(WA Senate) As an anti-war candidate, Dixon says he's no 'spoiler'

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/262469_senate10.html?dpfrom=thead

By NEIL MODIE
P-I REPORTER

"I do not look at myself as a spoiler," Aaron Dixon insisted Thursday as the one-time Seattle Black Panther leader announced his anti-war Green Party candidacy opposing Democratic U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell.

At a news conference at an assisted-living center in the Central Area, the black community activist made clear that his campaign is built around the Iraq war and the one-term senator's votes supporting it as well as her votes for the Patriot Act and a few other Republican military and security initiatives.

"If she was against the war, then I would be a spoiler, stealing her anti-war votes," Dixon told a roomful of supporters and news media. "If both the Republican challenger (businessman Mike McGavick) and Cantwell are in support of this war, then they are competing amongst themselves for the voters who are pro-war. I am the anti-war vote."

History, however, suggests Dixon isn't likely to become anything more than a spoiler who, in a close general election, could peel enough left-leaning votes away from the Democratic senator to jeopardize her re-election.

more

:rant:
look folks I'm in Washington and I don't like cantwell much. She's not the best progressive we want her to be. The democratic challanger is probably a better option, but it is unlikely he will win the primary. So instead of having a democrat who is strong on some issues and weak on others we will have a republican who will oppose all that we stand for. Excellent, good job...idiots

if you want to push an issue fine, just don't f**k up the general election. I'm all for proportional representation and instant runoff voting, why don't those guys focus on that instead? Because that would actually be hard, thats why. Please if WA goes red in the senate I'll be pissed, if you haven't figured that out already.

This rests squarely at the feet of Cantwell. She's a pro-war, pro-ALieto DLC puke and she deserves whatever she gets.

The voters are NOT at fault.

This isn't about Cantwell, it's about a group of anti-establishments who will always find something to complain about. There was no war or patriot act in 2000, and they found idiotic reasons to vote for Nader too. It wouldn't have mattered what Cantwell did, because if she'd voted 100% Green, the rest of the state would vote her out anyway. I haven't seen the Greens do anything in the last 5 years to promote their own party solutions and enter the political debate in an honest and meaningful way. They just stand on the sidelines and throw rocks and now they're poised to knock out a senator that we need to have any chance of taking back the Senate. We only needed 5 seats and they are out there for us to get. Another seat means millions more dollars to have to raise, and one more state various party members have to campaign in. It's a complete waste.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Tell that to Iraqi kids starved to death by Clinton, maybe.

Not in his announcement speech, his acceptance speech, or his speech on election night. He blathered on about anti-war this and that in 2004, but his plan included elections and security first, just like every other Democrat's did. He's a fraud and a phony who couldn't concoct a plan to build a public park, let alone run a country.

Don't think it couldn't happen. Regardless of polls and public opinion, the Repubs have gained seats in both houses every (s)election since the junta took over. There are now more Diebold Republican electing machinez than ever. They could go over 60 this year.

Not that we ever filibuster anything anyway, but it's nice to have some minimal sort of power, on paper at least.
If the Repubs hit 60 in the Senate, the Democrats and the Greens might as well hang it up, because there's no way back from there.

The Democrats are too scared to filibuster anything any way!

Act. Screw them for placing expediency over principle. It seems like all the DINOs want to do is keep their cushy jobs and income. Well, I for one am not going to help them do that. I'll take principle anyday.

:toast:

Senate.

After the way the Dems have conducted themelves since then, eh, it ain't no thang!

but they do still retain the ability to filibuster in theory at least.

It's not much to hang one's hopes for the future on, but it's all we've got.

The alternative is all Repiglicans, all the time, forever.

Sorry, but an unused weapon is a useless weapon. There is no filibuster if they are too scared to use it, so the Republicans already have a de facto filibuster-proof majority.

I can no longer be cowtowed and frightened into voting for just anybody with a (D) after their name over the fear of a filibuster-proof Senate because we already have one.

have to be a republican to stop a filibuster. The "spineless 19" proved that. The fact that they were Democrats didn't help us one single bit. Then for them to turn around and vote against Alito was an insult after they killed the filibuster.

everything they deserved" because it is their job to hammer on her to do their will. You can't elect these fools and leave them to their own devices. Like children, they have to be watched and taught what to do. Third parties are ALWAYS spoilers (please send me a link if that is not true). I loved Ross Perot, he got Clinton in the White House.

