IL-03

[Badger]

Hopefully the actual Democrat wins.

If you are pro-life you are not a Democrat (anymore)?

If you represent a D+6 district and are on the record as being anti-choice, anti-same sex marriage, anti-Obamacare, anti-DREAM Act, and didn't even endorse Obama in 2012, then yes, you are not a Democrat.

Didn't endorse Obama in a suburban Chicago District. No less.

[Badger]

In news that I think all of us can appreciate, noted Neo-Nazi Arthur Jones is pulling only 11% in the Republican primary.

only one worse than marie newman

Oh stop.

[Badger]

Lipinski is actually going to lose this. Wow. I can live with Sanders losing the primary, since it looks like Democrats in general are opening up to some of his ideas and not always going for the most “moderate” candidate (I realize Newman isn’t exactly Sanders’s twin, but still.)

I'm really surprised by this considering that Newman had to split the field with two other candidates who took nearly 10% of the anti Lipinski vote.

I'm wondering what caused Lipinski to drop so dramatically in support from the primary only two years ago. Happy to see it, but you wouldn't expect this type of largely blue-collar suburbs type of place to be subject to a ton of millennial influx or other demographic changes that could so change the results in only 2 years. Did he do something to screw up that's only known by the locals? Or did his inherited campaign apparatus just fall apart?

[Badger]

In news that I think all of us can appreciate, noted Neo-Nazi Arthur Jones is pulling only 11% in the Republican primary.

only one worse than marie newman

Oh stop.

Youre a RINO.

1) Yes, and only because Ohio canceled its primary today. Thus depriving me of the opportunity to cast a ballot for Biden, and officially change my avatar back to red.

2) one need not be a r i n o, or indeed anything more than the most histrionic minority of Lipinski supporters, to claim that a literal neo-Nazi is the only worst candidate on the ballot than Newman. So I repeat:

[Badger]

I miss daddy dan already, I cant even adequately put it into words

Then perhaps "Daddy Dan" shouldn't have been an anti-choice Congressman who thought voting against Obamacare was a good idea.

That’s why I liked him ffs

So wait a minute. You and I both support Joe, who is staunchly pushing expansion of Obamacare to include the public option that the Republicans + Joe Lieberman stanched 10 years ago. Why would you support Biden if voting against Obamacare was so integral to your support of Lipinski? Genuinely confused.

[Badger]

So much for the Democrats being a Big Tent party.

Don't care how often I have to repeat myself on this. Yes, any candidate who is not only adamantly anti-choice, but a lead Point person in legislating against gay rights for years, votes against Obamacare, refuses to endorse Obama for re-election, is at best Centrist on most other economic issues, AND represents a safely Democratic District to boot, yeah, they're going to fly like a lead balloon and deservedly so.

Additionally, if Lapinski was representing a district in West Virginia, Idaho, or maybe even non Gary or Indianapolis Indiana, relatively few Democrats here would seriously give him much beef.

On a further note, how many Republicans can you point to who are as similarly left-of-center on as many issues that Lipinski is right-of-center on and representing a safely Republican District who is it getting primaried? Please, go on and show me the pro-choice, longtime Pro gay-marriage, pro-obamacare, and generally moderate to right of Center on most other issues Republican who refused to endorse Mitt Romney due to being to extremist, who is also representing an r + 8 District without getting primaried.

I'll wait.

[Badger]

In news that I think all of us can appreciate, noted Neo-Nazi Arthur Jones is pulling only 11% in the Republican primary.

only one worse than marie newman

Oh stop.

Youre a RINO.

1) Yes, and only because Ohio canceled its primary today. Thus depriving me of the opportunity to cast a ballot for Biden, and officially change my avatar back to red.

2) one need not be a r i n o, or indeed anything more than the most histrionic minority of Lipinski supporters, to claim that a literal neo-Nazi is the only worst candidate on the ballot than Newman. So I repeat:

That's the definition of a RINO.  Zip it.

And proud of it. Which is why I am happily commenting on DEMOCRATIC primary. Shove it.

[Badger]

So much for the Democrats being a Big Tent party.

