IL-3 Dem Primary: Election Day!

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Newman can win this primary. No doubt about it.
Is it possible for Lipinski to replicate what Joe Lieberman did in 2006?

No. IL has a sore loser law.

So he would have to organize a massive write-in campaign?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Newman can win this primary. No doubt about it.
Is it possible for Lipinski to replicate what Joe Lieberman did in 2006?

No. IL has a sore loser law.

So he would have to organize a massive write-in campaign?

Give it a rest dude. If your friend loses then he is finished. Done. Over. Caput. Finito.
He will be an ex-congressman.

Was just trying to quantify how much was riding on this primary. Newman is an abortionist who doesn't deserve to win.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Newman can win this primary. No doubt about it.
Is it possible for Lipinski to replicate what Joe Lieberman did in 2006?

No. IL has a sore loser law.

So he would have to organize a massive write-in campaign?

Give it a rest dude. If your friend loses then he is finished. Done. Over. Caput. Finito.
He will be an ex-congressman.

Was just trying to quantify how much was riding on this primary. Newman is an abortionist who doesn't deserve to win.

Uh citation on the claim she’s an abortionist?

She is running a disgustingly pro-abortion campaign and her opponent is a supporter of the unborn who is also simultaneously a Democrat with a good record serving his district. The choice is obvious.
I wouldn't be shocked to see Newman vote to ditch the Hyde Amendment and back federal funding going to abortion-on-demand.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Newman can win this primary. No doubt about it.
Is it possible for Lipinski to replicate what Joe Lieberman did in 2006?

No. IL has a sore loser law.

So he would have to organize a massive write-in campaign?

Give it a rest dude. If your friend loses then he is finished. Done. Over. Caput. Finito.
He will be an ex-congressman.

Was just trying to quantify how much was riding on this primary. Newman is an abortionist who doesn't deserve to win.

Uh citation on the claim she’s an abortionist?

She is running a disgustingly pro-abortion campaign and her opponent is a supporter of the unborn who is also simultaneously a Democrat with a good record serving his district. The choice is obvious.
I wouldn't be shocked to see Newman vote to ditch the Hyde Amendment and back federal funding going to abortion bondsman's.

Lipinski isn't Pro-life. He's just pro-birth. His ridiculous voting record on things like Obamacare and other programs that help those people are indicative of that. Democrats can do much better than someone to the right of Rick Nolan and Tim Walz in this seat.

I don't care about the fact he voted against Obamacare. Pelosi didn't need his vote.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Newman can win this primary. No doubt about it.
Is it possible for Lipinski to replicate what Joe Lieberman did in 2006?

No. IL has a sore loser law.

So he would have to organize a massive write-in campaign?

Give it a rest dude. If your friend loses then he is finished. Done. Over. Caput. Finito.
He will be an ex-congressman.

Was just trying to quantify how much was riding on this primary. Newman is an abortionist who doesn't deserve to win.

I mean, if she does end up winning the primary, doesn't that mean she does deserve to win? It's a bit ridiculous to imply that someone is undeserving of winning simply because you disagree with their positions, if their position is something that is held by a large portion of the population and elected officials.

If one wanted to get pedantic, then they would point out that the Democratic primary voting base =/= the district at large. Lipinski is a better fit for the district at large than Newman.
But besides that, shall all hope of him being reelected be gone, I will absolutely be pulling for her in GE. She's better than the GOP candidate pretty much by default and while she's going to be unable to match Dan's constituent services and skill set, she should be able to bring forth some interesting bills and all that. Still inferior to Dan Lipinski, but then again it's very hard to surpass him and his stalwart record serving the people of the 3rd District.

Also, everyone is conveniently leaving out that Lipinski has repeatedly voted against GOP efforts to repeal Obamacare.

That is something that constitutes a good argument. Exactly the kind of thing that the Lipinski critics will ignore.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I mean, if she does end up winning the primary, doesn't that mean she does deserve to win? It's a bit ridiculous to imply that someone is undeserving of winning simply because you disagree with their positions, if their position is something that is held by a large portion of the population and elected officials.

If one wanted to get pedantic, then they would point out that the Democratic primary voting base =/= the district at large. Lipinski is a better fit for the district at large than Newman.
But besides that, shall all hope of him being reelected be gone, I will absolutely be pulling for her in GE. She's better than the GOP candidate pretty much by default and while she's going to be unable to match Dan's constituent services and skill set, she should be able to bring forth some interesting bills and all that. Still inferior to Dan Lipinski, but then again it's very hard to surpass him and his stalwart record serving the people of the 3rd District.

Why is that? I'm curious as to your reasoning.

Dan's just so darn good at it. It's not completely impossible, I guess. But it's extremely hard of a benchmark to meet.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

If you Google 'Marie Newman abortion' then this thread appears in the results. Lol.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Who cares if Daddy gave him this seat? I don't.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Whether you like him or not, guy's 13-year track record in Congress should outweigh how he got the seat 20 to 1 at least.

