The Blue Dogs' disconnect: Listening to people who will never vote for them anyway
By David Neiwert Wednesday Aug 05, 2009 8:00am
CNN's John King went out to Idaho's Benewah County last week -- which is a fairly typical logging area which lies within Rep. Walt Minnick's district -- and produced an interesting report that ran last weekend. It was especially interesting if you know this country, which I do. (Sorry, John, St. Maries is in northern Idaho, not western Idaho.)
It largely was a sympathetic report exploring the kinds of pressures a Blue Dog Democrat like Minnick faces in trying to represent a largely conservative constituency -- particularly on an explosive issue like health-care reform.
But it also revealed, I think, the flaw in the kind of thinking employed by Blue Dogs like Minnick when confronted with tough issues like health care. Rather than represent the people who actually campaigned for them and put them into office, they kowtow to what are perceived to be the majority conservative sentiments in their district and vote the Republican line.
In other words, they're trying to solidify their positions by selling out the very people who elected them, while pursuing the votes of people who will never vote for them.
The main report featured some quips from a threesome of Idahoans who sat down with King at a cafe in St. Maries, including a belligerent NRA type named Don Griesel, who explained to King that even though Minnick was voting his way, there was no way he would ever vote for him:
Griesel: If he doesn't change his party, there's no way I can vote Democrat. Because like right now they have control of the House and all, and that's what's killing America.
King did a separate segment featuring just his interview with these three, and it was actually rather good, because he managed to obtain three people who probably well represented the three main socio-political factions in the district: the thoughtful, common-sense Democrat who ardently supports health-care reform; the middle-of-the-road, mostly suburban Republican; and the bellicose, Limbaugh/Beck-loving gun nut/government hater.
Griesel even openly admits in this clip that the Blue Dogs are the only thing saving hard-core right-wingers like himself in the fight against health-care reform -- even though he'll never for them.
Perhaps more impressive, in a positive way, is Patricia Bauer, the psychologist and health-care professional who is like so many other Idaho Democrats I know: self-possessed, assured in her own good common sense, and dismayed at watching Walt Minnick betray her and the people like her who worked to elect him.
And indeed, Randy Stapilus at Ridenbaugh Press observes that Minnick so far is voting more conservatively even than most Republicans:
But here’s the stunner: The most “conservative” member of the Northwest delegation turns out not to be a Republican at all, not Idaho’s Mike Simpson (281.0) or Washington’s Dave Reichert (263.0), Doc Hastings (312.0) or Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (341.5).
Rather, it is the only Democrat in the House to score more conservative than the “least conservative” Republican - Idaho’s Walt Minnick, at 359.5, which puts him just about in the middle of the House Republican caucus, and more “conservative” than, for example, Simpson. No other Democrat or Republican scores across the line at all.
You get the feeling, watching people like Patricia Bauer, that a lot of these Blue Dogs, by pursuing this kind of "bipartisanship," are leaving behind the very people who put them into office while pursuing the chimera of conservative votes. Which means that come the next election, they'll find a lot of their old organization having peeled away lots of its original support and picking up very little new. Lots of luck with that: You won't be able to count on a pathetic Republican opponent like Bill Sali every election.
Login or Register to post comments.
The Corporate Party,
with two factions:
the right wing, and the ultra right wing.
The subset is:
Peons for Aristocrats, it works in both factions. Think about it.
Now look just who people are blaming for this Bush/Cheney economy and and country's destruction.....DEMOCRATS>>>>>
This is what the democrats get ,,, by saying they are going to move forward and not prosecute the criminal crimes of the Bush/Cheney administration , not looking back...
Just how many democrats are involved in the Bush/Cheney's criminal actions from the prior 8 years , which they are trying to protect.... Or is Cheney/Bush hit squads still on the loose targeting persons and their family which try to bring up their crimes and deceit..
Ever wonder if Obama really has a say in the policies which are being shoved down our throats...
Just why are the democrats so d... quick and anxious to censor all information and stop all investigations into the crimes and corruption from the Bush/Cheney administration;
which has brought our country to it's knees, while destroying our constitution , bill of rights and our economy...
...to lump all dems into your argument. This is Obama not wanting to pursue prosecution. If he wanted it, it would happen. There are many dems who would love to pursue criminal charges agains Bushco.
That says he would not vote for a liberal.
How do these people become so ignorant?
Were they just born batshit crazy?
republicanism is a mental illness!
