UT-04/Mason-Dixon: Matheson in a tough fight for new seat

[hopper]

First, I want to thank JohnnyLongtorso, for taking an interest in my state's politics. It seems nobody cares about Utah politics (even most Utahns).

I'm in favor of none of them, since I think Matheson is essentially a republican-in-democrat clothing (as I call him), and of course the GOP candidates are all crazy (except maybe Mia Love, and even she's far too conservative for me).

I'm thinking Mia Love will eventually get the GOP nomination, simply because she has none of the negatives Wimmer and Sandstrom have (they're unacceptable to Salt Lake County for attempts at school vouchers and criminalizing miscarriage shenanigans, among others), and if she gets the nomination, she will probably have a good chance against Matheson.

I live in this district, but I honestly don't care who wins, since none of them will adequately represent me. I think I'll vote for the Justice Party guy running, because I frankly can't stand Matheson.

PioneerProgress; Do you label yourself a liberal/progressive dem?

The criminalizing miscarriage is an extreme position in my opinion. School Vouchers are a catch 22 issue I think but in Salt Lake City where they have a hard left mayor(Rocky Anderson) maybe its an extreme right policy as you put it.

[hopper]

The problem is when the DINO/RINOs are in positions of authority in the House/Senate; then they can screw up key bits of legislation (like Obamacare; it's not like it would have a public option, but it would be a lot better if there would have been actual progressives looking over it).

Are the DINOs actually subtracting from the bill - that is, they're making it worse than if they were replaced by Republicans? Or are they are worse relative to the fantasy counterfactual where they're all replaced by progressive Democrats?

Matheson has still been way too conservative and it turns out (after doing a little digging) that he actually voted against Obamacare (and multiple other pieces of legislation that I would consider to be "moderate"), so yeah, I would consider him to be unacceptably bad.

 

Unacceptably bad relative to what though?  It's not like if Matheson loses than he'll be replaced by a semi-progressive or even moderate Democrat.  It will simply become a safe Republican seat and will probably be occupied by a Stephen Sandstrom.  Having a hyper-right-wing Republican for a few years and then an even slightly progressive Democrat a cycle or two later is simply not a realistically possible option in this district.  Say what you will, but Matheson puts the Democrats one seat closer to a house majority and he is pretty much the only Democrat who can win in this district.  I'm all for primarying Democrats like Lieberman, Tom Carper, Daniel Lipinski, David Scott, Tim Holden, Jason Altmire (since I think Critz can hold that district and even if he loses, someone better than Altmire could probably win it in 2014), etc.  However, trying to primary or protest vote against people like Ben Nelson, Jim Matheson, Collin Peterson, Larry Kissell, etc is a foolproof path to defeat.  Doing so actually moves the house to the right.

Carper and Scott? They vote their state and district. Holden is losing his primary right now so you may get your wish on that one. Altmire I can understand if you want him primaried if you are a liberal. Lieberman is retiring.

Lipinski is kind of borderline to be primaried.