a little bit for trying to get something done with gun control in response to Newtown.

Him being the only Democratic Senator to not support same-sex marriage is pretty bad, too

Oh shit I didn't even realize this. Even fucking Jim Webb supports same-sex marriage.

The Alternative to D-Manchin is R-Manchin

That would be objectively worse.

is it objectively worse when the message we send to young minority or LGBT people in Nevada and Arizona is that we're okay letting in homophobic white supremacists into the party and they say "what's the point in voting" in 2018, letting Heller and Flake survive reelection and deprive us of two Democrats who would be substantially more useful than Manchin ever will be.

Or do you think that they won't be seeing shit like this

If Manchin is such a supporter of white supremacy then why doesn't he just become a Republican? Surely you don't think he benefits from being a Dem in West Virginia so why do it? You keep ignoring any counter arguments and just repeating that everyone a shade to the right of you is willing to accept white supremacy and calling it a discussion.

This is a pretty easy answer. West Virginians are comfortable with Democrats who support coal and white supremacy and that can let him coast to reelection when the choices are "white supremacist" or "white supremacist who won't take away your healthcare"

I only care about Manchin to the effect that he'd be the 51st (or 60th, as it were) vote on something. Beyond that he can get fucked.

He was threatening to become a Republican if he was the deciding vote after the election!

 

[Aaron Strife]

I only care about Manchin to the effect that he'd be the 51st (or 60th, as it were) vote on something. Beyond that he can get fucked.

 

[Diablos]

Manchin is a body. That is it. He helps the Democrats in that regard.

 

[Box of Kittens]

I think there's some real debate to be had about what the Democratic Party should be willing to tolerate in return for voting for a Democratic Speaker/Majority Leader. What frustrates me whenever it comes up with respect to Manchin is that people just seem to want to shut down and not even consider the issue at all. Some members are more trouble than they're worth (see Lieberman, Joe), and I think it's at the very least worth discussing whether Manchin falls into that category even considering the reality of the state he represents, but it's kind of hard to do when the response is "lol purity test u want to run Bernie Sanders clones in red states."

 

[kirblar]

Yes, it is worse to have 1 less vote in the Senate. Period.

You want a 50 state strategy? THIS IS IT.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Yes, it is worse to have 1 less vote in the Senate. Period.

You want a 50 state strategy? THIS IS IT.

What if Manchin actually represents a net -1 seats in the senate because the sort of message he sends keeps up from beating Flake and Heller in 2018.

 

[whyamihere]

is it objectively worse when the message we send to young minority or LGBT people in Nevada and Arizona is that we're okay letting in homophobic white supremacists into the party and they say "what's the point in voting" in 2018, letting Heller and Flake survive reelection and deprive us of two Democrats who would be substantially more useful than Manchin ever will be.

I don't think LGBT people in Nevada or Arizona give a shit about Joe Manchin. Honestly.

 

[Slizeezyc]

I'm pretty sure the left is pretty good at being ineffectually angry.

When it comes to hating other things on the left I would agree. And Trump -- but that seems universal.

 

[pigeon]

Manchin is a body. That is it. He helps the Democrats in that regard.

I only care about Manchin to the effect that he'd be the 51st (or 60th, as it were) vote on something. Beyond that he can get fucked.

So, just to be clear...this is why I started the argument with Steve King.

Because this is an argument that Senator Steve King (D-Iowa) is somebody we should be embracing. If he's willing to vote for Schumer as majority leader and he's willing to get whipped on certain votes, everything's fine, right?

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Oh shit I didn't even realize this. Even fucking Jim Webb supports same-sex marriage.

It's pretty bad! That combined with voting against ending cloture for DADT repeal and weaseling out of the final vote shows his true colors.

When McCaskill, Donnelly, Heitkamp, etc came out in support of gay marriage in early 2013, I felt that was pretty fucking brave of them (I guess they didn't have elections to worry about until 2018, but still!). It was Landrieu, Pryor, and Manchin that didn't. But even Landrieu came out in favor of it on a personal level. Manchin is just straight up homophobic.

 

[metalslimer]

What if Manchin actually represents a net -1 seats in the senate because the sort of message he sends keeps up from beating Flake and Heller in 2018.

To be honest if the messaging is so bad in 2018 that a Senator from west viriginia is impacting votes, than we are fucked. As long as we are running good candidates in those states, some random senator (assuming he isn't the consequential vote on legislation) won't matter.

So, just to be clear...this is why I started the argument with Steve King.

Because this is an argument that Senator Steve King (D-Iowa) is somebody we should be embracing. If he's willing to vote for Schumer as majority leader and he's willing to get whipped on certain votes, everything's fine, right?