However, they can use this to the advantage of the people. The Green in the end, takes those votes to Cantwell and says, do as we want and you can win, don't...we all lose. But I've never seen that happen either.

For the thousandth time, you are describing a course of action that virtually guarantees you will have no voice in the Senate.

If you cannot elect the candidate of your choice and indeed split the moderate and liberal votes, you cannot make policy. End of story. You can rail against other candidates till the cows come home, but you've squandered what power you do have.

Don't kid yourself, leftstreet. The country isn't 55 percent self-described liberal and progressive. You have to ally with moderates, including pro-environment and social liberal Republicans, to win on the issues.

Ralph Nader, for instance, hasn't been elected to anything that I know of, and thus he has no active hand in making policy. Moreover, he hasn't thrown his weight behind a particular issue or created alliances that would bring about the actions he supposedly wants. That's just ineffectual and self-deluding.

Supposedly in this country anyone can run for office. Sorry if that is not fascist enough for you.

My brother, a life-long Democrat, lives in Tacoma and he will not support Cantwell, and he is far to my political right.

she is NOT a democrat -- she is a GOPig.

Don't blame the voter.

She is completely unresponsive to the voters of WA state.

He wont' vote Green either, because he has some issues with them, but there is no way that he can be cajoled into voting for Cantwell.

she's been great for alaskans who hate ted stevens.
she bravely stood up to him and fought anwr, and won!
and he's trying to get his revenge on her. one way was with the unlimited tankers and that failed.
now cantwell is trying to protect our forests with a roadless bill.
i wholeheartedly support her and i wish she were in alaska so i could vote for her.

IF you have two pro-war candidates in a race, it is right and natural to expect somebody to fill the void and for an anti-war candidate to emerge.

Yes, she's had a few unfortunate votes, but overall she's been good for the state. And the kind of pure liberal many of you are holding out for (and willing to sacrifice her to get) just won't win in a statewide contest. You don't know the dynamics or history of Washington. The Seattle area and Eastern Washington might as well be in two different states .

Cantwell will not be getting my vote.

I'll be voting for Mark Wilson(D) in the primary.

If that fails I'll be taking a good, long look at Dixon.

The reason this country is so screwed up is because no one stands up for their beliefs; they vote for what is convenient and then go back into a 2-year slumber.

I say power to the Green Party and thank goodness they are running to make a better Senate!

Not sure if the Green Party guy is the best choice, but Cantwell has PROVEN she does NOT represent democratic voters AT ALL!!!

She repeatedly has supported the repubs, again and again.
The most aggregious examples are:

Iraq
Patriot Act
Alito

but she has done it constantly for the past 6 years.

I am friends with one of Cantwell's campaign managers here who finally quit the campaign last week because it's impossible to support her. She ignores even requests from her staff for an explaination of her positions.

I know that the greens will steal the seat from the Democrats, but you should put the blame squarely on Maria. She has ignored her constituents for too long.

If you want a Democratic controlled senate, you're going to have to find a way to convince WA state Democrats to hold their nose and vote for Maria.

Personally, I think there's a good chance she will lose - and it's noone's fault but her own.

then she should have no problem getting re-elected.

Now, if the voters are sick of the war and the billions being spend, perhaps she has something to worry about. Perhaps she shouldn't have been such a cheerleader for the war and Bush's Agenda in the Middle East.

The problem is that many Senators, including Cantwell, became quite obsessive about the independent voter, the so-called "moderate swing vote" and they chose to court that vote over the last 4 years. Now, the issue is that these "moderate swing voters" really don't exist in the way these Senators think they do. No, the swing voter is minimal in number and tends to vote away from Democrats in tight races.

At their peril, these Senators have alienated the left and far-left vote and now, it's going to come back and bite a few of them in the ass. Cantwell may well have bought herself a one-way ticket back to Washington based on an totally flawed gamble at the "Swing Vote" and abandoning her base.

It's a shame, but perhaps it will be a wakeup lesson for the next session of Congress and the Senators who still believe there are moderate swing voters.

