Kos Endorses a Republican

While Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Minority Leader John Boehner clearly haven't figured out yet how to work together, left-wing blogger Markos Moulitsas and NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions just as clearly have.

How else to explain Moulitsas' endorsement of Sessions' favored candidate for Congress in the special election in New York's 23rd Congressional District?

Yes, that's the district newly confirmed Secretary of the Army John McHugh just vacated, where the anointed Republican candidate -- New York Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava -- has been the subject of local and national conservative scorn.

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/in_the_right/2009/10/kos-endorses-a-republican.html

This will make the Right-wingers hate Scoza-whatever-her-weird-name-is, driving more of them to vote for the Conservative candidate so the Democrat wins.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/10/1/788504/-NY-23:-The-most-liberal-candidate-leads-%28and-its-not-the-Dem%29

"The "Democrat" isn't even a Democrat -- he was a registered independent when selected by the district's Democratic county chairs for the special election. On social issues, he's pro-choice, but opposes gay marriage. On health care, he opposes a public option but doesn't have the balls to say so, so he talks all squishy like claiming he has no "litmus test" on the issue. He's a Lieberdem Blue Dog, and would strengthen the part of the Democratic caucus that is actually the problem, rather than the solution.

So who to root for? A Blue Dog who would strengthen the Democrats' corporatist faction, or a Republican version of a Lieberdem, who will probably be muzzled, but could -- if she remained true to her record in Albany -- be more of a Susan Collins-type Republican, a moderate in an ideologically rigid party willing to give the Dems fake "bipartisan" cover with crossover votes every once in a while.

If Republicans lose the seat, it'll dent that sense of momentum they believe is headed their way. If they win the seat, it will have been with a liberal Republican, suggesting that their path to electoral relevance in the northeast is to ditch the Southern-fueled ultra conservatism. Both are good for us.

If the Democrat loses the race, we lose nothing -- it was previously held by a Republican. If he wins the seat, we gain another obnoxious Blue Dog, undermining our caucus from within while adding just a single vote to our already dominant House majorities. Furthermore, the typical DC wankers will take this as "proof" that you need to run Lieberdems in such districts to win them, while ignoring the fragmented conservative opposition. Not much of an advantage at all. More than likely, a net disadvantage.

So it's official, I'm rooting for the Republican to win. As a congresswoman, she could either move even more to the left to properly represent her progressive-trending district and be a pain in the side of the GOP caucus (they have nothing like our Blue Dogs), or Democrats can field a real Democrat to challenge her in 2010."



EDIT: Ah - he's a plain 'ol conservative (so the former alternative obtains). Why are DUers posting their crap?

Voting for a Democrat is not good enough, as we have seen with Baucus & company.

Kos is making a great deal of assumptions there, how do we know that she will move to the left and not to the right?

I think she would vote with the repugs more than the dems. Look at the other repug moderate sen.snowe she votes with the repugs more than blue dogs.

A lot of issues are standard party politics, even in the Senate. So the votes on these issues really do no count. Where it counts are on issues that the Democratic Party strobgly believed it was campaigning for last year, real health reform, tax reform (eg make work pay), ending the shame of Gitmo and jobs. On all of those major areas of policy, blue dawgs have let the people and Party down.

In addition to little things like being against gay marriage and not supporting a public option.

If they're going to give us crap candidates that we know ahead of time, fuck them.

You always want more Democrats - always. Unless they're truly corrupt. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe have done way more damage to the poor in this country than Blanche Lincoln could ever dream of.

Many Republican candidates were once Democrats but figured they couldnt win the Democratic nomination in crowded fields so they switched party in name only. Bloomberg is one such example. Many "Republicans" are really Democrats who hold positions like pro-gay rights, pro gun-control, pro infrastructure, pro public option/healthcare reform etc.

How refreshing.

so I won't say which candidate I support.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bill_Pascoe

"Bill Pascoe
From SourceWatch

William W. "Bill" Pascoe III of Urquhart Media, LLC is a Republican strategist. <1>

Quotes

Regarding U.S. presidential election, 2008, on October 10, 2005, Dick Polman reported in the Philadelphia Inquirer:

"Bill Pascoe, a conservative strategist in Chicago, said Friday: 'Many conservatives believe that President Bush gave up leadership of the movement" with the nomination of Harriet E. Miers to the Supreme Court. "They're disappointed that he shied away from a fight that would have united Republicans and divided Democrats...

