Skip to main content

View Diary: MS-Sen: Wicker (R) pulls ahead (99 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Musgrove is no Democrat (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    simca, dotcommodity

    A democratic majority or not, this man is not supportive of a woman's right to choose, is anti-LGBT rights and is a not a fan of the separation of church and state.  He is no democrat, he is no progressive.  My understanding of our goal is to elect small (d) democrats not republicans running as democrats. I am truly disappointed.

    I know I will be bashed and bullied, but I have fought too hard my entire life for my rights to even consider supporting any candidate that holds the views that Musgrove does.  A vote for him is a vote against women and your LGBT brothers and sisters.

    -----------------------------
    In August 2003, Musgrove sent an invitation via state letterhead to display judge Roy Moore's unconstitutional - as ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court - Ten Commandments monument in the Mississippi State Capitol for a week in September. In the letter, Musgrove praised the judge, calling the Ten Commandments "the basis for our legal tradition" and announced that he would call on other governors to display the monument in their state capitols as well. Musgrove further wrote, "It would be my honor to host this monument as a symbol of every Mississippian's dedication to the fundamental principles of the Ten Commandments." Even further, Musgrove invoked "our Christian heritage," condemned "groups like the ACLU," and said there is "no freedom from religion." He called the removal of the Ten Commandments from the Alabama Supreme Court building a "tragedy".[9]

    "In 2001, Musgrove signed legislation requiring the motto "In God We Trust" to be displayed in every public school classroom, as well as the school auditoriums and cafeterias, throughout the state."[10][11]

    2000, Musgrove signed a bill into law banning same sex couples from adopting children, making Mississippi only the third state having done so. The law also says that Mississippi will not recognize adoptions from other states by same sex couples.[12][13]

    Despite being a Democrat, Musgrove is pro life, and as Governor signed a bill banning the public funding of abortion.

    •  He's a step in the right direction (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rmx2630, OleMiss

      compared to Wicker, no?

      •  Really? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        simca, dotcommodity

        What's the difference between Wicker and Musgrove, the R and the D?

      •  No, he's not. (0+ / 0-)

        He and Wicker are identical.  Actually, Musgrove might even be worse.  As a native-born Mississippian, I tell you Ronnie Musgrove is a piece of right-wing, corporatist dogshit.  Compared to Musgrove, Joe Lieberman is a loyal progressive Democrat.

        If I still lived in MS, my Senate vote would be "none of the above."

        To reiterate, NO, Musgrove is NOT a step in the right direction.  He's merely a step in the direction of making the Democratic Party as vile and hateful as the Repukelican Party.

        No one here should give a flying shit about which of the two sociopaths running for this seat wins.  Either way, Mississippi loses.

        McKinney/Clemente 2008: Parties that sell out the Constitution don't get my support or my vote.

        by simca on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 07:09:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  You'll get no disagreement from me. (0+ / 0-)

      I'm not particularly thrilled with Musgrove either.

      I consider him the lesser of two evils.

      I don't know why the MS Democratic Party won't field someone more in line with progressive thinking.

      I had come to an entirely erroneous conclusion which shows, my dear Watson, how dangerous it always is to reason from insufficient data.

      by TheBigKahuna on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 04:40:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's because our "bench" isn't deep (0+ / 0-)

        We've only got 1 candidate holding statewide office.  Gene Taylor will never run for anything more than his congressional seat.  Thompson wouldn't stand a chance statewide.  That leaves Childers, but he's probably content where he is as well.  

        Female friend: "So, are YOU dating anyone?" Me: "No. I think the muscles scare them off." FF: "You need to date a Kennedy. Kennedys like muscles."

        by OleMiss on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 05:31:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Because such a Democrat is probably (0+ / 0-)

        unelectable there. Did it not occur to you that MS is probably a very conservative state and that a "progressive" Democrat--or at least the one that people want to run there--would probably be lucky to get 40% of the vote!

    •  4 years ago (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      simca

      I pledeged to NEVER support or vote for any candidate that did not support me and/or my family.  It is ridiculous to support the 'lesser of two evils' just to have a psuedo-dem in congress.  All candidates should be held to the platform of the Democratic Party.

      •  Then don't expect to have any Democrats elected (0+ / 0-)

        in red states. And frankly, if we had it your way, there would be only 35 Democrats in the Senate, 150 in the House, and ten in various Governors' mansions.

      •  Musgrove is a 50% guy (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        csquared

        he will help 50% and backstab you 50% and you never know which is which.  i got to vote for him anyway because Wicker is so damn bad and the mississippi democratic party desperately needs to win a state wide race.

        This is not about musgrove.  your problems with him do not even touch the real issues with him.  i have given his prior campaigns thousands of dollars, worked many hours, been his guest at the governor's Mansion, been invited to go hunting with him, spoke to him many times and received christmas cards from him.  With that said I trust you to tell me the truth more than i do him.

        But what am I to do now, the elections in 4 days and the only other candidate in the race is Wicker, whom i trust to f##k me 100% of the time.

    •  Fact: Mississippi is not ready for gay rights (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      OleMiss

      Roger Wicker does not support gay civil rights.  Ronnie Musgrove does not support gay civil rights.  Nobody who wants to win an election in Mississippi can support gay civil rights.  Maybe someday - but not now.

      However Roger Wicker is a co-sponsor of Senate bill 311 - the Life at Conception Act.  This is a bill to implement equal protection under the 14th amendment to the Constitution for the right of life of each born and preborn human person.  In other words, he wants to make all abortions murder.   Wicker is a far right radical Repuglican.  Ronnie Musgrove is a conservative Democrat.

      That's the difference.