...evidence that in fact, they are born to be this way. Thom Hartmann had an interesting segment on one of his shows about it and I believe he may have written about it too.
Essentially, people think like this guy because when they were in the womb, their mothers were not secure about themselves. Whether that would be because of a threat of being beaten or fiscal insecurity or whatever, I'm not sure. The end result though, is that because of that insecurity, the fetus' brain develops differently. Their "lizard brain" (since I don't know the correct anatomical name for it) develops more than their "higher thinking" brain (again, sorry for my ignorance).
This makes them more likely to subscribe to the right wing crazies message of; "if I can take care of myself, everyone else in the world should be able to".
take care of themselves.
You threaten to take away their Medicare or Social Security and they'll go batshit crazy on that.
I'm a nature-nurture kind of person and most of these people seem like the kind that go to church on a regular basis. They go sit in the pew, take whatever information is given them and do nothing to process it or try to understand it.
It's sheep mentality. They can't think for themselves and the very prospect of thinking scares them.
...with you. It actually makes the point that their brains aren't formed to deal with change, even when it is to their benefit. It's the only thing that would explain how easily they're duped by the reich wing into voting against their own self interest.
What I find even stranger is that when people like fat boy tells them that its the liberals that blindly follow their leaders, these people then go "Ditto's Rush" and then try to claim that they are not just agreeing with everything fat boy tells them to believe. They insist that their use of the word 'ditto' is opposite of the actual definition of the word.
They actually think they are the free thinkers with common sense.
...over developed lizard brain is not being able to tolerate criticism.
I would add to that the habit of projecting their own bad behavior upon others as well, Fat boy has mastered that technique and taught it to all of his acolytes.
I have a friend that has lost a leg, and can't work. Her husband is collecting Unemployment.
They are walking NRA billboards and are active at all Tea party's in our area. They keep E mailing me all of the GOP talking points that circulate thru the Emails. I have often wondered why they can't see the forest from the trees.
From now on I will understand it's due to their lizard brains. Finally it makes sense.
Speaking of Thom Hartmann's show, a self proclaimed conservative called into his show to argue why we don't need health care reform. Thom asked if he was currently covered. The guy admitted that he was on a state run health insurance plan. Thom fired back, "oh, so you're on a socialized healthcare plan!". The caller went on to attempt to argue that we don't need socialized medicine because there are already options out there. In essence, the guy was arguing screw everybody else, I found my coverage, everyone else can just piss up a rope for all I care. The caller didn't even realize his hypocrisy.
It's not about pleasing people that will never vote for him. It's about pleasing the insurance lobbyists that are bribing him. We need to get it through our heads that the ONLY reason they don't back universal healthcare is because they are bribed.
correct!
I mean, call a spade a spade.
as any successful politician has the skill to convince others. Minnick could have used reality-based fiscal logic, such as healthy workers pay more in taxes than unhealthy, incapacitated workers to not only tow the Dem Party line, but to also help his constituents. Minnick has no ethical or morally based rationale to rest on. So, follow the money.
I wrote a dooky-load of emails yesterday about the pr and lobby groups for medical and insurance industries and their attempts to disrupt meetings on health care.
I send out pretty much the same letter, but to nancy pelosi I suggested removing Blue Dogs from committees, and endorsing whoever runs against them in their own party primaries.
Call them. It is much better.
Senate
House
My representative is pete session, and my senators are hutchison and cornyn.
My congressman is George Miller, and one of my senators is Barbara Boxer.
The other one is Dianne Feinstein.
Harvey Milk might have been your senior senator
Michelle Bachmanns district, then David Driers, now Ginny Brown Waites, I sure know how to pick 'em
I have Bingaman, Udall for senators and Martin Heinrich for rep.
So far they have been okay vote wise and so-so as far as the rest.
Rep. Mike Thompson (D)
Pelosi (D)
Fienstein (R)
...Tammy Baldwin.
Kohl is iffy at times but generally pretty good. Feingold and Baldwin are both solid progressives.
Thank you for expressing your views on reforming America 's health care and health insurance system. It is important for me to have the benefit of your views, and I appreciate you taking the time to contact me.
I have received thousands of letters and emails from constituents commenting on the health care reform legislation that is currently the subject of great debate in Washington and all around the country. Many of you have urged me to support the legislation, and many of you have urged me to reject it. I write now to all of you with an update as I return to Long Island for the August district work period.