Lipinski would be a Republican if he was representing a tossup district. We have people like Tester, Manchin, and Peterson who are Democrats despite representing solid red states/districts. We ARE the big tent party.

You're calling him a Republican, as if pro-life people aren't welcomed.

You'd be kicking JBE to the curb if you had a magic wand.

That is unadulterated horsesh**t. Even when Edwards signed one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the country, the near Universal consensus among Democrats here was along the lines of: "(grumble). Well it IS Louisiana after all. Hope the courts overrule this..."

You are just factually incorrect hear my friend. Jde is buying large a hero to most Atlas progressives for winning and keeping the Louisiana governorship.

[Badger]

So much for the Democrats being a Big Tent party.

Don't care how often I have to repeat myself on this. Yes, any candidate who is not only adamantly Auntie choice, but a lead Point person in legislating against gay rights for years, votes against Obamacare, refuses to endorse Obama for re-election, is at best Centrist on most other economic issues, AND represents a safely Democratic District to boot, yeah, they're going to fly like a lead balloon and deservedly so.

Additionally, if Lapinski was representing a district in West Virginia, Idaho, or maybe even non Gary or Indianapolis Indiana, relatively few Democrats here would seriously give him much beef.

On a further note, how many Republicans can you point to who are as similarly left-of-center on as many issues that Lipinski is right-of-center on and representing a safely Republican District who is it getting primaried? Please, go on and show me the pro-choice, longtime Pro gay-marriage, pro-obamacare, and generally moderate to right of Center on most other issues Republican who refused to endorse Mitt Romney due to being to extremist, who is also representing an r + 8 District without getting primaried.

I'll wait.

Charlie Baker signed a transgender civil rights bill, a $15 minimum wage, and a tough red flag law.

Meh, picking a blue State Governor seems a little bit like a cheat because the voting Dynamics for congressional representation versus an executive oh, and Judgment of their voting record accordingly, are rather different. Not to mention how how much do you want to bet if he new knew had tried to veto these bills he would have been overridden by the legislature in a heartbeat?

Still, I'll give you at least some points for Baker. He only lost over a quarter of the vote to a completely underfunded no name primary Challenger due to his moderation.

How about Larry Hogan? I simply assumed because he's a vaunted moderate in a state like Maryland that he must be pro-choice and pro-gay-rights

[Badger]

So much for the Democrats being a Big Tent party.

Don't care how often I have to repeat myself on this. Yes, any candidate who is not only adamantly Auntie choice, but a lead Point person in legislating against gay rights for years, votes against Obamacare, refuses to endorse Obama for re-election, is at best Centrist on most other economic issues, AND represents a safely Democratic District to boot, yeah, they're going to fly like a lead balloon and deservedly so.

Additionally, if Lapinski was representing a district in West Virginia, Idaho, or maybe even non Gary or Indianapolis Indiana, relatively few Democrats here would seriously give him much beef.

On a further note, how many Republicans can you point to who are as similarly left-of-center on as many issues that Lipinski is right-of-center on and representing a safely Republican District who is it getting primaried? Please, go on and show me the pro-choice, longtime Pro gay-marriage, pro-obamacare, and generally moderate to right of Center on most other issues Republican who refused to endorse Mitt Romney due to being to extremist, who is also representing an r + 8 District without getting primaried.

I'll wait.

Charlie Baker signed a transgender civil rights bill, a $15 minimum wage, and a tough red flag law.

Meh, picking a blue State Governor seems a little bit like a cheat because the voting Dynamics for congressional representation versus an executive oh, and Judgment of their voting record accordingly, are rather different. Not to mention how how much do you want to bet if he new knew had tried to veto these bills he would have been overridden by the legislature in a heartbeat?

Still, I'll give you at least some points for Baker. He only lost about a third of the votes to a completely underfunded no name candidate due to his moderation.

How about Larry Hogan? I simply assumed because he's a vaunted moderate in a state like Maryland that he must be pro-choice and pro-gay-rights

Yes, forgot about him.  He signed some laws beefing up gun control as well as a ban on conversion therapy.

My point is...the Dems should be able to be tolerant of someone like Lipinski.  This is part of the reason why we're so polarized.