No, but I think the difference is one is an outward white supremacist, while the other is willing to let white supremacy slide.

 

[neurosisxeno]

The Alternative to D-Manchin is R-Manchin

That would be objectively worse.

If it weren't Manchin we'd likely have a much worse Republican in his seat. And that would be very bad.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

I don't think LGBT people in Nevada or Arizona give a shit about Joe Manchin. Honestly.

I mean it's what he represents. I see shit like that pop up on my facebook feed, or when Coons says we shouldn't filibuster Gorsuch because we shouldn't be like Republicans I see people (not political journalists, just people I'm friends with) saying things like "Why should I even vote for Democrats."

Most of them don't know who Manchin (or Coons) are or what their deal is but they pay attention to stuff like that and it can bite us in the ass when we want turnout to be high.

 

[Roland_Gunner]

This is a pretty easy answer. West Virginians are comfortable with Democrats who support coal and white supremacy and that can let him coast to reelection when the choices are "white supremacist" or "white supremacist who won't take away your healthcare"

They're so comfortable voting for Democrats that the GOP has a super-majority in the state legislature. There is a Dem governor but he happens to be a billionaire. Maybe we could get a wealthy coal exec to primary Manchin if that would make you feel better.

 

[whyamihere]

Jim Webb is really the line that you cross and honestly Manchin isn't there yet.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

I think there's some real debate to be had about what the Democratic Party should be willing to tolerate in return for voting for a Democratic Speaker/Majority Leader. What frustrates me whenever it comes up with respect to Manchin is that people just seem to want to shut down and not even consider the issue at all. Some members are more trouble than they're worth (see Lieberman, Joe), and I think it's at the very least worth discussing whether Manchin falls into that category even considering the reality of the state he represents, but it's kind of hard to do when the response is "lol purity test u want to run Bernie Sanders clones in red states."

Sure, I'm down for a real conversation. Pigeon just isn't actually having one though.

To the question, I think if we write a Medicaid Public Option or a Medicaid Single Payer bill, Manchin votes for it. Obviously a Republican from WV does not. Now insert a variety of legislation here and see where you stand. At least for me, I'll reserve my outrage like I did for Lieberman when he actually was the deciding vote that affected things instead of hypotheticals for Manchin. If Manchin is the break vote that fucks us in the future on something, try to primary him.

 

[kirblar]

I don't think LGBT people in Nevada or Arizona give a shit about Joe Manchin. Honestly.

LGBT understand how to fucking compromise. You do it for years.

 

[Box of Kittens]

He was threatening to become a Republican if he was the deciding vote after the election!

This is pretty important to note. It's not actually clear that if his vote were the deciding vote for control of the chamber he'd vote D, which at the very least weakens one of the most common arguments in his favor.

What if Manchin actually represents a net -1 seats in the senate because the sort of message he sends keeps up from beating Flake and Heller in 2018.

I'd go further and say as long as he represents a net zero then he's clearly not worth it just from a standpoint of votes since any purple state Democratic Senator could be reasonably assumed to be a more reliable vote for our side. He needs to represent a net +1 (concessions we make to keep him in the party don't cost us any seats elsewhere and he'd actually come through if he were the deciding vote on something important) in order for him to even arguably be worth it. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. But it's at least worth talking about.

 

[pigeon]

The Alternative to D-Manchin is R-Manchin

That would be objectively worse.

Eh. I think there's a practical and electoral benefit to showing that the Democratic Party rejects white supremacy. Bonen makes this argument pretty effectively above. Also I think Manchin will probably lose anyway because he's a Democrat.

If Manchin is such a supporter of white supremacy then why doesn't he just become a Republican? Surely you don't think he benefits from being a Dem in West Virginia so why do it?

I...don't know? Why do I care what party Manchin wants to belong to? I care what the Democratic Party should allow.

You keep ignoring any counter arguments and just repeating that everyone a shade to the right of you is willing to accept white supremacy and calling it a discussion.

I don't really think I'm ignoring counterarguments? I feel like I put in a lot of effort today responding in earnest to posts! When I started talking about Manchin everybody decided to just be dismissive and obnoxious instead of engaging.

Manchin actually endorsed a white supremacist for Attorney General. Like, that happened. That's not my fault! I happen to want to discuss it. A lot of people, from my perspective, really, really don't want to discuss that, because they're making a moral compromise to get an electoral benefit and they either don't want to think about that compromise or don't want to be criticized for it. But you can't say I'm overdramatizing white supremacy!* Manchin really did endorse Sessions!