      •  Thank you n/t (0+ / 0-)

        Female friend: "So, are YOU dating anyone?" Me: "No. I think the muscles scare them off." FF: "You need to date a Kennedy. Kennedys like muscles."

        by OleMiss on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 06:11:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Also (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        deedogg

        While Musgrove may support the Democratic Party 40-60% of the time, Wicker will support the Democratic Party 0-20% of the time, if at all. I'd rather have someone support my agenda 40% of the time than someone supporting it only 10% of the time. But that poster is probably the type would rather have someone support none of his issues because he can't accept the imperfect candidate who supports only some of issues.

        •  Musgrove will support the Dem position 0 to 20% (0+ / 0-)

          of the time, the same or possibly even less than the percentage I'd expect from Wicker.

          I've lived in MS, and I know who Musgrove is.  I would vote for the devil before I'd vote for him.

          McKinney/Clemente 2008: Parties that sell out the Constitution don't get my support or my vote.

          by simca on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 07:13:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Then don't complain about (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            deedogg

            Wicker then. If you want to be a purity troll, fine; but don't complain when Wicker does horrible things. At the very least Musgrove would vote for the party's leadership. Wicker wouldn't.

            •  I wouldn't bet on him even supporting leadership (0+ / 0-)

              issues.

              You think Lieberman is a disloyal asshole?  Lieberman will look like Paul Wellstone compared to Ronnie Musgrove.  Don't believe me?  If he gets elected, three months later you will!

              McKinney/Clemente 2008: Parties that sell out the Constitution don't get my support or my vote.

              by simca on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 07:35:49 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Wrong. There's no difference (0+ / 0-)

        Any hate law that Wicker supports, you can bet your bottom dollar Musgrove will support too.

        McKinney/Clemente 2008: Parties that sell out the Constitution don't get my support or my vote.

        by simca on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 07:11:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  A San Francisco-style Democrat isn't going to win (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rmx2630, deedogg

      in Mississippi. The type of Democrat better suited for NYC and SF isn't going to win there. Mississippi is a conservative state, not one where the electorate supports the agenda that you support. I wish that it were different, but MS isn't receptive to more "progressive" politics on social issues.

      •  oceanstar, I have to ask: (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        simca

        Are you a state resident?

        I had come to an entirely erroneous conclusion which shows, my dear Watson, how dangerous it always is to reason from insufficient data.

        by TheBigKahuna on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 06:38:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  He/she isn't. (0+ / 0-)

          Oceanstar 17 doesn't know shit about MS.  He/she is one of those people here who think we should support anyone, even a stone sociopath like Musgrove, just because of the D after his name.

          Nobody expects a diehard liberal to run and win in MS.  That doesn't mean we should support a right-wing, corporatist neocon running under the mantle of the Democratic Party.

          McKinney/Clemente 2008: Parties that sell out the Constitution don't get my support or my vote.

          by simca on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 07:16:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Then who else is there who could have (0+ / 0-)

            run that race? Do you support Wicker? Do you want Wicker in that seat? But I forget: you're a martyrdom liberal, the type who would rather lose than win.

            •  No (0+ / 0-)

              It doesn't matter who wins in the MS race.  We're fucked either way so just forget about it and concentrate efforts in a race that DOES matter -- like GA or KY.

              McKinney/Clemente 2008: Parties that sell out the Constitution don't get my support or my vote.

              by simca on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 07:33:53 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Fair enough (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                simca

                I do think, though, that GA and KY are probably more realistic than MS at this point.

                •  Yes, I agree. (0+ / 0-)

                  And, unlike Musgrove, a senator Lunsford or a Senator Martin would be likely to work for meaningful change rather than to bolster the Republican theocrat know-nothings.

                  McKinney/Clemente 2008: Parties that sell out the Constitution don't get my support or my vote.

                  by simca on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 08:11:33 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Change that (0+ / 0-)

                    Just spoke to a friend who grew up in KY and was told Lunsford is another Democrat in the Musgrove mold.  He made  avery convincing case.  That being the case, I don't care whether he or McConnell wins -- same difference.  I'd shift all support from the KY race to the GA race.

                    Fuck DINO's -- may they all rot.

                    McKinney/Clemente 2008: Parties that sell out the Constitution don't get my support or my vote.

                    by simca on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 10:59:20 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

          •  I live in Mississippi and you are not helping (0+ / 0-)

            you left, i see by your signature line you are not supporting Barrack or the democratic party either.  Who or what agrees with you enough to get your support.  Based on what i am reading only you.  So run yourself.

            Damn, you made me defend Musgrove.  I got to go take a shower now.

        •  No (0+ / 0-)

          But I can reasonably state that a candidate aggressively supporting gay rights and abortion (admittedly gay rights is a deal killer, while abortion probably isn't) is a guaranteed loser in MS. MS is hardly a bastion of gay rights progressivism. If there are gay pride parades in MS, open gay marriage, parades with rainbow flags and pink triangles, let me know. But I doubt that you'd find much of that there.

          •  While I am loathe to disagree with factual (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            deedogg

            content in your post(s), I am somewhat little perturbed by your tone.  Agreed that MS isn't CA anymore than CA is KS.  But I believe you are selling the state short.

            I think it's a bit presumptuous of someone who doesn't live and/or work in the state to decide the what/when/where/how/who of its politics.  

            As someone who has gay family members, I can guarantee I am well aware of the official state government's stance (which, to a large extent, is a reflection of the population's stance) towards homosexual rights and other issues.  Having said that, however, I think it only fair to point out focusing on only one or two issues is no different than those single-issue voters on the right.

            There's far more at stake here than just gay rights.

            I had come to an entirely erroneous conclusion which shows, my dear Watson, how dangerous it always is to reason from insufficient data.

            by TheBigKahuna on Sat Nov 01, 2008 at 05:34:51 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site