By the simple expedient of aligning herself with the 70% of the folks in this country opposed to the Iraq war. Doesn't seem like a real dome-scratcher to me, but I'm not the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree. I'm sure there's some deep, political reason for Cantwell to pander to the pro-war crowd.

Republican Slade Gorton. And he wasn't easy to beat. As I recall, she only had 51% of the vote. This is no easy, Democratic seat -- outside of the Seattle area, the state is largely Republican. No, I wasn't happy with her Iraq & patriot act votes (although she has a liberal record overall), but we're deluding ourselves if we think a Green party liberal can win a statewide contest. He'll just be peeling off a couple percent from Maria, which will throw the vote to the Republican. In our insistence on political purity, we'll just be shooting ourselves in the foot. Again.

that supported Slade. The corporations that wanted CAFTA and NAFTA.

WA state is a state with an export-based economy, so any politician that wants to carry the state is in favor of free trade.

War support, CAFTA and NAFTA support, failure to support the other democrats and filibuster Alito? I forgot her support of the Patriot Act.

Principles v. practicality. Idealism v. realism. Heart v. mind. Who's a real Democrat and who's a DINO? I'm not going take it any more v. you're giving it all away.

I've taken part in too many of these debates. I've been on the side of practicality so there, my bias is on the table. Here, as an out-of-the-closest Practicalist, are my two categories of responses I have no more patience for (knowing of course that the other side has the same sort of list for my type of posts):
1) I'm tired of good political news being met by doom and gloom. I'm tired of opening up a link titled something like "New Poll Shows Republicans Nearly Universally Hated by Americans" and then scrolling through dozens of posts that say things like, "Doesn't matter ... Diebold...Diebold...Diebold" and "Too bad nobody'll vote", etc.
2) I'm tired of the Democratic Party getting more abuse than the Republican party on a pro-Democratic website.

I'm off for less cynical pastures, where political horse race threads are about who is going to win the race rather than beating a dead horse.

too bad it will probably be overlooked by the rest of the thread....

here is my bottom line:

1. EVERYONE has a right to run for office; the whole "ONOES! YOU'RE STEALING VOTES AWAY FROM WHOEVER!!!!!!one" be damned

2. It doesn't really matter, since I don't live in the state, but I happen to LIKE Dixon's stances, and am pleased to see someone like him running in any race.

3. Like Ohio, I believe this is something the voters of Washington should decide...Competition and more alternatives should be a good thing...If Cantwell or whoever's congressional career is on such thin ice that they can't take a little heat from a longshot outsider, then maybe he or she needs to re-evaluate WHY they got into politics in the first place, and WHAT they have been doing all this time to strengthen the support base. One of the many problems of politicians of all stripes is complacency--when they feel that re-election is a forgone conclusion time after time, they sometimes seem to 'forget' all the campaign promises they made....

when so many male Senators have taken less liberal positions than she has. Most male democratic Senators have the same or a more conservative voting record than she, but you wouldn't know it from all the criticism she gets. Why is that? Seems to me that the same thing is going on with Cantwell that is going on with Hillary. Different standards seem to exist for women, even among D.U.ers.

first to do so. There is no gender bias here. The negative information coming out about Cantwell is directly from her constituents about how her actions do not reflect her words, position, or party. Ive been writing her for 6 years and warning about this situation.

There is no gender bias or republican machine driving this problem. Cantwell herself is the cause of the problem

She beat Slade Gorton by only about 2000 votes and then has ended up voting almost exactly as Slade would have done.

It's very sad. I want to keep the seat Dem. But, she has created her own problem. WA is a very smart state and the people are educated about their senators. Everyone knows Cantwell is crummy. Still, she could have won easily if she had only voted against the patriot act or against alito to shore up her base. The choice was hers, and she knew the consequences, because I had informed her and so had at least one of her campaign managers.

I'm seeing it on these boards. She's rated in the top twenty senators for her progressive positions, and yet she's never good enough. How come we don't rake the male dems in the bottom 80% over the coals?

On DU, I've not noticed a slant based on gender. I have noticed some pissed off Washingtonians.

because you are from Washington, as I am, and she is your senator. But I do wonder why so many out-of-state D.U.ers love to attack her on these boards when there are so many male Senators with worse records that they rarely talk about.

