So....let's see here....... Kirsten Gillebrand has a ONE HUNDRED PERCENT approval rating by the NRA and is a proud member of the Blue Dog Democrats...... and Markos declares what a great choice she is for the cause of progressives!
Because EITHER she will shift left once she starts representing all New Yorkers......
OR, she will face a primary challenge from somebody with better values.
Now let's see. Just how logical is that? She's a good choice because..... she's so bad, therefore she is bound to get better? She's a good choice because..... she's so bad, therefore she is bound to get challenged in the next primary?
So here's the question: Is Kirsten Gillebrand, as Markos suggests, so bad she is actually good?