Congress has been working toward health care reform for several years. In fact, the House of Representatives alone has convened 79 official hearings on this issue over just the last two years. Still, after participating in the Education and Labor Committee's consideration of part of this reform bill, and after studying the proposed legislation pending in this session, I believe that more time for public review of this complicated and far-reaching legislation is needed.
Accordingly, I wrote a letter urging Speaker Nancy Pelosi to postpone a vote on the bill. I am pleased that the Speaker agreed and that the House of Representatives will continue debating the issue this fall.
My view is that health care reform must guarantee you and your loved ones stable, affordable health coverage through life's ups and downs. Regrettably, our current system does not afford this type of security, one of the principle reasons I consider reform to be so vital. I also support reform that closes the prescription drug "donut hole" and adjusts the sustainable growth rate, allowing doctors to continue seeing Medicare patients. We need a uniquely American solution that builds on the best of what already works to foster competition among insurance plans and provide patients with quality choices. The current bill before the House of Representatives has the support of both the AARP and the American Medical Association, our nation's largest groups representing seniors and doctors.
The inclusion of a public insurance plan as an option is one of the more controversial, and misunderstood, parts of the current debate. As currently envisioned, the public option would be self-sustaining through premium payments and incur no cost to taxpayers once start-up costs are repaid to the Treasury with interest. Also, the public plan would negotiate with health care providers on a level playing field with private insurers, and its range of premiums would be designated by the Health Insurance Exchange according to local market rates, just as they would be for private insurers. I believe competition among private plans and the public option will expand the availability of affordable coverage and help contain costs.
The public plan will not push private plans out of existence, nor is it intended to do so. A new study by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the public plan will enroll 11 to 12 million Americans including individual and employee-sponsored coverage. I intend to enroll in the public option should it be established. The public should be confident that any public option good enough for the American people is good enough for Members of Congress and their families.
Competition among private plans and the public option will expand the availability of affordable coverage to more Americans and help contain costs. Furthermore, the new public option will not interfere with the delivery of other government-operated health care benefits such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Veterans Administration Health. In addition, people in America illegally will not receive health care benefits and there is no mandate in any version of the reform legislation for abortion coverage.
The case for the necessity for reform is perhaps best made by the USA Today editorial "Dishonest Debate Mars Bid to Overhaul Health Care" published on July 31st:
Escalating health care costs are making insurance unaffordable and threatening to bankrupt the Treasury. Millions of Americans have no insurance and get their health care at hospital emergency rooms, a fantastically inefficient form of treatment that raises costs for everyone else. Many people who could afford coverage can't get it because of pre-existing health conditions. And, appallingly, thousands with insurance find that when they do get sick, their insurer finds a reason to cancel coverage.
This is the status quo that must change. This is the status quo that those who oppose reform would continue to tolerate. Surely we can do better. All Americans deserve coverage they can count on, coverage that is stable and secure. I am confident that if we can set aside the divisive, inflammatory rhetoric that has sadly dominated debate thus far, we can achieve this most desirable of outcomes.
I encourage you to visit my website at timbishop.house.gov where I will post updated information on health care myths and facts as well as the actual text of the legislation currently being debated. Once again, I thank you for your comments and ask for your continued input.
Sincerely,
Tim Bishop
Member of Congress
Personally, I wouldn't mind abortion covered if Viagra is and conversely, if abortion isn't, then viagra, vascetomies, etc. shouldn't be either! But overall, I liked the letter and feel good about his support of the Public Option.
What is being "killed" about America with Obama in office? Do they just open their mouth and throw up shit they've heard Rush say?
I don't get it? Maybe I am not dumb enough????
Why do they think their guns are being taken away? Why do they think "Obama = Hitler" it makes NO FUCKING SENSE....
SOMEONE PLEASE STOP THE MADNESS....lol
... all us DFH's just wanna go on unemployment and get healthcare on their hard-earned dollars.
And, dammit, they LIKE the shit-ass healthcare they already have!
"And, dammit, they LIKE the shit-ass healthcare they already have!"
Wait 'til they get sick, they'll change their tune when they have to pay what the ins. co. doesn't cover.
I know someone who has recently filed for bankruptcy 'cuz his "good" insurance wouldn't pay for an unexpected injury to his person.
Another friend filed because his daughter had a car accident and wasn't covered for some internal injuries she suffered. DENIED.