On the other hand, it isn't true that "everyone" here knows she is "crummy." I'm in the Seattle area, and most of my friends support her.

With the Alito decision, for example. Why should she have made what could have only been a symbolic vote against cloture -- and thereby further alienate herself from the more conservative half of the state -- when the Democrats had already counted up how many votes they had against him for a potential filibuster (including hers) and already knew that they were not even close? I'm sure her vote would have been different if a filibuster had been a REAL possibility. Up till now, her voting record on abortion issues was 100%. I think she was counting on people like us to understand why she voted the way she did, when a filibuster wouldn't have taken place anyway. (Because of all the more conservative Democratic Senators that people here are largely silent about.)

Maybe her decision was too political to suit you. So be it. But it was a reasoned decision. And the fact remains that once we come down to the November election, we need to all pull together and support whoever wins the Democratic primary. The Republican domination of Congress must end.

I see you're new to posting here at DU. Thanks for the chat!

She seems to be part of the elitist Democrats that we must oppose. They are part of the problem not the solution.

I suspect Rove has lined up a whole bunch of them for the elections this fall.

Worked in 2000, right?

Act, support for Bush's oil war, and the virtual certainty of overturning Roe V Wade we have changed. Nader was right about the two party system breeding cronyism and corruption. I have never voted independent before in my long life, but I have come to the conclusion that the current status quo must go and that the country desperately needs more than two identical political parties, for the corporations and by the corporations, that differ in little less than their names.

So, I will gladly go the Hell, were there really such a dreary place, and I will take my vote with me.

Votes have consequences. Smart people learned that in 2000.

The stupid "Gore=Bush" crowd are incapable of learning, and this kind of pathetic, objectively pro-Republican behavior is not surprising coming from them.

You call people "pro-Republican" because they don't like the Democrat candidate? I guess they only have 2 corporate choices, otherwise they get fascistly labeled "pro-Republican"

are objectively pro-Republican.

A bad Democrat is worse than a 'good' Republican.

People who vote Green should not be heard to complain about Republicans or the inability of Democrats to advance an agenda in Washington.

And Florida would not have been close enough to steal had Nader not run. So spare me.

You vote for anything but one of the two and you are automatically labeled as one of them?

WTF?

definition an opponent, and not a friend or ally.

Dems need to be held accountable.

I'd prefer it be done in the primaries, but either way it's gotta be done if the Dems EVER have any hope of regaining the majority- or even gaining relevance- again.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=H4152103


And from the Northwest Progressive Blog:

http://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2006/02/maria-cantwell-deserves-our-support.html

"...Taking her entire term as whole, she has been a good senator… a hard working senator… an effective senator… and a surprisingly more progressive senator than many people give her credit for. According to Progressive Punch, Cantwell has a progressive voting rating of 88.73 percent, ranking her in the Senate’s top 20, only a couple notches to the right of Sen. Patty Murray.

But most importantly, she is an incumbent, Democratic senator, and she absolutely will be the party’s nominee in November."

<snip>

"Maria Cantwell isn't a perfect Senator (who is?) but her voting record speaks for itself. She has a good reputation. Local officials I've talked to here on the Eastside, when I've asked about Maria, have told me that Cantwell has been attentive to their concerns and is a very hard worker.

Time and again, Maria has risen to the occasion to fight for her constitutents against some very powerful business interests (including Enron and big oil conglomerates)."

That kind of thing is a serious and recurrent problem....

Granted, she's not a Ben Nelson, but being from a fairly progreessive state like Washington, we're entitled to expect much better.

Washington State is fairly Democratic, but that doesn't make it fairly progressive. The folks in and around Seattle are arguably progressive, but they're offset, to some degree, by the Republicans east of the Cascades. Don't forget that Cantwell replaced an incumbent Republican (Slade Gorton). If you move your candidate too far to the left, you risk losing the seat to someone on the right. Are you prepared to accept that for the sake of your ideological convictions?

Explain that.

Ugh. Our moderate democratic governor is in office only because of a literal handful of votes. The same state capable of electing Patty Murray can turn around and vote for a total creep like Dino Rossi.