Incidentally, your analogy also fails in that Massachusetts and Maryland are far far more D friendly for pvi than Lipinski District. To be a true equivalent to Lipinski, Hogan or Baker would have to be governor of someplace like Texas, Georgia, or South Carolina. How well do you think they would do in a primary among "big tent" minded Republicans down there?

And again, if you just scratch the surface you'll see that Democrats and progressives on this list ARE reasonably Tower of moderate to conservative Democrats who represent conservative districts and states.

[Badger]

If my research is true, then there were probably other factors that contributed to Lipinski's loss.  A Hispanic population surge in the district was going to be fatal for him, given his vote against the Dream Act.

Oh yes, yet another reason it puts him gross out of step with even the most middle-of-the-road typical Democrat. Or even most Americans. Hell, he had to have known this is actually voting against the interest of most of his own dang constituents!

Still waiting to hear about that Pro DREAM Act Republican representing a + 6 R District

[Badger]

I've been saving my election victory song all f**king primary season long.

Not surprised you listen to demented state cult music.

Triggered traitorous racists. The yummiest tears around!

[Badger]

Deplorable DINO Dan Lipinski, a.k.a. Trump's favorite Democrat:
*Voted against Obamacare and co-sponsored a bill to take away employer-provided insurance for one million people
*Supported a budget that would have cut Social Security and Medicare
*Voted against overtime pay and against a $15 an hour minimum wage
*Voted against the Dream Act
*Called Donald Trump "a champion of immigration reform"
*Voted over 50 times to restrict a woman's access to reproductive health care and is one of only two Democrats (along with soon-to-be ex-Rep. Collin Peterson of Minnesota) an amicus curiae brief calling on the Supreme Court to reconsider and potentially overturn Roe v. Wade
*Voted against legislation to increase federal funding for embryonic stem cell research in 2007
*Supported the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and "religious freedom" acts and says he's "personally opposed" to marriage equality
*Accepted over $2.5 million from corporations and their lobbyists
*Supported reauthorizing the Patriot Act in 2006
*Did not endorse Barack Obama for President in 2012

Yeah, shame on those angry radical leftist Democrats for primarying this upstanding champion of progressive values such as these! Give me a break. Good riddance, DINO Lipinski. There's probably a seat waiting for you at Faux Noise right next to Tulsi Gabbard.

No no no! Don't you see that this opposition to Lapinski was totally and completely about abortion?

I mean, that's what the posters who totally and completely base their vote on abortion told me.

[Badger]

Yeah here’s the thing: I really, really doubt Lipinski lost cause of abortion and acting like it’s the sole (or even the main) reason isn’t quite true. Just look at the previous post.

Because of abortion only? - No, of course. But it was very important factor, motivating "base" hatred against him. And not only him and not only because of abortion  - Feinstein was called a "conservative Democrat" by many of these activists despite being thoroughly pro-choice. In fact - ANY vote against activist's wishes causes such reactions, and cries "primary him/her!". Democratic party gradually becomes as Bolshevick's and as intolerant to any views, but views of "base", as Republican does. Even 10 years ago it was very different, Now it seems that even Capuano and Crowley were "insufficiently liberal" for activists. Naturally, Lipinski - even more so..

You're yammering on is rather devoid of fact. For example, Feinstein was attacked from the left in California of course, and still handily won her primary.

[Badger]

The gloating going on by Marie Newman fans sends a message to pro-lifers that they are fundamentally unwelcome in the party. That's a losing track for Democrats if there ever is one. From "safe, legal, rare" to "end Hyde". What a shameful trajectory...

Waaaaaaaaaaaaa I can't discriminate against gay people anymore

Lipinski ain't stopping anyone from getting gay married, and he even voted for the Equality Act. Opposing gay rights is not why people support him.

Opposing gay rights is still a major problem.

No, and Lipinski does not oppose gay rights whatsoever.

- Opposes same-sex marriage & the recognition thereof.
- Supports DOMA, which denied federal benefits to gay couples
- Supports the First Amendment Defense Act, which would prohibit the federal government from requiring that some businesses not discriminate against same-sex couples.
- Supports the Republican version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which sought to allow businesses to deny services to individuals if they felt providing service would violate their religious beliefs.