LOL. Wait till they sick! LOL
Take a look at healthcare in the red"neck" states. They suck out more social services. They have historically higher levels of "permanently unemployed", large percentages are on publicly assisted healthcare (MedicAID not Medicare, because they meet the financial qualifications for aid).
These imbeciles don't understand what's even being discussed. They get their gubmint checks, and overlook the fact that they are on the government dole (cognitive dissonance my friends...cognitive dissonance...remember, these are poor whites...in "conservative" areas...they don't GO on WELFARE...oh..no no no...they're not poooor).
Bloated bastards like the guy here has probably been denied private healthcare because he is physical trainwreck.
Like joe the "plumber" the confuse unemployment compensation with welfare, and feel entitled to the monies.
..these are the same people who enjoyed living under the W dictatorship and want to return to that destructive era.
They like authoritarianism. As someone mentioned previously, they are children. Most of these folks are uneducated and honestly, with all respect, so simple that they simply cannot operate at an adult level in the modern world.
And it really makes the GOP approach so reprehensible.
These folks are being genuuinely frightened.
To any of my very civil attempts at communicating my concerns about his voting, tells me all I need to know about him. He does not care 1 whit about any of us. He is only concerned with his position in life. He has routinely sold out all of us in his pursuit of the everlasting house seat.
For the first time in my life, I am going to vote for a Republican when Minnick comes up for reelection. I'd rather have the enemy outside the gates than inside.
I am in the same position as a disappointed Idaho Democrat. Worse than a Republican in the seat is a Democrat who uses the misleading rhetoric of the Republicans. Look at Minnick's confused webpage on health care reform and you see him equating everything other than private insurance to that evil bugaboo of "socialized medicine."
Horribly confused thinking. I'll be voting Republican and then going on a cleansing fast.
..anyone just not the Republican. I know, you may not have that option and I feel your pain!
...write in, or not voting at all. As distasteful as not voting is to me, it would be better than voting for a rethug.
...lives in that county. But I don't think he votes. Shame. He's very progressive in his personal life.
...reason we have so many rethugs left in congress. I also know people who are progressive thinkers but refuse to vote for someone if they don't fit their mold perfectly.
I don't like the lesser of two evils either, but if we don't vote, we end up with pure evil.
You know, if Sheila Sorensen made another run at it and won the Republican primary, I'd happily vote for her over Minnick. But if it's Sali or an equivalent...I just couldn't do it. Maybe I'd just abstain.
None of these seperation of powers, anti monolithic control people had anything to complain about when Republicans controlled the House, the Senate, the White House and seven out of nine SCOTUS justices...
In other words, they're trying to solidify their positions by selling out the very people who elected them, while pursuing the votes of people who will never vote for them.
... that has turned the media into a pile of shit.
That, having been elected through the support of progressives, you have to now court the regressives who have done nothing but hurl insults at your racial heritage, your patriotism, and infer irregularities about your birth.
My. Ass.
It's like saying now that you've built this amazing house, you have to invite the cockroaches, ants, fleas, and termites in out of fairness.
Minnick didn't win BECAUSE of progressives, he won largely because the Repub incumbent had been involved in some big time scandals. It was one of those fortuitous "screw you" reactions that occurred in the aftermath of Jack Abramoff. And Minnick didn't run as a progressive either.
The only way progressives will be able to "elect" someone who is progressive is to build up their own solid voting block in the district. Or, in some states, by being able to seize on demographic changes in the district. So, get out there, register young people, talk to the "moderates", get them on board.
Then you can elect a Rep who will be beholden to you and representative of you.
Seems like he won a very, very tight race (50.6 vs. 49.4) against a corrupt GOPer (almost reduncant, that). Since he's not going to win over the anti-Dems and seems bent on losing the progressives, he seems destined to fail unless he can shift a lot of the swing vote.
Here is how the share prices of three major insurance companies (Cigna, United Healthcare Group, Aetna) responded on Tuesday, July 28 to the Monday night announcement that the group of six senators is going to eliminate the public option from their version of the health care reform legislation [graph produced using Yahoo Finance]. We have basically an 8-10 percent gain for these companies from the Senate announcement. And as the graph below shows, the S&P 500 index (yellow) was essentially flat. The market caps of these three companies together are around $53 billion, which suggests a $4-5 billion value from the announcement by the group of 6.
http://baselinescenario.com/2009/07/31/the-va...
You just explained the recent rise in the stock market over the last month (all through the healtcare debate and correlates to the rise and fall surrounding the dicussion of a public option), and also why the rise is unsustainable.