I think there's some real debate to be had about what the Democratic Party should be willing to tolerate in return for voting for a Democratic Speaker/Majority Leader. What frustrates me whenever it comes up with respect to Manchin is that people just seem to want to shut down and not even consider the issue at all. Some members are more trouble than they're worth (see Lieberman, Joe), and I think it's at the very least worth discussing whether Manchin falls into that category even considering the reality of the state he represents, but it's kind of hard to do when the response is "lol purity test u want to run Bernie Sanders clones in red states."

Yeah, this is kind of my experience here.


* this time

 

[kirblar]

That electoral benefit doesn't mean jack in a bunch of lily white rust belt states.

White Pop

Obama->Clinton vote changes

 

[Roland_Gunner]

To the question, I think if we write a Medicaid Public Option or a Medicaid Single Payer bill, Manchin votes for it. Obviously a Republican from WV does not. Now insert a variety of legislation here and see where you stand. At least for me, I'll reserve my outrage like I did for Lieberman when he actually was the deciding vote that affected things instead of hypotheticals for Manchin. If Manchin is the break vote that fucks us in the future on something, try to primary him.

As I mentioned earlier, just today Manchin voted with the Dems, Collins, and Murkowski to get 50 votes against allowing states to defund Planned Parenthood. The bill still passed because Isakson came back from his surgery and Pence broke the tie but, as you say, no GOP senator from WV would do that. Supporting Planned Parenthood is an issue that impact thousands of women and we need red state Dem senators to do that.

 

[pigeon]

Sure, I'm down for a real conversation. Pigeon just isn't actually having one though.

This seems really unfair from my perspective. I wrote a lot of stuff! The fact that you didn't like it and prefer to sneer at it doesn't mean I'm not making an effort. I haven't even called anybody stupid in like two pages. Again, the impression I get is that people just think their position is obviously correct on Manchin and don't want to discuss it at all. This response by you does not do much to change that. What about my posts makes you think I am not interested in a real conversation?

To the question, I think if we write a Medicaid Public Option or a Medicaid Single Payer bill, Manchin votes for it.

Manchin campaigned on repealing lots of Obamacare. I don't see why you think he casts this vote.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

That electoral benefit doesn't mean jack in a bunch of lily white rust belt states.

White Pop

Obama->Clinton vote changes

Ah yes, it's not like black turnout didn't cost us Michigan last year!

For the record, this post is not blaming black people in Michigan for costing us the state, but if our goal is to not appeal to a Trump voter ever again we probably need to appeal to black voters in Detroit and Michigan who didn't show up!

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

As I mentioned earlier, just today Manchin voted with the Dems, Collins, and Murkowski to get 50 votes against allowing states to defund Planned Parenthood. The bill still passed because Isakson came back from his surgery and Pence broke the tie but, as you say, no GOP senator from WV would do that. Supporting Planned Parenthood is an issue that impact thousands of women and we need red state Dem senators to do that.

I'm kind of surprised Shelley Moore-Capito didn't do it

Looking at her recent record it looks like she took a hard turn right on abortion rights after winning election to the Senate. She was pretty pro-choice for a Republican when she was in the House

I'd almost take her over Manchin fwiw

 

[kirblar]

Ah yes, it's not like black turnout didn't cost us Michigan last year!

If you really think that's the margin that cost us those states...jfc.

For the record, this post is not blaming black people in Michigan for costing us the state, but if our goal is to not appeal to a Trump voter ever again we probably need to appeal to black voters in Detroit and Michigan who didn't show up!

Good thing Manchin's not running in Michigan!

 

[pigeon]

That electoral benefit doesn't mean jack in a bunch of lily white rust belt states.

White Pop

Obama->Clinton vote changes

I feel like my position on compromising with white supremacy to win back white racists was already made pretty clear in the past. Win Arizona instead.

 

[kirblar]

I feel like my position on compromising with white supremacy to win back white racists was already made pretty clear in the past. Win Arizona instead.

I'd like to, but the trends aren't there yet electorally - it's the reason Hillary lost with a 3M+ lead.

We're not tolerating this elsewhere, it's in WV because it's WV.

 

[Box of Kittens]

I mean if your goal is to win the votes of racist whites, uh, good luck? Because you're going to lose their votes anyway when Republicans tell them Medicare-for-all means black people are going to steal their hard-earned tax dollars to make frivolous visits to the hospital.

 

[The Technomancer]

I'd go further and say as long as he represents a net zero then he's clearly not worth it just from a standpoint of votes since any purple state Democratic Senator could be reasonably assumed to be a more reliable vote for our side. He needs to represent a net +1 (concessions we make to keep him in the party don't cost us any seats elsewhere and he'd actually come through if he were the deciding vote on something important) in order for him to even arguably be worth it. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. But it's at least worth talking about.

