General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOur Revolution just endorsed an UNAFFILIATED candidate running against a Democrat...
...in the General Election for a seat in the North Carolina House of Representatives.
Unaffiliated candidate Penelope DiMaio is running against Democrat Charles Deaton and the republican incumbent for the District 13 Seat.
Link to tweet
dalton99a
(81,700 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)This IS a revolution against people like me and the mainstream voters of that precinct, after all. All's fair in revolution, which by definition requires destruction in order to rebuild.
Without defeated Democrats or perhaps over our trampled bodies, of course. I don't think they've quite thought that one through yet.
unc70
(6,125 posts)All the screaming and yelling down thread is misguided regarding NC. The OR candidate is the only one running against the Repub.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)to start making a difference. Also to start building a record for future voters to scrutinize.
And that's huge. Speaking about those entering politics with OR etc. help in general, I don't think a lot of you quite realize that a lot of left fringies migrate to the right over time (most often moving farther left until they finally get there). Being so given to anti- Democratic Party ideas as to refuse to run as a Democrat is certainly a clue to watch out for. Young zealots especially often start left and end right.
Of course, some are just what they say they are now, and I like that this woman is older and presumably knows who she is. (Although I didn't admire some of the people who apparently support her on twitter at all, another thing to watch out for.) Also btw, some will turn out to be fairly mainstream people who are positioning themselves to appeal to OR types because the market for the regular brand is already glutted.
Without past voting records to scrutinize, you can't know.
At this point the one thing I want to see isn't label but rather implacable commitment to joining Democrats to stop the rise of fascism on the right. Not someone too clueless to realize what's happening or who secretly considers it a possible solution to the evils of the Democratic Party.
Speaking of, you really should wonder what is happening inside those OR groups whose actions revealed that they wanted the Democratic candidate to lose to the Republican. Was that mere spite at their own candidate losing, was it the "when Democratic Party collapses we'll be waiting to take over" delusion, or is someone there manipulating them all to the right without the others realizing?
radical noodle
(8,017 posts)redstatebluegirl
(12,265 posts)We can't control who the other side endorses, and if they are not endorsing Democrats they are the other side here. I am voting for Democrats, nothing else in November and in any primary. I will not support a pseudo Democrat either.
George II
(67,782 posts)....Justice Democrats and Brand New Congress, who have endorsed Independents and even republicans, running against Democrats as "the other side".
Sadly as Democrats I guess we'll just have to go it alone against all comers.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)charter. That said, they have to know what three way races do and that does make me uncomfortable. I advocate these sorts of challenges through the primary system. If people want to dis-affiliate on the other end of that primary I don't really care(although the democratic party leadership does....eh), because it would be much smarter for us as a party to encourage these left leaning and far left candidates of all stripes to run in the primary rather than against us in the GE.
Maybe instead of more left-bashing, though, someone would have thought to link to Charles Deaton's website so people could do something POSITIVE for the party as opposed to trying to divide it.
msongs
(67,496 posts)GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)So I am sure you have Charles Deaton's website/twitter/ANYTHING because you care about electing Democrats, not just bashing OR, right?
I'll just wait here for it.
xmas74
(29,676 posts)brush
(53,971 posts)they run AGAINST Democrats.
brush
(53,971 posts)They're now running candidates in the general election against Democrats.
That means they are not a Democratic Party affiliate.
Wake up.
They're about to split the vote and the repug might now win. I wonder if they are on the repug payroll now?
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)They are endorsing a candidate in the general election whio is not the Democrat running. There is NOTHING more divisive to the party than that.
And frankly, there is nothing "left" about their position IMO, since it will help ensure the victory of the GOP candidate. So don't play the pity card on their behalf. Being a leftist doesn't mean you pour you brains out and ignore electoral consequences.
So FUCK OR.
unc70
(6,125 posts)Just did a bit of searching on the Dem running. Essentially nothing showing up. He apparently file and was unopposed in the primary. No campaign structure I could find easily. I'm out of state and need to do more checking.
Could be just a token campaign or even worse. I need to talk to friends on the ground in that area. The Repub has won repeatedly at over 70%. Suspect something strange is going on locally.
