Skip to main content

View Diary: Abbreviated pundit roundup: Cory Booker, unshared productivity, GOP-imposed gridlock (71 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  would you rather have steve lonegan? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    commonmass, wintergreen8694

    Just saying.  Look at the policies and the record ... we would be foolish not to support cory booker.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Riane Eisler

    by noofsh on Mon Aug 26, 2013 at 05:17:51 AM PDT

    •  Which is precisely the problem. (10+ / 0-)

      Progressives seem to be stuck with the "who will you support?" conundrum. So we support centrists or even centre-right candidates because we'd rather settle. We really don't have a choice, and politicians know it, and more importantly, Wall Street knows it.

      Hey. I'm supporting Mike Michaud (D-ME 02), a blue dog for Governor of Maine next year. But not because I agree with Mike on all the issues, or even think he'll be a good governor (he'll be a mediocre one, he's a much better legislator, talent-wise) but because he's not Paul LePage (R-Tea Party). But if I live in his district, I'd primary him myself. (I'd lose.)

      I resent that. I demand snark, and overly so -- Markos Moulitsas.

      by commonmass on Mon Aug 26, 2013 at 05:22:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh just stop it (10+ / 0-)

      New Jersey is a blue state. We can and should be doing better than this corrupt machine hack who is in bed with Christie and Wall Street. I would understand Booker better if we were a purple state and needed someone like him to have a chance of holding the seat. As it is, either Pallone or Holt would have been miles better. Both are the same on social issues, but much better on economic ones.

      I won't be voting for Lonegan, but I certainly won't be complicit in putting the "guaranteed" Booker into the Senate. He doesn't need my vote, which is good, because he won't be getting it.

      If Lonegan had half a chance, I'd consider voting for Booker, but as it is, screw Booker and screw the corrupt, know-nothing party machine that forced him onto us.

      Don't forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor. - John Dickinson ("1776")

      by banjolele on Mon Aug 26, 2013 at 05:29:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The Corporatist DLC wing of the Democratic (8+ / 0-)

      Party - ie, most of the "mainstream" candidates and elected officials who are supported by Wall Street, the Military-Industrial Complex, the anti-safety-netters, and the privatizers of everything - wants people to think that way.

      So, each election cycle, our party moves further and further to the right.

      Because we fall for it every time.

      I really don't know what the solution is, because I am guilty too - just as commonmass posted above me. For example, I will be supporting Sen. Kay Hagan for reelection in 2014. She's as blew a blew dawg as you can get, but what's the alternative? The speaker of the house in one of North Carolina's most extreme rightwing, nay, fascist legislatures in the state's history?

      I'll settle for Hagan. Just as Garden Staters will - hopefully - settle for Booker.

      But the whole exercise smacks of "please, sir, I want some more" - more screwing by the corporo-fascist entity the Democratic Party has morphed into.

      "Bernie Madoff's mistake was stealing from the rich. If he'd stolen from the poor he'd have a cabinet position." -OPOL

      by blue in NC on Mon Aug 26, 2013 at 05:31:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site