I think I need to see evidence that a significant fraction of voters care in the slightest about representatives who a.) aren't theirs or b.) don't have their names plastered all over the new constantly

I am almost positive that if you asked everyone who voted for the Democrats who Manchin was and what their opinion of him was it would probably be "oh yeah he's...from the east?" and "I dunno"

With that said...eh, I don't know how I feel about Manchin personally. I see the mathematic arguments, I also absolutely see where pigeon is coming from.

 

[Box of Kittens]

I think I need to see evidence that a significant fraction of voters care in the slightest about representatives who a.) aren't theirs or b.) don't have their names plastered all over the new constantly

I am almost positive that if you asked everyone who voted for the Democrats who Manchin was and what their opinion of him was it would probably be "oh yeah he's...from the east?" and "I dunno"

With that said...eh, I don't know how I feel about Manchin personally. I see the mathematic arguments, I also absolutely see where pidgeon is coming from.

To be clear I'm not arguing he is costing us seats elsewhere. Just that it would only take one for him to be a waste of resources.

And yes, it would basically be impossible to prove it if he did. The idea of how it would likely happen would be less along the lines of knowing who Manchin is and more that a Democrat voted for the white supremacist AG and they're tolerating it contributes to a sense of "I guess it's all empty rhetoric and they don't really care about me, looks like I'm staying home in November." The chance of this happening in large enough numbers to swing a Senate race is again pretty much impossible to quantify, so again I'm not exactly going to argue how likely it is. More I'm just saying that if you could trade Manchin for a Democratic Senator from another state (that Democrats actually have a chance of winning), you'd do it.

 

[Aaron Strife]

I'm kind of surprised Shelley Moore-Capito didn't do it

Looking at her recent record it looks like she took a hard turn right on abortion rights after winning election to the Senate. She was pretty pro-choice for a Republican when she was in the House

I'd almost take her over Manchin fwiw

Glad you threw in this qualifier. Everything we hate or that frustrates us about Manchin is going to be 10x worse with any given Republican.

So, just to be clear...this is why I started the argument with Steve King.

Because this is an argument that Senator Steve King (D-Iowa) is somebody we should be embracing. If he's willing to vote for Schumer as majority leader and he's willing to get whipped on certain votes, everything's fine, right?

Depends on whether you draw a distinction between an active racist/white supremacist and a more passive one.

It's fine if you don't.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

I think I need to see evidence that a significant fraction of voters care in the slightest about representatives who a.) aren't theirs or b.) don't have their names plastered all over the new constantly

I am almost positive that if you asked everyone who voted for the Democrats who Manchin was and what their opinion of him was it would probably be "oh yeah he's...from the east?" and "I dunno"

With that said...eh, I don't know how I feel about Manchin personally. I see the mathematic arguments, I also absolutely see where pidgeon is coming from.

It's not that they go "ugh, I can't believe Joe Manchin is a Democrat fuck that party", it's that they see a Democrat voting for Jeff Sessions or a Democrat saying the party needs to let Trump appoint Gorsuch and ask what the point of even voting is.

It doesn't even have to be a huge number of people who do this. Imagine if a thousand less people showed up to vote for Maggie Hassan last year.

I'd like to, but the trends aren't there yet electorally - it's the reason Hillary lost with a 3M+ lead.

We're not tolerating this elsewhere, it's in WV because it's WV.

So white supremacy is unacceptable, unless it's West Virginia. What a strong message!

 

[metalslimer]

I mean I do think you can argue that we aren't sending a good message to the black and lgbt population of WV.

 

[The Technomancer]

I mean I do think you can argue that we aren't sending a good message to the black and lgbt population of WV.

What's the solution to that specific problem though? That's sort of what I keep coming back to. Lets say we run a more progressive candidate who loses, and now that seat belongs to the GOP. Does that symbolic gesture outweigh that that GOP member will probably be actively shittier than even Manchin is? I'm not saying that I know if it does or not, just that it's is a very complicated problem

 

[kirblar]

So white supremacy is unacceptable, unless it's West Virginia. What a strong message!

That's a problem you'll need to take up with the voters of West Virginia.

 

[royalan]

What's the solution to that specific problem though? That's sort of what I keep coming back to. Lets say we run a more progressive candidate who loses, and now that seat belongs to the GOP. Does that symbolic gesture outweigh that that GOP member will probably be actively shittier than even Manchin is? I'm not saying that I know if it does or not, just that it's is a very complicated problem

Blacks as a demographic tend to be conservative. You don't have to run a progressive to appeal to us.

Just don't run a racist.