Who do you want to win the primary in Florida? I vote next Tuesday so I guess I'll expect stories bashing the democratic senate nominees for the next week.

"Down with Tyranny" dude is promoting Grayson & Cannova .
He just can't blog enough nasty opinions about DWS & Murphy fast enough. Guess he's looking at the election deadline too.

Why are his blog opinions against Dem Candidates even allowed on DU?

Its one guy and a blog who hates on DWS & Murphy & loves him some Grayson & Cannova.

Dear Mr Blogger DWTyranny, here's a donut to ease your agony on election night.


Geezus..

Guess he can blog his opinion but he is obviously loving him some Canova!!

pffft!!!

Which means they'll be the only votes that matter and the only ones whose wants and needs will be considered.

Welcome to Baucus/Nelson/Lincoln all over again.

Perfect.

I hate being a conspiracy theorist type of guy but it strikes me as more than coincidental that just when it started looking more and more like the presidency was a sure thing, and we actually had a chance at the Senate that the Conservadems came out of the woodwork and making sure they get their rightful place as the most important votes in the Senate.

And I have no doubt that President Clinton will be even worse at playing hardball and keeping the Senate majority in line than President Obama was.

Without his vote, it would not have happened. Did he weaken it ? Yes. But a Republican would not have voted for it under any circumstance and thousand so people would have died unnecessarily.

As long as we get a majority in the Senate, we get to dictate what hits the floor. I'll worry about Dinos when I can stop worrying about getting to 50+.

"We" won't get to dictate what hits the floor.

And neither will the actual Democrats who support Democratic policies.

I'm fine with them being in the party, I'm just not fine with them setting the agenda, which history tells me is what is going to happen.

If I thought we'd have 53-59 votes or 62+ then I'd be fine with it as they'll have no power. But if we find ourselves in a situation like 2009 where the DINO's essentially got to run the party and have their commitee chairmanships from which to stall or hurt the Democratic party agenda then I don't want them.

that voting that for the Republican is the best strtegy?

recruiting more and better Democrats, and promoting the hell out of them and throwing money at them, which they seem to be incapable of given the fact that they go running with arms wide open to the first piece of crap Republican who bats his eyes at them.

Maybe if the DNC had been working on that as much as they had been working on.....ahem....other priorities, we wouldn't need to be giving someone like Patrick Murphy the time of day.

Quite frankly they might deserve another look.

Anything from Mr Down With Tyranny is obvious hate speak b.s.
Trash the Trash. Grayson's a head case that beat up his wife.
Is that ok with Mr Blogger DWTyranny??
Go ask him.

This is ugly shite.
Bye

I like to pretend opinions and editorials are facts as well... as it certainly allows us to validate and reinforce our biases while rationalizing it as simple political outreach. Creative allegations all around!

Mitt Romney could run for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2020. There is nothing stopping him.

voted in by Democratic voters and not vote along Democratic Party lines.

They have to win over the Democratic voters of whatever district or territory they want to represent before they are called the Democratic nominee.

Only obscure third parties screen anyone who wants to become a member of that party. And that greatly reduces their ability to grow to a point where they can contend for most elections.

It's unusual, but parties do have the right to stop people from running under their banner.

Both parties have barred people from running for their nomination.

You can find it on every level.

Both parties have a history of it. Just look at how we use to pick our nominee. Elections had no real meaning and many of our Presidents prior to the 70s won very few, if any, primaries.

that their precedence no longer exists. Political parties do have the right and legal standing to keep people from participating in their party.

I picked Tyler because it's the only time it's happened to a President.

The most recent that I know of when Republicans prevented a woman in, I believe it was Connecticut, from participating in their primary.

Obama endorsed him, that is enough for me.

In addition, his opponent, Grayson, is the FL Dem Trump

He was a repug, but let's say he has been enlightened. He is our ONLY choice to take on Rubio.

Wish it was Charlie Crist, but this is what we have.



PS that site has Rubio written all over it

How is that in anyway something Rubio would try to use?

Obama endorsed Murphy.

Are you suggesting that Obama would like to see the ACA over turned??

Please elaborate.

I have no idea why Obama is backing this former Republican who worked against the ACA and voted for the Benghazi hearings.

Pam Keith and Alan Grayson are both strong progressive candidates. Go figure....

What is your theory there?

DO you think Obama wants Hillary to lose?

Or maybe, Obama thinks longer term ... na.

Grayson has some serious issues, and I know you know what those are.

And Pam who?

Oh ... you mean Obama doesn't like strong progressives. Cause ACA and Benghazi.

Ok.

Nothing sadder than watching people try to make excuses for candidates that SUCK on DEMOCRATIC issues...

