Skip to main content

View Diary: MT-Sen: Okay, the Morrison scandal IS serious (114 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  actually (6+ / 0-)

    Republicans contested almost every primary in 2004 and won every race. the primaries built their name ID, kept them in the news, and gave them the aura of "winner" when they won. Our "cleared field" Dems were almost invicible against the drama of nasty contested fights on the Republican side.

    I want to see a contested primary in EVERY race.

    •  Good argument but... (0+ / 0-)

      ...weren't these sham contests with the overwhelming weight of party money behind one of the contenders?

      I'm asking; I don't know.

      BTW, you surely meant the 2004 Dems were not invincible, yes?

      I have seen examples from years ago when contested primaries were helpful. In 1980 in the Calif. Assembly races, two liberals, Berman (now a congressman) and McCarthy both wanted the speakership. Nearly every primary was contested while the GOP chortled. However, in the general election, each would-be speaker got behind his man (or, in my case, woman) and buried the Reps.

      Most of the posters are younger than I, and I am absolutely prepared to learn from them. Nevertheless, I managed and won 30 campaigns out of 39 "back in the day," and I am offering sincere and carefully-reasoned comment here.

      I am unquestionably a bit out of touch; if what you say about 2004 is factually correct, then I'll concede your point. But I have a hard time believing that Bradley's tepid support for Gore, for example, contrasted with McCain's enthusiasm for Bush, was not a signicant factor in that election. In my experience, contested primaries waste money and leave a bitter residue.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site