To paraphrase a line from The Day The Earth Stood Still..."watch the market".
If you see a large drop, you will likely see a fall in insurance stocks. If so, that means the votes are there to pass a public option and that the insiders are gettin' out.
Lincoln and Pryor.
Both are toeing with the conservatives that never elected them or would elect them.
Lincoln is getting too much money from insurance co-ops to really give a damn about the average Arkansan.
They probably figure that with the extra money they can get from the insurance companies they can buy ads to bamboozle enough independent voters to compensate for any losses from ticked off voters. Especially as the GOPers are likely to nominate a neaderthal making these DINOs look almost moderate in comparison.
We have to remember ...he does represent the people of his district. He may have a "d" after his name, but he really is a repuke in democratic skin. Nice that he has the "d", but it doesn't mean a whole lot when it comes down to it...unless he wants to go against his constituents and do what is right for the country. Of course, it will cost him his seat next time around most likely.
This is a unique situation....just like bachmann, of Minnesota, is a unique situation. There, she represents her wealthy pocket of repukes. Only problem with her is she's an absolute nut cake. But, that represents her district....right wing nut cakes.
Except when he states that "like most Idahoans I oppose "socialized medicine," so our health care system of insurance must be private" he isn't representing anyone but the most confused - those who want government to keep their hands of their medicare. Playing to the stupidest of your constituents instead of educating them on the many government run programs that Idahoans do support, such as the VA, medicare, medicaid, state immunization programs, is pandering at its worst. let the Republicans do that, and get rid of Minnick.
This is no revelation. When you have a Dem elected in a solidly red district, and this election was based largely not on any political ideology but as a reaction against the misdeeds of the Republican incumbent - as was the case with Minnick, there's very little chance that the Dem incumbent is going to be reelected.
Unless the GOP doesn't come with anyone to run against him. But that rarely is the case.
This can happen on the other too, of course, since it's basically just a political reality. Such as is the case with the Republican who won Jefferson's district in New Orleans. Chances are he's a one termer too...unless the Dems screw up again with a lousy candidate.
So, this is why in fact the majority party usually loses seats in midterm elections. And why it's inevitably freshmen or sophomores who do down to defeat.
Conclusion? If Minnick is voting strictly to try and please Republicans in his district, he's playing a loser's game. Or, put otherwise, if you're going to be in Congress for 2 years, vote your conscience.
"People who will never vote for them anyway."
That's the odd paradox of the so-called centrists, the righties who pretend to be lefties who adopt a political philosophy that's sure to alienate EVERYBODY. The only sense I can see in it is that they intend to get in, do their damage, then quickly get out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5JALwwaASg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLbeAdpzy8Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E4buHZObMc&fe...
Tom Hanks as Charlie Wilson:
"Ahm not elected by mah constituents. Ahm elected bah mah donahs."
Were not democrats. There aren't enough here to get that done. It was everyone who was sick of his predecessor Bill Sali (who was a complete idiot). If Minnick wants to stay in office in Idaho, you have to pander to the right.
True, and he is doing it successfully, based on his fundraising reports and so far weak opponents.
I suspect he will win re-election since the Republicans seem to have fallen into a pattern of running people too extreme even for this very conservative state.
He just won't have my support.
I live in Idaho and did some informal polling of the Minnick-Sali race as a volunteer for another campaign. Many self-identified Republicans told me they simply couldn't vote for Sali. Anyone with half a brain recognizes that Sali is corrupt and has the intellectual and emotional maturity level of a ten year old. So, I'm sure that the Repubs will have no trouble running someone against Minnick next time. The power of the letter -R- here is frightening.
Idaho = Dumbassistan North
How Hate Talk Radicalized the American Right
Perhaps the most disturbing fact of this trend is precisely that mainstream conservatives—button-down types who bridle at the first hint of liberal incivility—seem to have developed an extraordinary, boiled-frog kind of tolerance for the increasing ugliness of their own movement. They can produce reams of ponderous rationalizations for behavior and speech that is simply inexcusable.
These same mainstream conservatives used to be one of the key bulwarks against any kind of fascist impulse in America. Part of our political bloodstream for over a century, such impulses could never find the political space to take root because, in large part, ordinary conservatives had little in common with them. In the span of the past decade, this has increasingly ceased to be the case.