FIRC
But that aside, OR does not claim to support Democrats. They support candidates who reflect their policy positions.
The folks out there attacking OR do CLAIM to support Democrats, yet not one of them know the first fucking thing about Charles Deaton, the Democrat in the race. That's because they don't give a FRA about Deaton. He's just a prop in their 25+ year effort to drive the left out of power in the party by constantly blaming them for the complete and utter failure of political centrism.
disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)if the Dem has a better platform I'll join in on the criticism.. policy over platitudes..
George II
(67,782 posts)...running against a republican is going to split the "Democratic" vote and almost ensure that the republican wins. When that happens, you can throw "policy" out the window.
unc70
(6,125 posts)No issue in NC.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)They are taking it to the next level, screw up the general for democrats and the country. Idiots.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Their win rate isn't 60% (that includes cross endorsement where the DNC endorsed also), the DNC win rate, where they endorsed and OR did not, is 89%. Joe Biden and Liz Warren are 100% on endorsements, Bernie is about 50%. Joe and Liz endorsed more people also, Joe twice as many as Bernie, Liz about 50% more.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)Our Revolution is directly opposed to the DNC and any candidate the DNC supports. That's silly.
George II
(67,782 posts)...is in the mid 40s. And most of their high profile candidates have lost.
I won't wade through the offices of candidates for whom they endorsed, but a number of their "successes" are very low level local candidates.
In other cases they jumped on winning candidates who were way ahead just days before their primaries.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)According to fivethirtyeight.com.
George II
(67,782 posts)I just read quickly through that article, it's very interesting and a lot of work went into it (have to go to the various links in the text) Some pretty amazing, and I'm sure objective, numbers!
What I found interesting is that the two most successful endorsers are the Democratic Party itself and Emily's List.
Thanks again for the source.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)candidates at a huge disadvantage? Saying that they are getting crushed is just foolish or cynical spinning.
Did the candidates they jumped on espouse the values they espouse? Maybe they weren't on their radar and then they were. I don't know how effective Our Revolution has been, but I know just how ridiculous it is to expect them to put up a batting average that is higher than the entire democratic party in the 2016 GE. If they are impacting these races in the favor of their candidates even slightly, their existence is justified.
George II
(67,782 posts)...a "startup political action group"? But they had a much higher success rate when they truly WERE a "startup group".
It's not like they're out campaigning for candidates or supporting them financially. They do none of the former and very little of the latter (more in a negative manner toward their endorsees' opponents), but they sure do take credit when some of their endorsees win. I just looked at their home page, they're referring to Sanders' win on Tuesday as "historic"!
Seems like their primary function is to raise money and use it to pay salaries.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)they endorse lose. You don't see any irony in that? Its only fair that they take the credit when their candidates win.
As to age, 3 years is still very young. But I don't expect Our Revolution to ever be as big as other players on the field though, and you and I both know why. It could happen, but money is a huge component of success. Their primary strength is that they have a set of ideological positions that is what makes their endorsements mean something. they have a brand that can generate support as a counter-culture of politics. Maybe that could go mainstream, but like Occupy Wall Street, etc. where money is tireless, people aren't and have to think about their bills and the many things tugging at their time. These sorts of groups are almost always doomed. It means something that Our Revolution is still standing after 3 years.
Their primary weakness (hopefully DU is just a bubble) is that people here seem to not even look at the candidates side-by-side, they just react to whether or not OR is supporting a candidate, and reflexively decide that they'll take the other candidate. Embarrassing, but whatever.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)1) Did the candidate support Bernie Sanders in 2016?
For reference, see KS-3.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)actually do the research?
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Did OR endorse any candidates who did not support Sanders in 2016?
Uncute and non-snarky answer: No.
What research are you referring to?
JCanete
(5,272 posts)I just haven't heard that before until now. Is there information out there that shows this, or is it just your feeling?