Brooklynite understands. I've lived in a liberal state (Massachusetts) and I've lived in Washington, and -- much as I like Washington in other ways -- this is not a liberal state.

And goodbye to the Alaska wildlife refuge if we replace Cantwell with a Republican.

Gregoire is a moderate-right dem.

The liberal wins easily.
The mod-right has to fight it out.


:think:

The liberal wins easily.
The mod-right has to fight it out.


I've lived in this state - and participated in politics here - for 35 years. In statewide races the voters tend to be moderate, bent slightly to the left. Given a choice we will almost always elect moderate dems. Every once in a while the people feel the need to elect a moderate republican, just to balance things, which is why we have moderate republicans occupying the Attorney Generals office, Sec of State, and Commissioner of Public Lands.

The Gregoire/Rossi race was a liberal Dem masquerading as a moderate vs a conservative Rep masquerading as a moderate. What made the race close was that Gregoire ran the most inept race I've seen in years. As a matter of fact, I've never seen anybody win before, who ran that bad a campaign.

The dems hold 6 of the 9 congressional seats in the state. Only McDermott and Inslee - both based in the Seattle area - are "liberals". The other 4 Dems -mostly suburban based- are varying degrees of moderate to conservative.
This state is no where near as liberal as outsiders -or republicans- think it is.

In statewide races the voters tend to be moderate, bent slightly to the left.


The fact that the establishment continually runs "moderates" is no indication of who the people will elect. Quick... name three liberal progressives who have run for statewide office!

I thought so!


Instead we get the likes of

Nethercutt
Locke
Gorton
Cantwell
Smith
Rossi
Gregoire
etc..


The only recent liberal, Murray, won by 16 points. Cantwell/Gorton was 50-50. Rossi/Gregoire was 50-50. See a trend here?


I think Inslee would win handily if he were to run for Senate. While someone like Dicks would be forced into a squeaker. The Seattle/Bellingham/Vancouver nexis has the votes to elect whomever they want. All we need are the candidates.

what makes you think they can win the whole state? Dream on.

:shrug:

...that's the key to Sen Murray's success. Six offices around the state, instant access, and immediate help. She's the best 'grass roots' Senator this state has ever had; she's made veteran issues her #1 issue, and the veterans - of which this state has plenty - support her in droves. And she works hard for the business in this state, which often gets her accused by the idealogically precious here of "pandering" to the right, and being a "corporatist".

I wish Cantwell was as good a Senator as Murray. I know McGavick won't be as good as Cantwell.

Think Wilson!





Wilson
bring an immediate end to our nation's ill conceived costly adventure in Iraq
protect Social Security
oppose: NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO. Repeal Taft-Hartley
direct 50% of weapons spending to conversion from fossil fuels to renewable energy, which will build bridges to peace while creating jobs
refocus our troops on national defense
enforce air and water quality standards
establish a National Peace Academy
support basic education, kindergarten through age 20
end the tragic, costly, and misguided war on drugs
make sure health care becomes the right of all Americans

Cantwell
the Iraq War, costing thousands of lives & billions of your tax dollars
the PATRIOT Act, infringing on your rights
NAFTA, causing millions of lost jobs
CAFTA, likely will have the same impact or worse as NAFTA
the confirmation of Condoleeza Rice, who lied to lead the nation into illegal war
the confirmation of John Negroponte, who looked the other way from human rights violations in Honduras
moving class-action lawsuits from state into federal courts, making restitution for corporate wrongdoing less likely for working families
the BUSH ENERGY BILL that gives $1.5 Billion in subsidies to the oil and gas industry, including Halliburton, but includes very little for renewable energy



http://www.votemark.org/

--but no campaign manager. How can he possibly be serious? I have no problem with a protest vote for him, and I'll probably cast one, but I am going for Cantwell in the general.

The basic problem with lefties (and I include myself here) is that we haven't bothered with electoral politics since the late 60s. Therefore we have none of the organization and office-holding experience necessary to seriously contest elections now. The sole contrary example that has national name recognition is Bernie Sanders.

Now, how much further left do you get in American politics than being an avowed socialist? (Small "s" indicates no serious Socialist parties worth bothering with.) The reason he stands a good chance of being Vermont's next senator is that he has been running for some office or another in Vermont since friggin' 1975! What if, just WHAT IF, more of the people now bloviating about how Dems are capitulating all the time had done likewise?

