Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why is the party scared of Alan Grayson? [View all]DirkGently
(12,151 posts)126. Yes. It's not Republicans coming to the Dems.
It's Dems rationalizing a candidate convenient for funding purposes as a "pragmatic" choice for Florida.
Then when Florida Dems won't vote for said ex-Republican in sufficient numbers, the insiders with the failed strategy grumble about "turnout."
That whole "CURRENT seniors will be fine" angle Murphy came up with was grotesque.
"Hey, vote for me, and we'll screw over your grandchildren together!"
And this is sold as the wise, sober choice.
We can do better.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
144 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
this is a must read --> Are Democratic Leaders "Tea Partying" The Progressives?
nashville_brook
May 2015
#10
I believe you're right. Faux liberals on Fux news. The Medium is the Message, unfortunately.
erronis
May 2015
#33
the best ways to donate in Orlando are directly to the candidates you love
nashville_brook
May 2015
#100
Alan Grayson has some serious issues that won't play well with voters. Consider his remarks
okaawhatever
May 2015
#14
you've articulated perfectly the attack platform the party has laid out.
nashville_brook
May 2015
#15
Grayson was really coming up fast & great! esp. speaking out on heathcare on the House
appalachiablue
May 2015
#41
Thank goodness Hillary's pay-to-play State Dept., records misconduct, and marital problems
whereisjustice
May 2015
#20
No, it's that most Democrats realize Hillary didn't have a pay-to-play State Dept., there isn't
okaawhatever
May 2015
#22
$300,000 a speech buys a lot of influence doesn't it? Of course that's the discount rate. How was
whereisjustice
May 2015
#96
So the Rolling Stones are indebtted to the coliseum where they perform because they get paid
okaawhatever
May 2015
#103
"your b.s. about the DNC kissing Wall Street's ass is fucking precious" -- i'd alert on this, but
nashville_brook
May 2015
#123
theres an even more legitimate question whether Murphy can win statewide.
nashville_brook
May 2015
#17
Murphy WAS a Republican, right up until he challenged West. So he fit right in.
djean111
May 2015
#26
I don't like Murphy as a candidate, but I do understand why many former Republicans
okaawhatever
May 2015
#47
Oh, Murphy doesn't want to be a Democrat, he wants the Democratic Party to be Republican.
djean111
May 2015
#50
Thanks for the info. I didn't realize he was that bad. I think I like him mainly because he spared
okaawhatever
May 2015
#54
That's because he's one of the worst Democrats in Congress and his "conversions"
TeamPooka
May 2015
#64
And what about the big Democratic party donor who is Grayson's friend and attorney who has
okaawhatever
May 2015
#24
It isn't ONE donor. It's a big donor who is also his good friend and lawyer. Why are you
okaawhatever
May 2015
#31
I'm not saying one voter can veto a campaign. What I continue to say, and everyone fails to
okaawhatever
May 2015
#62
i read the POLITICO article too. everyone knows John Morgan's position.
nashville_brook
May 2015
#81
I believe it's because they're running away from the charge that they're commies.
Spitfire of ATJ
May 2015
#32
They're proud of the idea that they can make the rich richer than Republicans.
Spitfire of ATJ
May 2015
#48
there' Dems in this thread who believe that not only Wall Street, but any big donor
nashville_brook
May 2015
#72
this is what i'm saying in the post -- there's people in our own party who'd rather
nashville_brook
May 2015
#79
It's more than insulting terms, and it's done in a way that is driving away voters:
okaawhatever
May 2015
#43
Maybe using the image of Klansmen is okay with you, but it is deeply offensive
okaawhatever
May 2015
#65
and that'll just be Grayson's decision -- when the party attacks, i'll be there to call them out.
nashville_brook
May 2015
#120
It really is about l vs 99%, Occupy had it right, we are slow to realize how powerful the meaning of
mother earth
May 2015
#44
Absolutely, Grayson is one of our best, and I agree about O'Rourke, he is so sickening to listen
mother earth
May 2015
#90
Is the purpose of this thread to vent against "The Party Bosses" or do you want an answer?
brooklynite
May 2015
#46
I agree, they marginalize them quickly, the Dean scream, 1-2 punch to a fast rising star with solid
mother earth
May 2015
#91
Compare the compensation for serving office versus being a lobbyist once you leave
GoneFishin
May 2015
#88
Well said, it is truly kabuki theater...money trumps all. I think your reply nails it. nt
mother earth
May 2015
#92
they've repeatedly shown they'd rather have a conservadem who's behind in the polls than an electabl
MisterP
May 2015
#107
unless the strategy is simply to keep progressives from advancing to higher office.
nashville_brook
May 2015
#112
How much richer is Tester since he went to Washington? How would I find that out? nt
ChisolmTrailDem
May 2015
#99
same numbskulls who thought it was a bad idea for Grimes to say she'd voted for Obama
nashville_brook
May 2015
#121
Hillary is the biggest easy target for Rs. party machinery isn't afraid of that.
nashville_brook
May 2015
#110