"Lipinski does not oppose gay rights whatsoever?" K.

The greatest gay right is the right to a job.  Economic gay freedom.  When it comes to that, Dan is a much bigger supporter than you are.  But please, keep focusing on settled issues that are of no relevance to modern gays.

As a gay person- kindly stfu about what the "greatest gay right" is. You can frevently support whatever obscure conservative democrat you want to support, but don't run your mouth and disrespect our struggles for the right to exist and live our lives. Thanks.

No, Ill say whatever I want thanks.  There is not a homophobic bone in his body.

In one ear.....

[Badger]

Lipinski's defeat was a very sad event for me.

To this day, I likely hold the record of being the youngest member of the Suffolk County Democratic Committee in its history.  I identify here as a Republican because I am registered as one, but I have voted for more Democrats than Republicans over the last 24 years of being a registered Republican.

When I was an active Democrat from 1975-82, there were a number of liberal Democrats who were pro-life.  I'm not talking about Dixiecrats, or even moderately conservative Southern Democrats elected from 1972 onward.  I'm talking about center-left Democrats who were (A) loyal to the National Party, (B) adherents to liberal positions on civil rights, unions, and even on the Vietnam War, and (C) supported ratification of ERA who were pro-life.  They were mostly Catholics who held to a pro-life position out of religious conviction (as did many of their constituents), but who also held to all sorts of other LIBERAL positions as a result of their religious faith.  These were pro-life Democrats who were anti-war in Central America, who were anti-Death Penalty when it wasn't cool to be so, who were believers in foreign aid as a means of America being Salt and Light to the World with an obligation to feed the poor, who advocated liberalization of immigration (though not open borders), who supported the Civil Right acts, and who supported Equity Feminism (the issues of equal pay for the same job, prohibition on gender discrimination in hiring and promotion) while being reserved on the Gender Feminism that has ripped the institution of Family to tatters in America.  And they were pro-labor, pro union, pro-Davis/Bacon and pro Glass/Steagall.  They were the guts of the Democratic Party that America needs now and doesn't have.  They kept the Democratic Party what it was, without running it off the rails.

THIS Democratic Party didn't use abortion as a litmus test.  We're way beyond this at this point.  I don't know if I could even be elected to a local committed post as a Democrat, even if I were to pledge unending fidelity to the National Ticket.  That's not enough; one must endorse an agenda of Gender Feminism and Identity Politics that has NOT been good for America as a whole.  One must endorse a world view where Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib are American Patriots (and not mere outliers and flakes) while Donald Trump is a Russian Asset.  It is one step closer to make the Democratic Party the sort of socially liberal party that may well be able to cobble a coalition of wealthy liberals, identity politics-based constituencies to remain a competitive entity in Amercian politics, and even enjoy more hegemony than they do now, but it's a party that resents ordinary Americans who work for a living and make every attempt to be self reliant, and resents the notion that people who play by the rules of society ought to receive favor over those that have not.  It's abortion position is a manifestation of that.  It has become a line of cleavage between the parties.  It has caused many of the truly liberalizing elements of our society that recognize the humanity of the unborn to have no real political home.  

Lipinski's defeat is a sign that there is no place in the Democratic Party for me.  I can agree with its core positions on labor unions, economics, and even basic equality, and still be persona non grata.  Sure they'll take my vote, but they won't take my input.  I'm certainly not sure how much the GOP would take the input of people like myself.  Indeed, this is one reason for my positive opinion overall of Donald Trump; he appears to be concerned about the opinions of folks like myself in ways that neither today's off-the-rails Democrats nor the average Republican pol (who is going along with Trump right now because he/she is stuck for now) are capable of.  Trump may be conning me, but I know where the Democratic and Republican establishments stand on the opinions of people like me.  And I'm realistic that this isn't going to improve.  But Democrats need to know that I'm someone who's more liberal than conservative that they've shoved out of the party.  Working Americans are not better off because the Democratic Party is more like Marie Newman than Dan Lipinski these days.

This doesn't make any sense. Lipinski isn't a Catholic liberal who happens to be pro-life, so the whole premise falls.

What are typically silly to the point of deluded post by fuzzy. To repeat, Dan Lipinski was nothing like Mary Rose oakar. If he was a staunchly progressive on other issues like Oakar was, most primary voters would continue to largely forgive his pro-life views, as they do a good number of other pro-life Democrats.

Given the many many other issues that Lipinski deviated far from the median Democrat on Beyond abortion, including opposing the DREAM Act with increasing number of Hispanic constituents, to say his defeat was about abortion being a so-called litmus test is somewhere between ignorant and disingenuous.

[Badger]

Lipinski didn’t lose b/c he’s pro-life, he lost because he’s a DINO in a safe Democratic seat who opposes much of the Democratic Party platform.  The man wouldn’t even endorse Obama in 2012 for f***’s sake.  Frankly, the party is better off without folks like him.  Lipinski would’ve still been a DINO in the Democratic Party of 1988.

What position does Lipinski have that would have been unusual for a Democratic member of Congress in 1988?

1988 might be a little bit of an exaggeration, but he was far far out of the mainstream Democratic views from even a decade or more.

On top of that, even in 1988 refusing to endorse an incumbent Democratic president for re-election what, one who comes from your hometown no less, would be pretty far off the pale. Not to mention that decidedly craptastic nepotism that got him his job in the first place.

[Badger]

I know why Lipinski faced a primary challenge (he's like Peterson, but in a safe district), but why do activists launch primary challenges against many incumbents who are well to the left of Lipinski (Zoe Lofgren, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Anna Eshoo, Jimmy Gomez, Mark Takano, Nanette Barragan, Alan Lowenthal, Julia Brownley, Lou Correa, Josh Harder, Eric Swalwell, Grace Napolitano, Linda Sanchez, Jared Huffman, Doris Matsui, Ami Bera, Mike Thompson, Scott Peters, and Brad Sherman)?

The big difference? Who on this list is seriously endangered in their primary, let alone likely to lose? I can't identify anyone off the top of my head, which I believe answers your question.

[Badger]

I know why Lipinski faced a primary challenge (he's like Peterson, but in a safe district), but why do activists launch primary challenges against many incumbents who are well to the left of Lipinski (Zoe Lofgren, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Anna Eshoo, Jimmy Gomez, Mark Takano, Nanette Barragan, Alan Lowenthal, Julia Brownley, Lou Correa, Josh Harder, Eric Swalwell, Grace Napolitano, Linda Sanchez, Jared Huffman, Doris Matsui, Ami Bera, Mike Thompson, Scott Peters, and Brad Sherman)?

The big difference? Who on this list is seriously endangered in their primary, let alone likely to lose? I can't identify anyone off the top of my head, which I believe answers your question.

They will all win easily. They just faced many challengers from their own party. Is it just because other Democrats simply want to be in Congress?

Yes, and of course within both parties there are some extremists who demand ideological purity, especially in safe districts. Even hardcore conservatives regularly get non Fringe primary Challengers from their right.

In other words, this has nothing to do with the Democratic party or Justice Democrats. It's a condition inimical to both parties. Now that you mention it Perhaps it is slightly more common among Democrats because, unlike the Republican party which is Purge everybody who isn't either hardcore right-wing or crazy as a loon right-wing, most Democrats are usually fit the label of a standard liberal. The relative condition of the parties would be if the DSA had essentially completely taken over the Democrats between 1980 and 2016 culminating with electing AOC president in 2016. Republicans have already had that equivalently extreme ideological takeover, and revel in it.

[Badger]

My two cents on this primary is that Lipinski's loss: Progressive challengers seem to win only when they have some established special interests fighting on their behalf. In this case, organizations like Planned Parenthood and Emily's List. Lipinski had many reasons for his loss within the Democratic primary, but he barely lost when all these people/organizations backed Newman is a testament in itself as to how hard it is to defeat a Democratic incumbent.

but it also shows how the AFL-CIO and industrial unions are no longer enough here to save an incumbent against opposition from the service unions and liberal interest groups.

It's not enough if you're Dan Lipinski running in a + 6D District.