But his record in Congress is awful?

His record in Congress involves bringing a train station to his district just this past year, along with leadership on transportation issues (his district includes some rail yards too, atop all of that). How is that awful?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

His record in Congress involves bringing a train station to his district just this past year, along with leadership on transportation issues (his district includes some rail yards too, atop all of that). How is that awful?

"On the one hand, he's an amoral monster who supports all the horrid policies advanced by the Republicans. On the other, he managed to secure part of the money to refurbish the second-largest Metra station in La Grange."

You have a severe case of Lipinski Derangement Syndrome. Why else would you be spreading this fake news?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

His record in Congress involves bringing a train station to his district just this past year, along with leadership on transportation issues (his district includes some rail yards too, atop all of that). How is that awful?

"On the one hand, he's an amoral monster who supports all the horrid policies advanced by the Republicans. On the other, he managed to secure part of the money to refurbish the second-largest Metra station in La Grange."

You have a severe case of Lipinski Derangement Syndrome. Why else would you be spreading this fake news?

SJoyce is being too generous here; from a quick count there's at least a handful of sitting Republican house members who are more progressive on LGBT rights than Lipinski.

Heck Mark Kirk has a more liberal record than him on gay rights; if you're a Democrat, and the former Republican senator from your own state is more LGBT friendly you should expect a primary challenge.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is ludicrous primarying him solely on the basis of this issue.
There are plenty of terrible GOP policies out there. The wording 'all the horrid policies advanced by the Republicans' is not just clumsy phrasing, it's bordering outright lying.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

His record in Congress involves bringing a train station to his district just this past year, along with leadership on transportation issues (his district includes some rail yards too, atop all of that). How is that awful?

"On the one hand, he's an amoral monster who supports all the horrid policies advanced by the Republicans. On the other, he managed to secure part of the money to refurbish the second-largest Metra station in La Grange."

You have a severe case of Lipinski Derangement Syndrome. Why else would you be spreading this fake news?

SJoyce is being too generous here; from a quick count there's at least a handful of sitting Republican house members who are more progressive on LGBT rights than Lipinski.

Heck Mark Kirk has a more liberal record than him on gay rights; if you're a Democrat, and the former Republican senator from your own state is more LGBT friendly you should expect a primary challenge.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is ludicrous primarying him solely on the basis of this issue.
There are plenty of terrible GOP policies out there. The wording 'all the horrid policies advanced by the Republicans' is not just clumsy phrasing, it's bordering outright lying.

Didn't endorse Obama in 2012, voted against Obamacare, voted against the Dream Act in 2001, voted against banning workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation, voted against stem cell research.

I disagree that it's ludicrous to primary someone who doesn't support the civil rights of gay people.

It's really not that complex- it's not 1995, and we don't have to try and pander to these sorts of useful idiots anymore.

Lol, as if all those you listed is the totality of the GOP's bad policies.
What a comedy show this thread has became...

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Lol, as if all those you listed is the totality of the GOP's bad policies.
What a comedy show this thread has became...

I wasn't responding to your comment about the 'totality of the GOP's bad policies'', but rather the when you said....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was demonstrating that Lipskini's lack of support for gay rights isn't at all the only issue where he's out of touch with the values of the Democrats.

You still haven't actually responded, or even tried to defend Lipsinki's awful record on LGBT rights

It's not a good record, but there's no point in talking much about it when you guys will jump on it, howling from the rooftops, saying it is alleged proof he must be primaried, giving it more weight than is proper. It's a one-way ticket to turning this thread into a severe Lipinski Derangement Syndrome-ridden circlejerk, even more than it is now.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

If his dad is allow to fix, and cheat to get him his seat in Congress, then progressives have every right to throw the absolute kitchen sink to kick him out of congress. There's a lot of chat on this thread about people from outside the district but look at this gem....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So not only did his Dad drop out after the primary, but he was then the one who helped make the decision to appoint his son, who hadn't lived in state since the 90s

I'm not sure where this is from, but I can't imagine it's true, since Lipinski was involved in Chicago politics throughout the 90s. It sounds like a straight-up lie.

It’s true.

If it is indeed the case that he was involved in Chicago politics throughout the 1990s, then for sure it was also untrue to call him a carpetbagger from Tennessee. (not necessarily vice versa).

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

If his dad is allow to fix, and cheat to get him his seat in Congress, then progressives have every right to throw the absolute kitchen sink to kick him out of congress. There's a lot of chat on this thread about people from outside the district but look at this gem....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So not only did his Dad drop out after the primary, but he was then the one who helped make the decision to appoint his son, who hadn't lived in state since the 90s

I'm not sure where this is from, but I can't imagine it's true, since Lipinski was involved in Chicago politics throughout the 90s. It sounds like a straight-up lie.

