VA-05 Democratic Caucuses Today

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

who was our best shot?

National Democrats liked Huffstetler the best, but they also thought Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis would be the best in Texas, soooo. Looks like he's going to be joining the rank of strong fundraisers who DC wanted but flopped when it came to getting actual votes.

Ed Meier was by no means the choice of national Democrats, they didn't really get involved in that primary.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

who was our best shot?

National Democrats liked Huffstetler the best, but they also thought Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis would be the best in Texas, soooo. Looks like he's going to be joining the rank of strong fundraisers who DC wanted but flopped when it came to getting actual votes.

Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis kind of were the best.... primary electorate isn't the general electorate.

Only if you have a strong preference for male candidates. Gina Ortiz Jones and Lizzie Fletcher were the top vote-getters for a good reason.

By that logic, Christine O'Donnell was a stronger candidate than Mike Castle.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

who was our best shot?

National Democrats liked Huffstetler the best, but they also thought Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis would be the best in Texas, soooo. Looks like he's going to be joining the rank of strong fundraisers who DC wanted but flopped when it came to getting actual votes.

Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis kind of were the best.... primary electorate isn't the general electorate.

Only if you have a strong preference for male candidates. Gina Ortiz Jones and Lizzie Fletcher were the top vote-getters for a good reason.

By that logic, Christine O'Donnell was a stronger candidate than Mike Castle.

You’re strawmanning because you don’t want to confront your biases. People on Atlas are biased against female candidates, along with much of the DC establishment, which is why they supported candidates like Alex T and ignored their serious issues, like him not even living in the district.

Or you could just...you know...be wrong and making an argument that doesn’t hold up well under scrutiny as a result.  And if you don’t like that example, how about Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

who was our best shot?

National Democrats liked Huffstetler the best, but they also thought Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis would be the best in Texas, soooo. Looks like he's going to be joining the rank of strong fundraisers who DC wanted but flopped when it came to getting actual votes.

Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis kind of were the best.... primary electorate isn't the general electorate.

Only if you have a strong preference for male candidates. Gina Ortiz Jones and Lizzie Fletcher were the top vote-getters for a good reason.

By that logic, Christine O'Donnell was a stronger candidate than Mike Castle.

You’re strawmanning because you don’t want to confront your biases. People on Atlas are biased against female candidates, along with much of the DC establishment, which is why they supported candidates like Alex T and ignored their serious issues, like him not even living in the district.

Or you could just...you know...be wrong and making an argument that doesn’t hold up well under scrutiny as a result.  And if you don’t like that example, how about Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin?

Hey, the site is <95% male, and it has a bias towards male candidates, I'm just pointing that out. Yes, sometimes the winners aren't the best candidates, but in the cases I pointed out above, they were the best candidates.

Alex T (he didn't live in the district), Meier (he didn't have much of a profile besides "Clinton fundraiser"), and Hulings (he had laid off a good chunk of campaign staff right before the primary, that's not a good sign) had serious issues, but the biases of Atlas users and the DC establishment caused them to overlook it.

I supported Jones in the primary.  All I’m saying is you shouldn’t assume everyone who thinks Alex T or that Levin is a better candidate than Jacobs without being a sexist.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

who was our best shot?

National Democrats liked Huffstetler the best, but they also thought Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis would be the best in Texas, soooo. Looks like he's going to be joining the rank of strong fundraisers who DC wanted but flopped when it came to getting actual votes.

Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis kind of were the best.... primary electorate isn't the general electorate.

Only if you have a strong preference for male candidates. Gina Ortiz Jones and Lizzie Fletcher were the top vote-getters for a good reason.

By that logic, Christine O'Donnell was a stronger candidate than Mike Castle.

You’re strawmanning because you don’t want to confront your biases. People on Atlas are biased against female candidates, along with much of the DC establishment, which is why they supported candidates like Alex T and ignored their serious issues, like him not even living in the district.

Or you could just...you know...be wrong and making an argument that doesn’t hold up well under scrutiny as a result.  And if you don’t like that example, how about Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin?

Hey, the site is <95% male, and it has a bias towards male candidates, I'm just pointing that out. Yes, sometimes the winners aren't the best candidates, but in the cases I pointed out above, they were the best candidates.

Alex T (he didn't live in the district), Meier (he didn't have much of a profile besides "Clinton fundraiser"), and Hulings (he had laid off a good chunk of campaign staff right before the primary, that's not a good sign) had serious issues, but the biases of Atlas users and the DC establishment caused them to overlook it.

I supported Jones in the primary.  All I’m saying is you shouldn’t assume everyone who thinks Alex T or that Levin is a better candidate than Jacobs without being a sexist.

Are you saying that there is no bias against women on the forums or among DC in general? Pointing out the bias isn’t me crying out sexism.

I’m not saying there isn’t a lot of bias, but some races where the most electable candidate happens to be a man even though he has a female primary opponent.  Supporting a male candidate over a female primary opponent b/c he’s the most electable candidate isn’t bias against women, it’s simply prioritizing retaking Congress over potentially blowing competitive races by making an empty symbolic gesture.  I support Radinovich over Phifer in MN-8 b/c he can win the GE and she can’t.  I’d support Radinovich just as strongly if the candidates’ name were Jane Radinovich and Lee Phifer.  Right now, my first choice for 2020 is a Gillibrand/Brown ticket.  I’m supporting Amy McGrath over Jim Gray in KY-6.  I’m supporting Kate Browning in NY-1.  I could go on, but the point is that you shouldn’t be so quick to assume that everyone is motivated by gender bias with this stuff.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

who was our best shot?