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Find me an OR candidate that didn't at least implicitly support Sanders, or - better yet - explicitly supported Clinton and I'll retract my claim.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)who hadn't been active in politics previously, I don't think they're going to be asking "Who did you support in 2016."Do you think if somebody did a mea culpa and decided to abandon the notion of money out of politics, to have come to Jesus with big Pharma would be endorsed by OR simply because of a previous affiliation with Sanders? Does that really make sense to you? I'm not going to bother with doing your leg-work for you on this though. You made the claim, as absurd and dismissive as it is. You know you can still disagree with them without trying to reduce them to being all about a cult of personality right? You can even still distrust them. But until you show me an instance where somebody who does not align with their purported values has gotten an endorsement because that person previously endorsed Sanders, maybe you shouldn't be making these sorts of claims simply because they suit you.
R B Garr
(17,011 posts)"notions". I'm glad that other candidates realize that until Democrats are a majority, notions don't really mean diddly-squat because there is no plurality to enact anything. In the meantime, the Republicans are going to the Russian coffers to grease their wheels while so-called "progressives" are trying to hamstring Democrats with "notions."
JCanete
(5,272 posts)this hasn't gotten childish at all.
R B Garr
(17,011 posts)over things that only mean anything if you actually WIN.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)That doesn't make sense to me. Why would they have a "previous affiliation with Sanders" if they only recently aligned with his positions? Note, BTW, that I asked "Did the candidate support Bernie Sanders in 2016?" Your question is absurd.
Here, from their About page, concerning Membership:
Again, that's not a secret. It's the genesis of the organization
FWIW, I can give you an example of a candidate who does align with their "purported values" but was snubbed in favor of a Sanders supporter: Sharice Davids. But I digress...
JCanete
(5,272 posts)finance. That is the BIG one a the center of Our Revolution. Again, you are trying to make Our Revolution about the man and not the ideals he fights for, and nothing you quoted proves your point. They cite Sanders unprecedented campaign as the impetus but that is not the same thing you are trying to make it to be, and I hope you know this.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)What is Davids' position on campaign finance?
JCanete
(5,272 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)R B Garr
(17,011 posts)promotes candidates who endorsed Sanders' platform?? Really? You haven't heard that before? Because I thought I've seen multiple posts from you insisting that Sanders' platform is what everyone needs to run on, including Democrats in areas not as progressive as the Bronx or Vermont. You don't remember that?
JCanete
(5,272 posts)carry much weight if the person's platform was not in alignment with that Sanders platform today, wouldn't you say? The whole attempt to make it about the support of the man versus the support of the policies is the bullshit smear I'm addressing here. You kind of had to undercut that attack to make your point, so thank you for that.
R B Garr
(17,011 posts)It is who they are and what they are. You constantly contradict yourself. I didn't "undercut that attack" because your entire distraction is completely disregarding why Our Revolution was formed, who formed it, what their stated goals are...LOL. Your distractions get quite byzantine. Look at how your comment makes no sense -- they are Sanders' "platform" and the whole role of Our Revolution is to force every single "platform" wish anywhere in America, so unless Sanders' quits promoting his "platform", then of course Our Revolution is about him.
*I'm only putting these words in quotes because the Democratic platform is very progressive and insinuating Sanders' is the only progressive to follow is not accurate.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)It does not follow that because Our Revolution was born out of Sanders campaign and the issues he addressed, that the main concern of the group is loyalty to Sanders, not to the ideology. You don't see a difference in framing that is disingenuous to say that its about the person? If you fail to see the difference, I submit that you're trying to hard to blur your vision.
There is an obvious example of what this poster insinuated about Our Revolution in trump supporters. Trump can say one thing one day and entirely contradict himself in the same breath and nobody who supports him gives a shit. That is a cult of personality. That has nothing to do with any ideology beyond bigotry and an appreciation for his viciousness directed at people who his voters have, or are perfectly willing to have, disdain for.
R B Garr
(17,011 posts)their endorsements have not worked out except for the ones that the "establishment" endorsed that OR just happened to get right. This thread is about another dubious endorsement, so of course now you have to say that Sanders is not Our Revolution. Has Sanders' contradicted Our Revolution?? Does he go on record as being opposed to anything his own group is saying or doing?? How does it work that his group does not have anything to do with him unless there is a win, which there haven't been that many.