It’s true.

If it is indeed the case that he was involved in Chicago politics throughout the 1990s, then for sure it was also untrue to call him a carpetbagger from Tennessee. (not necessarily vice versa).

You aren't a "carpetbagger from Tennessee" if you took a job there for 3 years. The guy did work on Chicago-based political staffs throughout the 90s. Even if he was primarily working in Washington in those roles, that still means he was very involved in Illinois politics.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I would assume Lipinski loves his job too much to retire. And that probably rules out him caucusing with Republicans; if he were to do that, his next re-election campaign would be dead in the water...

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Lipinski will win this time around, but I imagine it'll be his final term in office - He's not used to, you know, campaigning, and seems to only be doing this to avoid being the laughingstock at the #NoLabels after-convention dinner. Hell, maybe he even resigns six months into 2019?

Only if he can give his seat to a family member, amiright?

Does he have any children he can gift the seat to?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Come one Lipinski, you can do this.

Lol no he can't

We'll see on March 20.
Either of the candidates can win.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-met-marie-newman-felon-dan-lipinski-congress-20180305-story.html

Wow.  Not nice, not ethical.

Nothingburger.

Hopefully this engulfs her campaign and makes her lose. 

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It's time for King Dan to rich into his coffers already and let out a campaign blitz in the final couple of weeks.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bagel23 is guilty of plagiarism. As holder of the copyright, I sue for monetary damages.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Useless Pelosi at it again:

Conservative Democrat Dan Lipinski says DCCC now backing him against primary challenger

Assuming this is true,
WONDERFUL NEWS!!!!!!
Nice to see the DCCC isn't going in lockstep behind the forces that want King Dan.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

With it being this close, I wouldn't put it past Lipinski to pull a Lieberman and run third party should he lose the primary.

I think IL ballot law prevents that.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I bet you a million dollars Greenline knows more about this districts' shifts over the past 30 years than BRTD does.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

For all the right- Winger's lamenting Democrats engaging in a so-called Purity Purge of Lipinski, consider this. Take an AR + 6 District like Steven teague's or Justin Amash instead of A+ 6D District like lipinski's. Now imagine the Republican incumbent has a voting record that is pro Obamacare, Pro DREAM Act, pro-gay marriage even before became a fait accompli by the Supreme Court, and resolutely aggressively pro-choice. And they even refused to endorse Romney over Obama in 2012.

Go on and tell us because they are anywhere from right-of-center to mainstream conservative on economics that you would oppose a staunch conservative primary Challenger because you opposed Purity purges by either major party.

Yeah, I didn't think so either. The bottom line is conservatives are upset because they're losing a conservative vote on multiple issues out of this primary. Yet no one I think would hold my own party to the same standards of moderation. The fact is, it's unlikely that such a Republican incumbent as I described would ever exist or be elected in the first place in an r + 6 District. Though maybe if they inherited the seat from their father the same way Lipinski did, maybe.

"Right-wingers"? It's interesting that you would lump in people like Bagel23 (moderate Democrat) and GreenLine (independent), as well as an independent such as myself, under such a category. The argument throughout, which I have made, is that I think polarization would be less if there was room for ideological diversity within each party, and room for compromise and bipartisanship on more issues. The route that you're suggesting would eventually eliminate people like Manchin and Collins, leaving us with only politicians with aggressively partisan agendas, unwilling to work across party lines for the better good of the country.

If they are willing to call people like you right-wingers, then we may as well call them left-wing exclusionists.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

For all the right- Winger's lamenting Democrats engaging in a so-called Purity Purge of Lipinski, consider this. Take an AR + 6 District like Steven teague's or Justin Amash instead of A+ 6D District like lipinski's. Now imagine the Republican incumbent has a voting record that is pro Obamacare, Pro DREAM Act, pro-gay marriage even before became a fait accompli by the Supreme Court, and resolutely aggressively pro-choice. And they even refused to endorse Romney over Obama in 2012.

Go on and tell us because they are anywhere from right-of-center to mainstream conservative on economics that you would oppose a staunch conservative primary Challenger because you opposed Purity purges by either major party.

Yeah, I didn't think so either. The bottom line is conservatives are upset because they're losing a conservative vote on multiple issues out of this primary. Yet no one I think would hold my own party to the same standards of moderation. The fact is, it's unlikely that such a Republican incumbent as I described would ever exist or be elected in the first place in an r + 6 District. Though maybe if they inherited the seat from their father the same way Lipinski did, maybe.

This is the bottom line, right here.

If he represented some Utah blood-red area or Alaska or the Oklahoma panhandle then no one would be complaining.

The stupid asshole represents Chicago.

Should be noted that a minority of IL-03 is in Chicago, and the gentrifying social liberal types Newman is targeting the most are such a tiny bit of the seat.