National Democrats liked Huffstetler the best, but they also thought Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis would be the best in Texas, soooo. Looks like he's going to be joining the rank of strong fundraisers who DC wanted but flopped when it came to getting actual votes.

Jay Hulings, Ed Meier, and Alex Triantaphyllis kind of were the best.... primary electorate isn't the general electorate.

Only if you have a strong preference for male candidates. Gina Ortiz Jones and Lizzie Fletcher were the top vote-getters for a good reason.

By that logic, Christine O'Donnell was a stronger candidate than Mike Castle.

You’re strawmanning because you don’t want to confront your biases. People on Atlas are biased against female candidates, along with much of the DC establishment, which is why they supported candidates like Alex T and ignored their serious issues, like him not even living in the district.

Or you could just...you know...be wrong and making an argument that doesn’t hold up well under scrutiny as a result.  And if you don’t like that example, how about Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin?

Hey, the site is <95% male, and it has a bias towards male candidates, I'm just pointing that out. Yes, sometimes the winners aren't the best candidates, but in the cases I pointed out above, they were the best candidates.

Alex T (he didn't live in the district), Meier (he didn't have much of a profile besides "Clinton fundraiser"), and Hulings (he had laid off a good chunk of campaign staff right before the primary, that's not a good sign) had serious issues, but the biases of Atlas users and the DC establishment caused them to overlook it.

I supported Jones in the primary.  All I’m saying is you shouldn’t assume everyone who thinks Alex T or that Levin is a better candidate than Jacobs without being a sexist.

Are you saying that there is no bias against women on the forums or among DC in general? Pointing out the bias isn’t me crying out sexism.

I’m not saying there isn’t a lot of bias, but some races where the most electable candidate happens to be a man even though he has a female primary opponent.  Supporting a male candidate over a female primary opponent b/c he’s the most electable candidate isn’t bias against women, it’s simply prioritizing retaking Congress over potentially blowing competitive races by making an empty symbolic gesture.  I support Radinovich over Phifer in MN-8 b/c he can win the GE and she can’t.  I’d support Radinovich just as strongly if the candidates’ name were Jane Radinovich and Lee Phifer.  Right now, my first choice for 2020 is a Gillibrand/Brown ticket.  I’m supporting Amy McGrath over Jim Gray in KY-6.  I’m supporting Kate Browning in NY-1.  I could go on, but the point is that you shouldn’t be so quick to assume that everyone is motivated by gender bias with this stuff.

Please do go on, because you in particular seem to be against equity in Congress, by calling it an empty gesture. I assume you don’t care whether women make up 5% or 50%, so if you really don’t care about advancing the rights of women and minorities by increasing their representation, then maybe you should reconsider your affiliation as a Democrat. The party of white men is on the other side.

I’m calling nominating female candidates who will lose the GE instead of electable candidates just b/c of their gender is an empty gesture since it still leaves you with an anti-women’s rights Republican winning the election.  I realize that you’re falling back on smears to try to shut down the discussion since you aren’t capable of responding with legitimate arguments, but all the same, I’d kindly ask you to stop telling bald-faced lies about what I’ve said.

Oh and since you seem to have so many thoughts about which party is most in-line with my values, I suppose I should check whether or not you’re me.  Hmm...you’re not me.  What’s that?  You’re just some random immature internet troll who isn’t even a Democrat?  Well, when you put it like that, it sounds like there’s no reason for me to care what you think my political affiliation should be.  It’s almost as though people don’t take you seriously when you lie about their views, claim to know their values better than they do, and display little-to-no knowledge of the subject being discussed.  Funny how that works.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Oh boy!
Apparently the Democratic frontrunner, Leslie Cockburn, has written an anti-Semitic book where she blames Jews for starting the Cold War and controlling the Medellin drug cartel, among other things.
How lovely.

https://www.amazon.com/Dangerous-Liaison-Inside-U-S-Israeli-Relationship/dp/0060921455/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1524359050&sr=8-4&keywords=Leslie+Cockburn

The Medellin Cartel is a new one   I kinda feel like there needs to be a new rule: "If it exists, there is a nutjob who has an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory about it."

In b4 Gauche says this is an anti-woman smear campaign.

He quit Atlas.

Did he? In what thread did he melt down?

Yes, please provide a link.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

welp, I wasn't really expecting this district to flip anyways. If it flips after this, holy crap Tom Garrett was a bad incumbent.

It could've flipped with Huffstetler (unlikely, but possible).

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

welp, I wasn't really expecting this district to flip anyways. If it flips after this, holy crap Tom Garrett was a bad incumbent.

It could've flipped with Huffstetler (unlikely, but possible).

After looking at Garrett's fundraising numbers I was starting to believe flipping this was possible, but the reason I was skeptical of it flipping even in a good year for Democrats is that Gillespie won this district by a lot.

I agree, I'm just saying to the extent there even was a path to victory, it was with Huffstetler.  It was never going to happen with Cockburn even before this.