You are actually describing your own tactics when you bring up the "cult of personality" by trying to divorce Sanders from his own group. You contradict yourself a lot.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)Sanders from the group he helped to form. I'm saying that Sanders isn't the king there. Sanders is popular and held up because of what he stands for. Attempting to reduce Our Revolution's interests down to whether or not a candidate is some Sanders sycophant(granted that's me reading between the lines) rather than an actual candidate with ideals that align with the stated goals of Our Revolution, is not genuine.
I don't follow where I contradicted myself, sorry. Maybe I need some coffee.
R B Garr
(17,011 posts)in the Our Revolution. Our Revolution is his group, so of course he is the "king there." (your words) All of the candidates state that they backed Sanders -- do you have a link to any of the candidates that do not tout him and his group Our Revolution?
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Yes, OR would change their "platform" if Sanders changed his.
Yes, there is a cult of personality behind OR.
They endorsed Dennis Kucinich, for fuck's sake.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)happen? If Sanders IS the rudder you claim him to be I'd expect a different result.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Sanders may not have endorsed Kuchinich, but Kucinich most certainly was a Sanders supporter.
What did I say about Our Revolution again?
George II
(67,782 posts)...is because of some of their tactics?
As for your criticism that people "give them blame when the candidates they endorse lose", I haven't seen very much of that. BUT, I've seen some pointing out their poor judgement in their choice of candidates, and there seems to be a common thread (pointed out by someone else in this discussion) running through most of their endorsements.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)burning...posts about establishment candidates cleaning their clock? I'm impressed that you could miss them. I'm sure I won't see posts of yours in those threads.
George II
(67,782 posts)I responded to your premise of "well oddly enough you and so many others sure do want to give them the blame when the candidates they endorse lose."
I don't think I ever said that (except maybe a time or two humorously) and haven't seen much of that from others, either. What I HAVE said is that they choose the wrong candidate. This is politics, sir, one can't get anything accomplished unless one gets elected. Backing losing candidates isn't the way to promote one's agenda.
So tell me, this week Ilham Omar won her primary. Last week Rashida Tlaib won her primary. Our Revolution endorsed them - just what did they do to put them over the top? They certainly didn't help them financially - when it comes to doling out their money they're very frugal and don't contribute to candidates' campaigns, most of it goes to "administrative costs".
I'll make it easier, they also endorsed Sanders and on Tuesday night he won his (actually OUR!) primary. How many votes did Our Revolution generate there?
Getting back to what I originally responded to (and you deviated from), most of the candidates they endorse lose, and they have very little effect on those races. Isn't that a show of poor judgement?
Finally, your comment about "establishment candidates cleaning their clock" - they got their clocks cleaned NOT because Our Revolution endorsed them but because they were poor candidates to begin with and, this is a novel concept - they did not appeal to their constituency!
JCanete
(5,272 posts)If you're going to speak honestly about this at least address the financing disparities when you get into how they were "also" bad candidates. You KNOW that exposure matters. You know that funding matters. You have to know that "they did not appeal to their constituency" is a half-truth then. It doesn't mean that on an even playing field they would win, but you can't take your single criterion of evidence as proof of what you claim it to be.
If by your definition, it makes a bad candidate to campaign in a way that ultimately puts you at a disadvantage because of funding and you lose, I simply disagree with your definition. The fact is that left-wing candidates can pull their centrist candidates to the left on issues, so even losing, if their showing isn't non-existent, they can have a real impact on the exposure of those issues they care about. Sanders articulated this himself. The point is to advocate for the people who reflect Our Revolutions values, not to tout a score-card. Why would I trust an organization more if that's what it cared about?
As to your point about Our Revolution's record, well I just have to say that if you're going to break apart their endorsements you need to do the same for the win percentages of everybody else who has made endorsements. If incumbants don't count, okay lets take them out. If people far ahead in a race don't count if you got there late, okay lets take them out of the count.
Your point is taken and not disagreed with that Our Revoutions actual effect is hard to measure. I assume that it has a net positive but I don't expect it to be staggering. And you're right that other than their public presence and minor visibility they may bring to a candidate, they aren't putting money into these campaigns, which is probably a good thing.
Demsrule86
(68,788 posts)These sort of groups and OR have now shown their true colors. I consider them despicable and are not progressive in any way. Nina Turner employed an anti-immigration person who appeared on Fox multiple times. And I have heard from some she was not really fired...don't know if that is true though. They help Trump and the Republicans. I won't vote for any primary candidate candidate championed by OR and the Greens can fuck off.
brush
(53,971 posts)and help the repug candidate, ala Jill Stein.
