Rachel Reddick (PA 1st congressional district)

[cyclonefence]

is a born-again (actually never-was) Democrat who is opposing Scott Wallace for a chance to unseat Republican Brian Fitzpatrick. She became a Democrat only in August, just in time to get into the running. She says she has thought of herself as a Democrat for the past 10 years, yet each time she moved and re-registered to vote during that time, she registered as a Republican. According to public records, she did not vote at all in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections. She has not said who she voted for in 2016.

Scott Wallace is something of a carpetbagger. He was born here and educated in Philadelphia, but he has spent the past 20 years or so living abroad, running a philanthropy focused largely on fighting climate change. He is the grandson of Henry Wallace, FDR's vice-president, so his progressive credentials run deep.

All other things being equal, I would have supported Reddick just because she is a woman, and she is saying the right things in her campaign. She has been endorsed by Emily's List. She has not been active, so far as I can tell from her campaign literature, in any liberal/progressive organizations.

Here is what I fear: She is a stealth Republican, taking advantage of the fact that so many women are successfully running for political office, and she has become a Democrat to improve her chances. Should she win the general election, she might reveal her true colors and vote with the Republicans. I have heard that there are other newborn Democrats like her running for local and state offices--does anyone have any information about this?

And here is my dilemma: If she wins the primary, I am duty bound to support her as a volunteer and donor, as I have supported Scott Wallace. But it seems wrong. The only way out I can see is for Wallace to win the nomination.

[Amishman]

1. Reading her priorities page, she seems legit

[cyclonefence]

4. But how can we get past the fact that she

did not vote for Barack Obama? What kind of true Democrat would not have voted in 2008 and 2012? I am worried about her as a Democrat.

Her TV and mail ad campaigns have been 85% negative; I am very, very suspicious of her.

[Amishman]

8. Suspicion is fine, but I wouldn't write someone off just based on their past

People learn and change. I'd imagine the past two years have been a political awakening for many.

[Hortensis]

2. Scott Wallace sounds like a good candidate, Cyclone.

And, although I voted for a couple candidates just yesterday specifically because they're women, with the history as you relate it nothing Reddick could say would make me vote for her.

I find it extremely helpful to always put people's objective records, including for honesty and competence, above what they or their enemies say. Politicians planning to deceive and betray their promises ALWAYS tell us what we want to hear so we'll vote for them.

I evaluate past histories, the actions they've taken, and their success rates with those actions, and compare them to current verbiage.

In this case, neither someone trying to tar Wallace by calling him an insulting name like "carpetbagger" nor Reddick singing every song I ever loved from the podium would matter. Her history is highly suspicious and her integrity very much in question.

[cyclonefence]

6. Yes, I've been pleased to support him

Interestingly, unattributed signs have shown up all over the place in this district with things like "Silver Spoon Wallace is a multimillionaire and didn't pay his taxes" and other lies. For a while, I suspected either the Reddick campaign or the local Republican party. My husband and I have been in a contest to see who could pull up and turn in more of these signs (it's 10-8 right now). Turns out they were put up by a nutso Republican Trump-lover who believes the Republicans can beat Reddick but not Wallace.

[RandySF]

3. My dad was a Republican until he turned 50

She has my support

[cyclonefence]

5. Did he turn Democrat just in time

to run for office? I think she's dangerous and untrustworthy. She didn't vote at all in 2008 and 2012--what kind of Democrat would pass up the chance to vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden?

[Hortensis]

7. I belatedly looked Reddick up, instead of just going by

the description given. My bad. Reddick's endorsed by Emily's List, who select for viable female Democrats who support legalized abortion. EL does not endorse people of questionable character or competence or those whose ideology is incompatible with the party's overall.

EL will, however, support a blue dog-type woman Democrat over a good liberal male candidate.
I still recommend that records be carefully examined.

And, of course, viability in November is the #1 priority for me this year. Who's our best chance to elect a Democrat and keep a Republican out of government?

Btw, my husband's a liberal and a registered Republican. Since normally only Republicans can get elected in our part of Georgia, he votes for the less objectionable who could win. When they're all awful (too often these days), he votes for the strongest second contender in hopes of throwing races into runoffs, for more weeks of Repubs badmouthing each other and sinking more money in the hole.

THIS time, we have two women Democrats running for governor, so the second option was taken with great enthusiasm. It'd take something remarkable for a black woman Democrat to actually win, but we're hoping for at very least a history-making show that'll make the nation stand up and take notice.

[cyclonefence]

9. I was not surprised that Emily's list endorsed her

because she is a female and supports abortion rights. Scott Wallace, on the other hand, is endorsed by Planned Parenthood and NOW, which I think says a lot because I am sure those two organizations would support a woman if all things were equal.

People do change and grow, and I'm glad if Reddick has truly seen the light. I am suspicious of her based on her own words, that she began to think of herself as a Democrat about a decade ago, yet in the two subsequent registrations, she continued to register herself as a Republican.

The fact that she did not vote at all in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections is pretty damning as well.

The information about her registration and voting came from publicly available records. When she was confronted with these facts, she a) seemed surprised the information was available and b) refused to offer any explanation.

[Hortensis]

10. Good points. I'm not crazy about all that either.

I'm biased in favor of very competent policy wonks with all their ducks in rows ready to launch.

Unlike EL I'm not confined to supporting women, and those two other endorsements do pretty much suggest what one would need to know about him on women's issues.

Getting eager to see the results in all these states.