I've observed this shift through firsthand experience. I grew up in a conservative family in a conservative state—Idaho—and have lasting familial and friendship ties to many right-leaning folks. More importantly, perhaps, I also worked as a journalist in northern Idaho at a time when white supremacists, most famously the Aryan Nations at Hayden Lake, began making it their home.
These people—with their Hitler worship, their swastikas, and their hatred of Jews and blacks—were genuine fascists, and their “Patriot” associates were genuine proto-fascists; that is, they represented a seedbed for nascent fascism, with all of the necessary traits in germinative form. In the course of my work, conducting interviews and exploring these people’s motives and beliefs, I got to know many of them and came to be deeply familiar with their milieu and their value systems. In the process, I was disabused of many of the stereotypes surrounding them.
--David Neiwert (INTRODUCTION p. 26 & 27)
Recreated using PaperPort version 11.1 (11.1.0.300)
"Regan too liberal" ......... what a nutter .........
"Came from British parents" "Government take over .... heath care" Socialised Socialised Socialised Socialised ........
Dam, I've yet to see someone from the US actually know what socialised means, let alone the real meaning of libertarian !
Shit...I'd be amazed if they could SPELL socialism.
Is Benewah County where they make:
http://www.sitetheme.com/Sites/413/ClientPix/...
?
Never mind :-/
I live in Latah county and work at the University of Idaho. Benewah county is the next county north and my wife is from St. Maries. Sadly, in that logging/mining community being a democrat or a liberal can get you harassed. Then again you are looking at a county of about 3,000 people, centered around the mill. If the struggling mill goes, the county goes too.
I saw that segment on Sunday and recognized Griesel as a "brother" to the hundreds, if not thousands, of people who live where I do in the lowcountry of SC, where we are blessed/cursed to have no representation with even a tinge of blue. Jim DeMint, Lindsay Graham, A. Joe Wilson. OMG!
Every day on our local blogs and in an anonymous call-in column and even in signed letters to the editor, depressing ignorance such as Griesel's is on display. They are the people who say things as stupid as "keep the government away from my Medicare" or "the illegals will benefit if our health care is socialized." Of course, every day we also have raffles and bake sales and golf tournaments and auctions to raise money for people, some of them children, who need surgery or something medical.
Some days I just can't take it. I'm 69 years old and am grateful for Medicare and wish that everyone had the same options that I do and that members of Congress do. The blue dogs may have some decent ideas about fiscal responsibility, but voting against radical health care reform is just a despicable way of keeping their own employment and thus their own health insurance, and I believe it's true that they are pandering to people, like Griesel, who will never vote for them anyway because they are of the some party as that awful "librul" Barack Obama. Great God Almighty!
However, I applaud the other two at the table that morning. They were sensible and polite, and I would have found that very difficult.
...part of your post peachblossom. Blue Dogs do not have any ideas about fiscal responsibility. Check how they have voted for funding two illegal wars and other wasteful spending during the Bushco years. They are pandering and nothing else. In fact, it WOULD be fiscally responsible to enact a single payer system as it would save American $billions in overpayments to insurance companies.
If they were fiscally responsible, they would be trying to see how much we could save just by slashing defense spending. It's only the progressives that even talk about doing that.
Because of the homos and the muslims, you know.
or any Idaho democrats who elected him. Contrary to what the restaurant owner says in the end, Minnick does NOT represent his constituents. He is a Democrat in name only.
Yep, the Blue Dogs should be called the DINO's.
Larry Craig's old senate seat in about six years. The House isn't a goal for him but a waystation. He's in a hurry because in the past six years the Idaho Democratic Party vote jumped from 25% to 38%. Ada county and other southern Idaho areas are rapidly filling up with Latino voters and by the time Minnick is ready The Idaho Democrats very well might have over 50% of the voters. I would expect that Minnick will then miraculously turn into a democrat that we will be proud to take home to dinner.
Crazy as it sounds, I don't think the dogs really care about capturing the votes of the wingers. They are simply mouthing the talking points that their big contributers want them to promote. By doing so, they can keep that campaign money coming in, which they don't dare risk losing. They can continue to win elections by spending money on campaigns, no matter what their voting record is. They don't care about responding to the needs of the public. They're not foolish - they know the wingers won't vote for them, and they don't care. They don't care what other voters think either, and they'll continue to take the more liberal voters for granted, play both sides of issues, and make excuses. As long as they have the money to manipulate elections, they feel safe. It's about money. The rest is political theatrics.
Login or Register to post comments.