TheBlackAdder
(28,252 posts)Gothmog
(145,839 posts)comradebillyboy
(10,184 posts)Gothmog
(145,839 posts)George II
(67,782 posts).... are already "fused" somewhat, at least financially. They have been trading money back and forth for a while. In the last year:
Justice Democrats have transferred 31% of their receipts to Brand New Congress
Brand New Congress' largest recipient of money, 53% of their receipts, has been themselvess
Of the $460,000 received by the Sanders Institute, $170,000 (37%) came from Our Revolution
I don't know if the Green Party has gotten involved in all this, but as you say it may only be inevitable.
All these numbers are available on opensecrets or FEC.gov
Demsrule86
(68,788 posts)In the ohio house race still not settled, there is a green candidate that took enough votes that the Democrat would have probably won outright .
Gothmog
(145,839 posts)sheshe2
(84,057 posts)I am not at all surprised by this.
R B Garr
(17,011 posts)the attacks on Democrats as a launching pad.
It was obvious they needed to generate all that agita to have a bad guy. Trump needed to attack Hillary, too. Where is Tad Devine?
Stinky The Clown
(67,838 posts)Maybe with some "fringe" campaigner?
Kaleva
(36,395 posts)I don't think she's at any risk of losing even if OR didn't endorse an unaffiliated candidate.
And I very highly doubt many, if any, of us DUers are going to send donations to the Dem candidate Charles Deaton.
George II
(67,782 posts)...and supporting non-Democratic candidates who are running against Democrats in GENERAL ELECTIONS.
Should we as Democrats be happy about this?
Kaleva
(36,395 posts)Nobody here is going to care if the Repub incumbent wins re-election to a state house seat and very , very few, if any, are going to send contributions or do volunteer work for Democrat challenger Charles Deaton.
We may profess to be angered by this but our actions say we don't give a damn.
unc70
(6,125 posts)The situation in NC is dire with a veto-proof majority in both houses of the General Assembly. That said, NC HD-13 is not a likely place for a pick up, but certainly not with a "stealth" candidate like Deaton. A quick search turns up little information about him.
Kaleva
(36,395 posts)Can you link to a few posts here at DU talking about Charles Deaton?
Donkees
(31,524 posts)NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT
013
PATRICIA MCELRAFT Patricia (Pat) McElraft REP
CHARLES DEATON Charlie Deaton - Withdrawn DEM
PENELOPE DIMAIO Pene diMaio
http://www.carteretcountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5029/UOCAVA-Election-Notice
unc70
(6,125 posts)I had discovered that too but had not had time to post.
BTW I grew up a mile from this district and Carteret County has always been heavily Republican.
George II
(67,782 posts)....a non-Democratic candidate who is running against a Democratic candidate?
Where is your "red line" on issues like this?
still_one
(92,502 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)still_one
(92,502 posts)Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Always "explaining" them. Go read historical posts here on DU. The post are just a clever way of saying "why support the democrat in this race?". There is complete failure to acknowledge that democrats across the country have WON in very red districts.
Kaleva
(36,395 posts)I did Google searches on him and have come up with about zilch. This thread is about two unkowns who have next to zero chance of defeating the incumbent. Nobody here is supporting the unaffiliated candidate Penelope DiMaio nor is anyone here actually supporting the Dem candidate Charles Deaton either.
I find it very interesting that several people spend so much time attacking an organization they are arguing is ineffectual. If it's ineffectual, why waste any time on it? And I find it very interesting that several people who attack AOC and OR used to also savagely attack Hillary. The archived threads don't lie. Makes one wonder what's really going on here.
R B Garr
(17,011 posts)and OR?? Talk about wondering whats going on here...
If youve observed OR and their ex Republican funded affiliates Justice Democrats, youll see how they attack Democrats, so theres your answer about why people question them. This isnt difficult to understand.
*Cenk Uyger founded Justice Democrats he is an ex Republican
grantcart
(53,061 posts)SkyDancer
(561 posts)And one flipped her district from red to blue last year., A district which hasn't voted Dem in AGES. A district Trump won by huge margins.