McGavick. You should be delighted with him. After all, there's no difference between him and Cantwell.

Your profile says "Oregon".

which is exactly what I said. And we SHOULD expect better. All of us.

And guess what? I don't don't give a shit if she- and other Dems who enable the far right go down this year. I hope they do. The sooner that happens, the sooner the Dems become relevant as a party again- and the sooner they can mount a credible nationalized campaign that has some reasonable hope of regaining the majority- and passing responsible legislation, or mounting a halfway effective opposition.

That's NEVER going to happen so long as there's no accountability for members who vote with the Republicans and legitimize their policies.

If you think DINOs are unaccountable, try REPUBLICANS.
If that's not bad enough, try Republicans when they have established a
self-perpetuating one-party government with total control over its own "elections".
We have almost passed the point of no return, perhaps it is too late already.
Losing any more seats this year would certainly push us over the edge.

Not to mention re-energizing the Republicans in their bid to privatize, piratize, and prostheletize everything.

...with McGavick in the Senate they'll be drilling in ANWR this time next year. It's ironic that it'll be a GREEN that made it possible.

It's only a matter of time....

...to justify an anti-enviromental course of action by the "Greens".

otherwise. It's a non-issue considering that we're entering into an era of oil depletion. Anyone who thinks ANWR won't be drilled- even if Dems ran the whole federal show is deluding themselves. It's only a matter of when.

Hey, why not just start a nuclear war while we're at it? The world's going to end someday, anyway.

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

and based on science & economics. Don't try to put "John Maynard Keynes type" words in my mouth- especially if you have no understanding of energy issues.

She votes with the DLC DINO's all the time. I'm glad a "spoiler" entered the race!

Many people that vote green wouldn't vote at all if there wasn't a green candidate. Many Democrats are fed up with the corporate elitists that have taken over the party. Most poles i have seen don't show much grass roots support for Hillary, so why is she the front runner? Corp money! You shouldn't turn your mind off and just vote Democrat. Vote for candidates that stand for progressive democratic principles. Cantwell refused to support the filibuster on Alito. She supported the invasion of Iraq. What more can i say.

I've come to the conclusion that rightwing activists are smarter and more rational than those on the left.

They care about winning, whereas the Nader crowd cares about screaming.

Apparently many people here would rather lose and then bitch about it.

Winning is over-rated. The Country is obsessed with winning. That is why we will stay in Iraq forever because many Americans think we have to stay until we "win". There was a great cartoon once during the Vietnam war that showed an American soldier standing alone among the ruins of a devastated world stating, "I think I won".
When Joe Lieberman wins an election, do the democrats win? I don't think so.

we'd be getting ready to drill in ANWR right now. Let's say we pick up those five senate seats, but lose Cantwell. The Republicans retain controll. You'll be able take full credit for ideological purity. Sweet. And when Bush appoints another right wing Supreme, we'll think of you. And when the Senate squelches all enquiries into the administration's lies and corruption We'll think of you. Cantwell voted for the war resolution, but she has not embraced it the way Hilary or Lieberman have. Maria Cantwell is a techocrat not an ideologue. She's smart, hard working and teachable. We could do a lot worse, and if enough people follow your lead, we will.

If you can't be a Republican, Karl Rove wants you to be a Green.

In 2000, the morons were saying that there was NO DIFFERENCE between Gore and Bush.

Such people are hopelessly stupid and ignorant. And, as we've seen here, congenitally incapable of learning from their mistakes. Which goes along with their stupidity and ignorance.

Of course, some of the "Greens" on this board are likely just agent provacateurs playing psy-ops on a board whose primary purpose is to stick up for the Democratic Party.

should be forced to compare her FULL voting record with that of the average Republican Senator.

Such reading would reveal that she votes "correctly" far more often than even Lincoln Chafee or Olympia Snowe.

That mistake is leading us down the path to tyranny. Shall we forget that she refused to filibuster Alito after all the work we did to convince her otherwise?

The fillibuster vote is not as simple as people make it out to be.

