Daily Kos

View Story | 28 comments

  •  Honestly (0+ / 0-)

    I like Kleeb, but could deal with having Raimondo in the Senate. This is Nebraska.

    by oceanstar17 on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 06:54:27 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  If I had to choose between Raimondo and (0+ / 0-)

      Johanns I honestly don't know what I'd do.  I think I'd write in Kleeb's name.  I can't bring myself to vote for another faux Democrat, especially not this year.  I want change I can believe in.

      A vote for John McCain is a vote for war.

      by Involuntary Exile on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 06:58:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is Nebraska (0+ / 0-)

        Don't be martyrdom liberal.

        by oceanstar17 on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 07:01:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  If I vote for Raimondo I'm voting for Republican (0+ / 0-)

          What's the difference between him and Johanns?  Is it good enough just to caucus with the Democrats when, like Ben Nelson, you only vote with them 45%-55% of the time?  Sorry, but if Raimondo gets the nomination and wants my vote in the general he's going to have to earn it.  Being a rich Republican business man turned Democrat isn't good enough.

          A vote for John McCain is a vote for war.

          by Involuntary Exile on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 08:47:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  This is why being a Democrat is so frustrating (0+ / 0-)

            sometimes. The right doesn't act this way when it comes to Olympia Snowe, Lincoln Chafee, Susan Collins, and Arlen Specter. They realize that a Tom-Delay Style Republican can't win in their states, which are more liberal than most of the other constituencies that House and Senate Republicans represent.

            But I guess that you would rather have a Republican who will vote for the issues you care about 0-20% of the time. Maybe Nelson supports the Party only 55% of the time, but that is much better over how Don Stenberg and Pete Ricketts would have voted. Ricketts and Stenberg would have voted 100% of the time with the Republicans.

            In a heavily Republican state like Nebraska, where liberalism just isn't popular (at least not right now), I'd rather have a Democrat who supports the party 55% of the time than a Republican who won't support the party at all.

            by oceanstar17 on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 07:38:24 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  He won't win... (0+ / 0-)

      A choice between Raimondo and Johanns isn't a choice. It's a confirmation of all of those who say there really is no difference between Democrats and Republicans.

      Or, as I wrote in December:

      Right now, the Nebraska Democratic Party is offering us a choice between a Beltway insider who was a member of the Bush administration and one who was almost a member of the Bush administration. Between two men who switched parties for no better reason than political convenience. Between two men who, up until 40 days ago, were both running for Senate as Republicans.

      This is a false choice. A choice based on the flawed logic of partisan ideology. Understand that our problem with Raimondo isn't because he's a Republican. Or that he registered as a Democrat. It's that he has no guiding principle of what those words mean to him. If it's simply about what his party registration is, then the words "Republican" and "Democrat" become just labels. A lifelong Republican spends six months preparing for a campaign for Senate, donates tons of money to Republican Congressional candidates, the NRSC, and the Nebraska GOP, and then expects to have any credibility when he jumps ship 40 days after dropping out.

      Further Reading | New Nebraska Network

      by ptmflbcs on Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 07:04:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

View Story | 28 comments