To say Putin endorses that is absolutely disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Response to SkyDancer (Reply #35)
Post removed
Jake Stern
(3,145 posts)Republican wins the race for Booger County Dog Catcher? Putin.
Stock market dips 100 points? Putin again.
Chik-fil-a store in Kenosha has good sales on Wednesday? Putin willed it so.
It's so pervasive that is seems like anybody that is to the left of Bill Clinton is almost instinctively viewed, on here, as being a potential Putin stooge until proven otherwise.
p.s. Welcome to DU.
Voltaire2
(13,257 posts)have been losing elections across the country for decades.
Jake Stern
(3,145 posts)Putin and racism is all that some folks got to explain it.
I once gave an example of a coworker who had spent 2 years trying to get her then Dem rep to help her father get his VA benefits only to be told "there's nothing we can do" well the new GOP rep got it fixed within a month and has come through a few times after. She has voted for them since out of gratitude.
SkyDancer
(561 posts)Benghazi truther birth certificate level stuff.
Logical and rational thinking be damned.
Seriously, literally saying "Democrats were helped by Putin" and nobody even saying a word? Ya, that bothers me.
KPN
(15,677 posts)SkyDancer
(561 posts)Demsrule86
(68,788 posts)different. However, in the age of Trump, the money should be spent on races we can use to win the house and Senate and not on primarying sitting Democrats.
SkyDancer
(561 posts)Obviously we all know what candidates for Our Revolution stand for, correct? Do you have a link to the website for the Democrat running? I tried looking yesterday but I am finding absolutely nothing about the guy. I mean a big fat zero. Even Ballotpedia is empty with no info on the guy. I want to see where he stands on issues and see if there are defining differences between him & the Our Revolution candidate.
I am finding nothing. If you find anything do me a favor please and holler in a reply. I banged my head for 90 minutes yesterday.
disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)Demsrule86
(68,788 posts)Last edited Thu Aug 16, 2018, 01:03 PM - Edit history (1)
candidates spew during a primary, I won't vote for them...they endanger a majority for us this year and thus have extremely poor judgement. I suppose they can't win but will settle for electing Republicans by splitting the vote ...despise OR. Nina Turner hates Democrats...well the feeling is mutual. I am surprised that you appear to support an independent OR (third party) candidate over a Democratic candidate.
SkyDancer
(561 posts)being slime. They have helped Democrats get elected all across the country. In the end, that is what matters the most.m correct?
I am not a fan of what they are doing here but I also know that this is very much an outlier case, my question to them is "wtf?!" In fact, maybe I could get an answer if I tweet to them asking them why. We'll see. Should I, I will reply here. Should be interesting to see what they say should they reply.
I'm not sure why you'd think I support a third party candidate as I didn't elude to such a thing and only asked you a simple question. I do not.
disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)when it comes to situations like these.. just an fyi
unc70
(6,125 posts)No need for outrage regarding NC endorsement.
Response to George II (Original post)
lark This message was self-deleted by its author.
SkyDancer
(561 posts)I REALLY like her! She is awesome and very nice. I've had some great conversations with her on Twitter.
She was the first to absolutely kill it in a Trump district that hadn't voted for a Democrats in a LONG time! She flipped the district in May 2017. It was a HUGE win!
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)and she's running unopposed in her primary.
As I've said before: Worst. Revolution. Ever.
George II
(67,782 posts)Gothmog
(145,839 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)...to do with the point of the OP.
SkyDancer
(561 posts)I think electing Democrats who are for a living wage and single payer health care is a GREAT revolution!
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)This "revolution" is nothing compared to Teddy Roosevelt's.
SkyDancer
(561 posts)2naSalit
(86,920 posts)Just who the hell is OR? What is their platform?
George II
(67,782 posts)....to "advance the progressive agenda that we believe in"
What we're seeing more and more is that they are willing to support candidates who are running against Democrats. Not only in primaries, which is no big deal, but in general elections, splitting the Democratic vote and helping the republican candidates.
2naSalit
(86,920 posts)Thanks. Like we need that after the last go 'round. Well, they won't be getting my vote, not this election, nor the next.