I take it you voted the Green Party ticket in 2004, given that both Kerry and Edwards voted to authorize the Iraq war.

the war is asking for? I have never seen one iota of evidence supporting anyone's support of this terrible war. Why did the Democrats vote to give GWB this tremendous power. We may never recover. Please give me some kind of explanation other than Bush tricked them. Or that they didn't know he was serious.
Voting green didn't loose the election. It was stolen and Kerry said, "oh well, maybe next time." If there is a next time.
Another thing, what the hell is so complicated about the filibuster??? Filibuster and maybe you have a chance to keep Alito off the SCOTUS. You don't do it and bingo, guess what? He is on the court for life. Seems pretty simple to me.

I'd rather vote for what I want, and not get it, then vote for what I don't want, and get it.

Karl Rove wishes there were more people with that attitude on our side.

Cantwell is in good company, I guess.

Instead of someone with name recognition like Winona LaDuke, they had a no-name go for the seat. The way things work in Minnesota is if they don't nominate someone themselves, anybody whatever can run as a Green. So they had to run somebody, and they picked someone who would do the least damamge to Wellstone.

A bunch of people posting on this thread don't seem to be familiar with DU rules:

You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.

Democratic Underground may not be used for political, partisan, or advocacy activity by supporters of any political party or candidate other than the Democratic Party or Democratic candidates. Supporters of certain other political parties may use Democratic Underground for limited partisan activities in political races where there is no Democratic Party candidate.

It's one thing to slag Cantwell; it's quite another to advocate for her opponents. This is not Zell Miller we're talking about.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

party.

If you're going to bolt and run a third party candidate instead of working within the party, true Democrats have no reason to value your opinion.

Be in the Party -- or else!

party how it should conduct itself.

I am a Democrat. It is none of my business how the Republican party chooses its values or leaders. Similarly, the progressives can either be part of the Democratic party and work to shape its values, or they can go off and pout and render themselves irrelevant to it.

People who vote Nader and demand purity are behaving like adoloscents.

Senators, Isakson (whose voting record puts him at 81 on progressive issues) and Chamblis (93), instead of Maria Cantwell, who is among the top 20 progressives in the Senate?

As a Washingtonian, I think decidely to the left of most posters on this website (or so it usually seems), I will still be able to gladly vote for Cantwell in the general election.

The US is currently a fascist state. This country's claim to democracy is a lie, a sham, a ruse, fool's gold used to pacify and cajole the masses.

The state govt. of Washington is primarily in the hands of the Democratic party and narrowly escaped the fascist corruption of its own electoral process in the last general election, with the hand recounts conveniently ignoring the two counties with paperless systems. I recognize we still have problems, but at least all votes must be recorded on paper now.

I lost count of the number of posters deriding Cantwell for supporting Alito for the SC. She did oppose the nomination, but also opposed the fillibuster option. I personally called and encouraged the Senator to support fillibuster, was disappointed with her choice and deplore the court's ready embrace of fascist principles. However, the direction of the court is not new. (A flaw in the US Constitution is the "lifetime" appointments to the SC, in my opinion. The average life expectancy and modern communications have drastically altered the complexion of such an appointment. This flaw is almost as serious of the electoral college nonsense.)

I do like portions of the platform of the Green Party that I have seen, and have friends who participate in it, but I personally do not know Mr. Dixon. However, I do expect that he is a gentleman and a scholar. In a better political climate, he would possibly get my support and vote.

Senator Cantwell has made a lot of good votes in the Senate. I was impressed by her passion in protecting ANWR from further rape and expoitation. I was impressed by her willingness to stand firmly against attacks by Senator Stevens of Alaska. I have met Senator Cantwell and spoken with her. I do not always agree with her approach and certainly not her votes, but I can not abide by the overt fascism of the Republican Party.

In Cantwell's own words:

“I am very concerned with Judge Alito’s record regarding an individual’s constitutional right to privacy. While I do not expect any judicial nominee to prejudge future cases, I do expect all nominees to make their positions clear on protecting the most basic rights of individuals and the fundamental structure and foundations of our democracy. In the end, I cannot be sure that Judge Alito would do either.

“Judge Alito has a record of concern when it comes to placing and consolidating the rights of the government over the rights of the individual and he has not provided the answers to adequately reassure the people of our nation. I must conclude that he would neither show due respect for the authority of Congress nor apply a necessary check to the reach of the executive. With great respect for the institution, I cannot vote to confirm Judge Alito to the Supreme Court of the United States.”