But good luck with your "effort".

"I have no idea why Obama is backing this former Republican..."

And no doubt, it would be a waste of both your time and your narrative to find out precisely why.

Hiding behind "I don't know" is a courageous and disciplined stand to take, illustrating not only the depth of your convictions, but the breadth of your rational thought as well.

I'd love to have any kind of Dem Senator in my red state

and these constant bash Murphy posts are over. This is your 2nd one today. He's not a progressive. Big shock. That's fine. This is a big tent party. Atleast, he doesn't have a two decades worth of abuse allegations against him that aren't going to be disproved thoroughly before the election.

to get Patrick elected...


http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/patrick-murphys-dad-dumps-1m-into-senate-democrats-super-pac/2290408


And voting for the Benghazi hearings? Seriously?....

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2016/may/16/alan-grayson/patrick-murphy-voted-house-benghazi-committee-gray/

Anything is better than Grayson.

I'm not inherently against party switchers or even conservative Dems.

What I'm against is them given an inordinate amount of power or say in the party.

If we take the Senate I don't want Democratic legislation held hostage or watered down by the likes of a johnny-come-lately like Patrick Murphy.

If he's willing to get in line and support solidly Democratic legislation, and doesn't insist that it get watered down to accomodate him at the expense of what the majority of people in the party and the majority of other Senators and (presumably) a Democratic president) then I'm fine with the big tent and him being included in that big tent.

if she was I would be voting for her.

House incumbent friendships.

I guess those were the qualifications that made her such a good choice to be head of the DNC....

I respect your right to support whatever Democrat you wish in your primary. For that matter, until a primary is won, there is no reason to stifle competing narratives.

What good does it do to vote for a Democrat if he or she votes with the Republicans against their own party all the time?...

That is all.

Or will they do what we saw in 2009/2010 with the ACA (as just one example)?

That is to have them hold progressive legislation hostage and not let it move forward until it is completely watered down and even destined to be highly flawed?

As I said upthread, I'm fine with a big tent party, but I'm not o.k. with 2-3 conservative dems being allowed to hold themselves up as the arbiters of bullshit "bipartisanship". And I'm not o.k. with them being in charge of any committees if Dems have the majority. Especially someone like Murphy or Bayh who should have zero seniority within the Democratic party, Murphy because he just became one and Bayh because he jumped ship and now wants back in.

....

Because that's the other option in the real world, your nearly-a-year-old link notwithstanding.

And the time of the article has nothing to do with the FACT that Murphy chose to cosponsor this GOP anti ACA crap of a bill..

Murphy takes more money from Wall street than anyone in congress except the Speaker of the House and the Senate majority leader.

As the article states Murphy only became a Democrat 4 months before he ran against West in 2011. He has still voted like a GOPer on many important occasions.

IF you aren't able to see past the bullshit smears on Grayson one would hope a person would support Pam Keith, a TRUE progressive.

A progressive who is also running but been snubbed by the establishment in preference for the former GOPer who worked against the ACA and voted to send Hillary before congress for the Benghazi hearings....

... so I'll take his opinion over yours.

But hey ... maybe you could run for something ... get something done.

It could happen.

And I've ran before as well as worked on campaigns for Democrats on a local level in the past.

I suspect you dislike the aca given your earlier post about it not being the same as being shit on.

But you thought it gave you a path of attack, so you used it.

And now, you attack Obama, to defend and deflect your attack on Murphy, for his lack of support of Obama on the ACA.

You make a great pretzel.

I posted about Patrick Murphy.

You're the one trying put a spin and a glow on Murphy and his poor record of voting now that he is a Democrat.

Florida just went through a similar situation with Charlie Crist and Rick Scott. That worked out swell! What a fiasco. What's with Florida and recycled Republicans being favored over long time Democrats?

Go back and read your posts. Thanks.

BTW, I don't have a dog in this hunt, other than wanting the Democrats to take back control of the Senate. However, you are continuing to ignore the allegations and actual footage of Alan Grayson's tendency towards violent actions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/26/alan-grayson-said-he-never-hit-his-wife-so-he-got-physical-with-a-reporter/

There are just too many instances to just excuse them away. Sorry.

Grayson not only cannot win the GE in Florida, ..he could actually hurt Clinton on the ballot. The guy has become unhinged. Not someone we want representing democrats. Let Trump and company represent lunacy. Clinton winning Florida is too important to be distracted by this guy.

Grayson has been convicted of nothing.

Scott is terrible scum, but he is a republican in a right of center state. Republicans are fine with other purist republicans no matter how crooked. Grayson is hard leftist and an accused domestic abuser. He cannot win Florida and would hurt Clinton.

He is the only one who has a shot.