Cha
(298,021 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Response to George II (Original post)
Post removed
George II
(67,782 posts)GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Can you?
And I guarantee we all support him in the general. Dont you?
The worlds shittiest Democratic Congress Member is better than any republican.
RandySF
(59,697 posts)RandySF
(59,697 posts)LexVegas
(6,121 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)...but they're not required to. After pushback, they now list their individual contributors' names, but that's all. No location, no occupation, and no amounts.
Opensecrets has only sketchy data about their receipts, contributors, and expenditures.
RandySF
(59,697 posts)This seT is a tossup
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)It was inevitable. It is their only chance. Put pretend candidates on the ballot and then hack the vote to move Democratic votes to the third party splitters in races that are close. We are going to see this over and over---and unless the FBI/NSA/CIA does something to protect the vote, it could work.
George II
(67,782 posts)....to any candidates. Apparently their biggest expenditure was $170,000 (a "loan" which hasn't been repaid) to the Sanders Institute, which coincidentally was founded by the same founders of Our Revolution.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)sheshe2
(84,057 posts)RandySF
(59,697 posts)Squinch
(51,083 posts)RandySF
(59,697 posts)R B Garr
(17,011 posts)exposure or they never would have gained any traction enough to matter. Such deception with not an ounce of accountability. Although it was obvious to most of us. All they needed were a few gullible types.
R B Garr
(17,011 posts)They cant make it on their own. This is not surprising. How phony!
roscoeroscoe
(1,370 posts)I couldn't do that! This is wrong
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)Right now we have a Democrat Governor but the GOP has a veto proof majority in the state legislature.
So basically our Democrat Governor is almost powerless. The Legislature does whatever they want and overrides every veto he makes. Now they have put Constitutional Amendments on the next ballot to strip him of even more power.
I dont have hopes we can win a majority back in the legislature this election. But I have high hopes we can at least break that veto-proof majority and force the GOP leadership in the legislature to have to negotiate and deal with the Governor to get any legislation signed. It wont be perfect, but it will stop the insanity that a legislature with nonchecks and balances against it is waging in this state.
So EVERY RACE and EVERY SEAT matters. Is that probably a safe R seat? Probably. But you never know, next week something could happen damaging the incumbents chances. But endorsing an independent and siphoning votes away from the Democratic candidate makes that much harder.
Every seat matters in this election. This isnt the time to play spoiler and split votes in these contests in NC.
Fuck them.
unc70
(6,125 posts)OR is not being a spoiler in this NC race. There is no longer a Dem in the race.
No need for the outrage.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)But they didnt.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,411 posts)Was it before or after the Carteret County Democrats put DiMaio on their Candidate Roster? Or she spoke at their Big Blue Wave Rally?
Did "Our Revolution" endorse DiMaio before that tweet?
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I dig Sanders, and I think its in his best interest to absolve himself of this PO Box organization.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)From the minuscule amount of information available about Penelope DiMaio, the candidate they've chosen to endorse:
During a tenure a few years ago as a truck driver, she tuned into the radio to catch Bernie Sanders 2016 presidential campaign and, she says, something just clicked.
Finally, here was a, in my opinion, a politician whom I shared values with, she said. At this point now Im starting to listen to politics for the first time in my life, you know?
✔ Supported Bernie Sanders in 2016.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,411 posts)At least, they give her space on their "candidate roster", but not Deaton: http://www.carteretdemocrats.org/election-2018/
What do we know about Deaton? He was unopposed in the Democratic primary. The online lists say nothing about him:
https://votesmart.org/candidate/179968/charles-deaton#.W3XYOvlKjIU
https://ballotpedia.org/Charles_Deaton
Me.
(35,454 posts)maybe DiMaio should ask them to reconsider
Hekate
(91,005 posts)This year, as last year, adults understand that getting rid of Red Don and His Comrades supercedes absolutely everything else, or next year we can kiss the republic goodbye. It is obvious that OR, like its founder, is not about getting Democrats elected or re-elected, and they are not a Democratic group.
Good to clear that up.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,411 posts)and post #134 shows why - Deaton has withdrawn. Dimaio is the only candidate running against the Republican.