"'We wanted a conservative with a track record. We've heard that 'trust me' line many times before. What all this means, for 2008, is that will be more determined to look for a presidential candidate with a conservative track record, somebody with the ability to deliver proven conservative governance.'"


Profiles

According to his Urquhart Media bio, "William W. Pascoe, III has been a professional political and communications operative for 25 years, ever since his first job working for Ronald Reagan’s 1980 presidential campaign. Since then he was worked on or managed dozens of campaigns, at all levels of government, from President, Governor, and U.S. Senator to candidates for state legislature, county board, and city council. Leading international corporations, such as Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, have sought his communications counsel. Mr. Pascoe is a former newspaper columnist and nationally syndicated political radio talk show host, acknowledged for his crisis communications skills and his insights into media management. He is a graduate of the University of Virginia, where he received his B.A. and M.A. in 1982 and 1984, respectively."

Affiliations

* 2006: contracted with Tony Peraica for Cook County President campaign <2>
* 2004: campaign manager for Alan Keyes in his Illinois run against Barack Obama and, with Dan Proft, "one time campaign counsel" to U.S. Senate candidate Jack Ryan. <3> <4>
* 2002: identified as a "Republican political consultant in New Jersey" who "served as Bret Schundler’s campaign manager during his campaign for governor." Pascoe was Doug Forrester's "campaign manager in the 2002 U.S. Senate race." <5>
* 1997/1998: political director of the American Conservative Union <6><7> "

I have investigated the candidates in the above referenced case and it is not the usual race.

If he's more liberal than any other party of either party, then I don't see a problem with endorsing him. Where's the context?

The only other issue I can of is that she has voted for tax hikes in the past when it was needed to balance the state's budget, so she's a realist on budgeting, but not necessary a liberal.

Her first ad she has up is trying to make herself sound like what the antitax club for growth loves, a fiscal conservative against new taxes (the club for growth has already aired ads against her and the democrat). In my opinion she's making a mistake by trying to talk like a republican to take away support from the conservative candidate Hoffman. This is only an R+1 district, not an R+20 district.

As a NY23 resident, I'm still up in the air. That WFP endorsement carries a lot of weight, though, as does her support for gay rights.

Oswego "Not that it really matters since I'm moving back to Canada" Atheist

She can be moderate on many issues, but that doesn't mean she still won't align herself with the crazy wing of the party on many other issues or just flip the script completely.

How idiotic.

bipartisanship is and then turns around and endorses a fucking Republican.

I don't give a shit how bad the "Democrat" is, they're still better than a Republican, because they give us a majority. Electing Republicans will give the Republicans a majority and they'll spend all of their time investigating the Democrats. Remember the 1990s?

Do you know anything about where he stands?

out of the 3 choices, there is not one Democrat on the ballot.

Is coming to pass. Democrats are falling apart......Republicans cannot be trusted. Millions will just stay home in November 2009 and November 2011, instead of believe again in the ability to "Change". Not looking good at all.

because the elections are in November 2010 and November 2012.

:think: No wait you're right Republicans will dominate in 2009 and 2011! Make sure they know that's when the elections are!

As Kelleher openly supported single-payer health care and was far to the left of Baucus on almost every issue.

Yet, he was a Republican, and so support for him here was verboten.

I'm sure Kelleher wouldn't be trying to pass some watered-down insurance company giveaway right now.

In my opinion, DU should make exceptions for when the Democrat is obviously more of a conservative/DINO than his opponent.

and while the republicans are good at voting in lockstep, the democrats clearly are not. imo, the way to fix the Baucus problem would be to keep these red state Dem's off committees important to the democratic agenda.

Based on his platform, Kelleher would've been a much more solid progressive vote than Baucus.

His win in the Republican primary was an upset, as nobody really expected him to win.

Kelleher was certainly not your usual Republican, and it's doubtful that such a colorful 86-year old perennial candidate would vote lockstep with the Republican party.

On the other hand, what's the point in getting all the "right" votes for leaders and committee chairs if nothing worthwhile gets passed?

It's certainly something to think about, and I'd like to see DU draw a line in the sand and stand up for progressive ideas.

Weird.