One of the best political books of the last decade at least, in my opinion of course, is Cornel West's "Democracy Matters". In which he writes, "Let us not be deceived: the great dramatic battle of the twenty-first century is the dismantling of empire and the deepening of democracy....The pervasive climate of opinion and the prevailing culture of consumption make it difficult for us to even imagine the revival of the deep democratizing energies of our past and conceive of making real progress in the fight against imperialism....But we must remember that the basis of democratic leadership is ordinary citizens' desire to take back their country from the hands of corrupted plutocratic and imperial elites. This desire is predicated on an awakening among the populace from the seductive lies and comforting illusions that sedate them and a moral channeling of new political enery that constitutes a formidable threat to the status quo."

The culture of consumption can be seductive and comforting indeed. Even though a vegan and environmentalist all of my adult life, as a citizen of this corrupt empire, I feel that I have been unduly influenced by the corrupt culture around us. Standing upon principle with integrity is a daily struggle. I feel sympathetic towards those who would support Dixon's run for the senate, but am not persuaded of the wisdom of doing so myself.

It was many decades between the founding of the American experiment and the Civil War, and many more before meaningful civil rights legislation for unions and minorities. I don't believe that we have the benefit of that kind of time frame before meaningful change takes place again.

We should not confuse political strategy with principle. In principle, Cantwell spoke against Alito, but strategically she did not support openly a fillibuster of the nomination.

Here is Cantwell's statement on the Iraq resolution (10/02/2002): http://cantwell.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=243342&

Obviously, Cantwell absorbed a good deal of the disinformation and outright lies of the neo-fascist elements of the US. Yet, her words are measured and clearly her position is in serious conflict with the plans and actions of the neo-fascist right.

"This is a troubling scenario, and if the Administration ultimately acts within the scope of this authorization, it must be upfront and honest with Congress and the American people in explaining what we are up against." Clearly they weren't and aren't "upfront and honest."

The good people of Washington should remind Cantwell of her own words, and ask her to act on them when the bastards are up for impeachment.

Some Senators may feel that filibustering a SC nominee--in the absence of truly glaring, outrageous, obvious red flags--is bad for the institution and bad for the country.

Moreover, some Democrats think ahead to the day when they take the Senate back from the Republicans.

filibuster directly led to the confirmation of Alito. This lie that they tell themselves that voting no for the confirmation sent some kind of "signal" to Bush is utter baloney. They failed to stand up when it mattered simply to protect their jobs. Many progressives, myself included, are taking their votes elsewhere. I am disgusted with the current set of politicians. The failure to support the filibuster and the failure to take a Murtha like stand against Bush's oil war is the bright red line where many progressives feel the Democratic "leaders" have abandoned them. Preach all you want about what is or is not politically expedient for a politician to keep their job, at this point I am simply voting for principle, and that vote will not be for any DINO.

Republicans would have used the nuclear option, and goodbye judicial fillibuster.

Being loud and strident isn't enough.

But, Karl Rove loves what you're doing. Howard Dean doesn't.

Who could'a possibly thunk it!

:sarcasm:

because she's so much weaker than other Democrats on the issues.


http://www.seattlegreens.org/archives/news/2006/01/the_case_agains.html

"This is why the Green Party of Washington State will be running and running hard for the U.S. Senate against Maria Cantwell and her Republican opponent, Mike McGavick - representing that growing majority of Americans who want to end the war in Iraq now. A campaign for the U.S. Senate is necessary not only to help rejuvenate an ailing anti-war movement, but to establish the Green Party as the electoral expression of that movement.
We need a strong statewide campaign to gain new blood and new members, while pulling back many people who have drifted from the Green Party in recent years. We need a sense of camaraderie and a common goal. We need this campaign to grab an issue that has been handed to us on a silver platter: The war in Iraq."

What about at least one PCO?

Seriously, those who attempt to advance the Green Party's agenda at the expense of the Democratic Party should leave and form their own website.

The point of my post was that Cantwell's record is progressive, the Green's are trying to make her look bad to advance their own agenda.

This thread has become a flamefest.