HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Places » U.S. » Maryland (Group) » Choosing Van Hollen over ...

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:59 PM

 

Choosing Van Hollen over Edwards means one thing and one thing only:

The Maryland Democratic establishment was able to make the case that the part could only hold the Senate seat by nominating a bland, corporate white candidate.

As a result, it's very likely no person of color will ever even bother running for anything above the level of a state legislative or U.S. House seat in Maryland again. Why should any of them ever try to be senator or governor again. since this is result proves what is always going to happen if they do?

Way to drive straight back into the dead, hopeless past, folks.

Way to guarantee your state will never ever make history, will never be part of building a just transformative future.

Way to tell every POC in MD that they will never, ever be seen as good enough.

No greater progressive good can possibly be served by this cowardly, retrograde decision.





17 replies, 1754 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:05 PM

1. No

 

The Congressional Black Caucus Political Action Committee [PAC] was against Donna Edwards.

I think what went on was that Edwards did not play ball (as does Chris Van Hollen).

I did not have much interest in this primaries race because—like the rest of 95+ percent elected members of the Democratic Party—Donna Edwards endorsed not Bernie Sanders but Hillary Clinton.

I don’t have anything good to say about the establishment of this party. (It is more a club.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CobaltBlue (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:26 PM

8. I know about the CBC-PAC decision.

 

It was largely taken because CBC-PAC is led by the former congressman Donna beat in the primary a few yearss ago. The guy used his clout in the PAC to get payback.

As a result, the nominee is Chris Van Hollen, an unnoticeable hack who has never stood up and fought for anybody or anything.

There aren't even any votes he can get in the fall that Donna couldn't have counted on winning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CobaltBlue (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:55 PM

11. I think she endorsed Hillary in order to get the endorsement from Emily's List

and the large contribution that followed. Also, wasn't Van Hollen on Hillary's enemies list for endorsing Obama in 2008?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:06 PM

2. I really liked Edwards, but I'm not from MD and I don't presume to ascribe any motives to anyone.

I think it's kind of ugly to do that, too--to play that race game without knowing. Those are hideously ugly accusations you are making and big accusations require Big Proof. I don't see you bringing anything but your "opinion" about "POC."

I'd rather hear from some black Marylanders, rather than you.



Bluntly--if you're not from MD, I think it's poor form to comment like that.

It looks like you're trying to drive a "racial wedge" through the party without knowing the particulars of the campaign.

Why would anyone want to do such a thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:08 PM

4. Her campaign was basically that she was a black woman

 

She wasn't very strong on the issues and never really connected with people

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #4)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:44 PM

10. She's a progressive black woman and Van Hollen is a bland, priviliged suburban centrist.

 

That's what matters. She has a living history of facing oppression and Van Hollen has a living history of never facing any obstacles at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #10)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:19 PM

13. Yeah...that was her campaign

 

It was soundly rejected by the voters

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #10)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:58 AM

16. Van Hollen was better during the debate big time

 

We need to keep the seat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:06 PM

3. Sooo people should have voted for her because she's a black woman?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #3)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:10 PM

6. Yes

 

Absolutely.

There are people who are voting for Hillary Clinton because they want to experience living to see someone who is female elected to—and in office as—the president of the United States.

Consider more demographics as well.

My point: Yes, this is real. One has to take it on a case-by-case basis when questioning whether this is for the best. (Meaning, the best choice in a respective election race.) But, make no mistake: This is real. And I do understand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CobaltBlue (Reply #6)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:24 PM

7. basically you want voters to put less thought into their vote for senator

 

than people did when they voted for contestants on American Idol.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:39 PM

9. No one is saying don't think- but that thought should include the need to make history.

 

Now, the Maryland Senate race will be nothing but a passionless, issueless, ambition and personality contests. No one's life can be changed by the result there, no one can be inspired, no one will really even care who wins this(don't worry-the Dems were and are always totally certain of carrying the seat, btw-Van Hollen was never the only Dem who could win).

This race matters now solely in terms of numerical party control only.

Van Hollen simply didn't have anything superior to offer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #9)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:22 PM

14. Her campaign was about her being a black woman

 

The voters rejected it.
If she'd actually run on issues and connected with the voters her skin color and gender would have been a bonus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:08 PM

5. Don't give up! We're coming! Tens of thousands of us!

I just moved to Maryland! Maybe I'm not brilliant or anything, but I could see that Donna Edwards deserved my vote. And I will help vote in the next Black senator or governor here in this state! And there are a lot more like me! At least in that respect! And besides, new people are growing up every day, and the word is that this generation really is more enlightened generally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raging moderate (Reply #5)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 12:17 AM

15. Here's a good role model

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:58 PM

12. As so often, it's 'establishment' v other.

Imo she had to compromise in some ways, and the cbc compromised her out. Lots of disappointments for my state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:33 PM

17. I can't say that for sure. I left Maryland three years ago, and of the two, I knew who Van Hollen

was, but was not familiar at all with Donna Edwards. I assume she was either from PG County or the Baltimore area, but I really heard nothing about her. With Van Hollen, he was minority whip and as such was much more visible, though not nearly as visible as my own US Representative was and still is. Elijah Cummings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread