MA-08: Brianna Wu running against Lynch in 2018 Democratic primary

[smoltchanov]

I'd be in favor of Wu, but I wouldn't be too broken up if Lynch wins. It's Massachusetts, Democrats there are pretty good compared to Democrats in a lot of other places.

I would like more union folks in Congress anyway though. There are far too few of them these days.

Votes against lynch even though he's not a conservative dem, or third way dem :/

You can't be "too liberal" for some folks. And if you vote against at least one piece of liberal program - you are already a conservative))) (the same, in fact, takes place in Republican party too, but in "mirror image")

[smoltchanov]

I'd be in favor of Wu, but I wouldn't be too broken up if Lynch wins. It's Massachusetts, Democrats there are pretty good compared to Democrats in a lot of other places.

I would like more union folks in Congress anyway though. There are far too few of them these days.

Votes against lynch even though he's not a conservative dem, or third way dem :/

You can't be "too liberal" for some folks. And if you vote against at least one piece of liberal program - you are already a conservative))) (the same, in fact, takes place in Republican party too, but in "mirror image")

Obamacare? He voted against that from the left.

I know that. But so is happened he voted with Republicans that time (though by different reason). For "loyalists" that's more then enough...

[smoltchanov]

I'd be in favor of Wu, but I wouldn't be too broken up if Lynch wins. It's Massachusetts, Democrats there are pretty good compared to Democrats in a lot of other places.

I would like more union folks in Congress anyway though. There are far too few of them these days.

Votes against lynch even though he's not a conservative dem, or third way dem :/

You can't be "too liberal" for some folks. And if you vote against at least one piece of liberal program - you are already a conservative))) (the same, in fact, takes place in Republican party too, but in "mirror image")

Obamacare? He voted against that from the left.

I know that. Buy so is happened he voted with Republicans that time (though by different reason). For "loyalists" that's more then enough...

I think they class him conservatove because of muh abortion.

His record on serving his consticuents has been exemplary, which won't matched by Wu who just wants the attention.

May be. I am pro-choice myself, but don't hold that against him. There are lots of pro-life Democrats in his district, and i also heard good words about his constituent services.

[smoltchanov]

If Lynch is really that great at constituent services, he'll probably win. I think it's good that he's getting challenged though.

I also consider it a positive thing. But one question: why must all challenges to come "from the left" in Democratic case, and "from the right" - in Republican?

[smoltchanov]

^ Good examples (though i don't think that Marshall will be more moderate then Huelskamp - may be only less vocal and shrill, and Moulton is quite liberal by my standards and his challenge of Tierney was, IMHO, more because of scandals, surrounding him (Tierney), not ideology). But in 90% of cases it's so. And question remains - why Democratic activists frequently try to challenge somewhat less liberal (but still - not conservative) Democratic officeholders even when it's clear that "bold progressive" can't win general election (if he/she - can, situation is different)? And similar situation among republicans? Why this endless "desire for purity" even at a price of electoral loss?

[smoltchanov]

^ Good examples (though i don't think that Marshall will be more moderate then Huelskamp - may be only less vocal and shrill, and Moulton is quite liberal by my standards and his challenge of Tierney was, IMHO, more because of scandals, surrounding him (Tierney), not ideology). But in 90% of cases it's so. And question remains - why Democratic activists frequently try to challenge somewhat less liberal (but still - not conservative) Democratic officeholders even when it's clear that "bold progressive" can't win general election (if he/she - can, situation is different)? And similar situation among republicans? Why this endless "desire for purity" even at a price of electoral loss?

I don't think there's a chance of an electoral loss in MA-08. It's a pretty solidly Democratic district. Give that, if you're a progressive, why wouldn't you choose the more progressive option in the primary?

MA-08 is, surely, solidly Democratic, but are you so sure that it's so "progressive" IMHO, it's closer to "working class Democratic"-type districts, which are populist, but not "progressive"...

[smoltchanov]

^ Good examples (though i don't think that Marshall will be more moderate then Huelskamp - may be only less vocal and shrill, and Moulton is quite liberal by my standards and his challenge of Tierney was, IMHO, more because of scandals, surrounding him (Tierney), not ideology). But in 90% of cases it's so. And question remains - why Democratic activists frequently try to challenge somewhat less liberal (but still - not conservative) Democratic officeholders even when it's clear that "bold progressive" can't win general election (if he/she - can, situation is different)? And similar situation among republicans? Why this endless "desire for purity" even at a price of electoral loss?

I don't think there's a chance of an electoral loss in MA-08. It's a pretty solidly Democratic district. Give that, if you're a progressive, why wouldn't you choose the more progressive option in the primary?

MA-08 is, surely, solidly Democratic, but are you so sure that it's so "progressive" IMHO, it's closer to "working class Democratic"-type districts, which are populist, but not "progressive"...

It swung towards Clinton in 2016. It's a rich suburban district, not a working-class populist district. But they'll vote for any Democrat over any Republican. Just like they've consistently re-elected Lynch despite him being not that great a fit for the district. He's better, in their eyes, than a Republican.

But regardless of whether most Democratic primary voters are progressive, the point stands that if all you care about is how "progressive" a candidate is, you'll vote for the candidate who is the most "progressive" if general election electability isn't a factor. I don't think such people are a majority of Democratic primary voters in the district, and I think it's debatable whether Wu is really more progressive than Lynch, hence I expect Lynch to beat Wu.

Thanks! But i still have some doubts that, say, Brockton and South Boston are so "rich suburban". But you are closer to district then i am...

[smoltchanov]

Ok, where do I go to donate money to Lynch? If there's anything I dislike more than the alt-right, it's social justice warriors.

For me - they are mirror images of each other. So - i equally dislike BOTH...

[smoltchanov]

Ok, where do I go to donate money to Lynch? If there's anything I dislike more than the alt-right, it's social justice warriors.

For me - they are mirror images of each other. So - i equally dislike BOTH...

People who care about racial issues are JUST AS BAD as neo-Nazis!!!!!1

No. People who are unable able to listen , always think they are (and - only they) - right, and impose their point of view on other by ANY means (including slander) are as bad as neo-Nazis. I am color-blind, so i am absolutely for ALL possible rights for minorities, and as absolutely - against ANY privileges for them

[smoltchanov]

Ok, where do I go to donate money to Lynch? If there's anything I dislike more than the alt-right, it's social justice warriors.

For me - they are mirror images of each other. So - i equally dislike BOTH...

People who care about racial issues are JUST AS BAD as neo-Nazis!!!!!1

No. People who are unable able to listen , always think they are (and - only they) - right, and impose their point of view on other by ANY means (including slander) are as bad as neo-Nazis. I am color-blind, so i am absolutely for ALL possible rights for minorities, and as absolutely - against ANY privileges for them

Most SJW don't do that, but please keep trying to stereotype people.  That always goes so very well.

I don't try to strreotype, but express my personal experience. BTW - there is very old proverb about where "good intentions" usually lead....

[smoltchanov]

Ok, where do I go to donate money to Lynch? If there's anything I dislike more than the alt-right, it's social justice warriors.

For me - they are mirror images of each other. So - i equally dislike BOTH...

People who care about racial issues are JUST AS BAD as neo-Nazis!!!!!1

No. People who are unable able to listen , always think they are (and - only they) - right, and impose their point of view on other by ANY means (including slander) are as bad as neo-Nazis. I am color-blind, so i am absolutely for ALL possible rights for minorities, and as absolutely - against ANY privileges for them

Most SJW don't do that, but please keep trying to stereotype people.  That always goes so very well.

I don't try to strreotype, but express my personal experience. BTW - there is very old proverb about where "good intentions" usually lead....

The loud idiots on the internet who are cherrypicked by anti"SJW's" to damage the set of beliefs are not most people who believe "SJW stuff".

Well, may be i met too many "loud idiots" you mentioned, who influenced my position on this subject....

[smoltchanov]

I don't really like Lynch, but I'll happily root for him in his primary.

My general rule - "be wary of activists!". In almost all districts, but the most liberal and conservative)))))

[smoltchanov]

Ok, where do I go to donate money to Lynch? If there's anything I dislike more than the alt-right, it's social justice warriors.

For me - they are mirror images of each other. So - i equally dislike BOTH...

People who care about racial issues are JUST AS BAD as neo-Nazis!!!!!1

No. People who are unable able to listen , always think they are (and - only they) - right, and impose their point of view on other by ANY means (including slander) are as bad as neo-Nazis. I am color-blind, so i am absolutely for ALL possible rights for minorities, and as absolutely - against ANY privileges for them.

Ignorant racist alert.

I am not racist. And almost surely - more knowledgeable then you are. But i don't give a damn (and never will) about "political correctness". Live himself with it, and let ME live without it. As i always like to say in such cases "whites have rights too". You began to forget about that. That's why you lost this time, not because of Putin (whon i don't like either) or some other reasons. Normal white men and women doomed you, "politically correct elitists",  this time...... And some Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and other joined them (after all, Trump, with all his baggage, got even slightly better percentages among minorities, then Romney)