Opinion of Brian Schatz

[Mechaman]

Obvious FF is obvious FF.

Also, LOL at some of the people on here who are voting HP out of spite because the guy was appointed into office or some dead guy's will.  I'm not judging, and nobody should be judging, Schatz based off of how he got into office (unless of course he had somebody murdered and then came into the Governor's office with a mountainload of blackmail to get into office a la Frank Underwood but then he wouldn't be in office if that was made public) but based off of what he brings to the table for the people of Hawaii.  Going off of his wikipedia page I can see that the only positions of his that are mentioned is that he supports same sex marriage and he voted against FISA.  I mean really, that makes him better than at least 75% of the current Senators right off the bat.  He was also endorsed by the labor unions in the Lieutenant Governor primaries.  If labor unions IN HAWAII endorse you, you must be pretty daggum pro-labor.

Like Oakvale just said, in a state as Democratic as Hawaii what is even the point of going moderate hero?

Seriously, what is wrong with you people?

[windjammer]

Hawaii is one of the most (the most?) Democratic states in the union. It stands to reason that you should thus try to get the most liberal Senator possible. Why waste Hawaii on some moderate hero like Hanabusa? It's not complicated. This is even aside from the seniority arguments.

Hanabusa isn't a moderate hero.

----
And Flawless Victory, teacher unions endorsed Hanabusa.

[Donerail]

Hawaii is one of the most (the most?) Democratic states in the union. It stands to reason that you should thus try to get the most liberal Senator possible. Why waste Hawaii on some moderate hero like Hanabusa? It's not complicated. This is even aside from the seniority arguments.

Hanabusa isn't a moderate hero.

I'm hawkish, her too. I'm "moderate" socially, like her.

I really can't stand Schatz, too "left libertarian".

She's not a moderate hero... but you're advocating for her because her opponent is too far to the left and because she's hawkish and running as a moderate.

[windjammer]

Hawaii is one of the most (the most?) Democratic states in the union. It stands to reason that you should thus try to get the most liberal Senator possible. Why waste Hawaii on some moderate hero like Hanabusa? It's not complicated. This is even aside from the seniority arguments.

Hanabusa isn't a moderate hero.

I'm hawkish, her too. I'm "moderate" socially, like her.

I really can't stand Schatz, too "left libertarian".

She's not a moderate hero... but you're advocating for her because her opponent is too far to the left and because she's hawkish and running as a moderate.

moderate socially, not economically.

[Donerail]

Hawaii is one of the most (the most?) Democratic states in the union. It stands to reason that you should thus try to get the most liberal Senator possible. Why waste Hawaii on some moderate hero like Hanabusa? It's not complicated. This is even aside from the seniority arguments.

Hanabusa isn't a moderate hero.

I'm hawkish, her too. I'm "moderate" socially, like her.

I really can't stand Schatz, too "left libertarian".

She's not a moderate hero... but you're advocating for her because her opponent is too far to the left and because she's hawkish and running as a moderate.

moderate socially, not economically.

That's besides the point - Schatz is too. Her main distinctions are that's she to the right of/more 'moderate' than Schatz on several issues, and that a dead guy chose her.

[windjammer]

Hawaii is one of the most (the most?) Democratic states in the union. It stands to reason that you should thus try to get the most liberal Senator possible. Why waste Hawaii on some moderate hero like Hanabusa? It's not complicated. This is even aside from the seniority arguments.

Hanabusa isn't a moderate hero.

I'm hawkish, her too. I'm "moderate" socially, like her.

I really can't stand Schatz, too "left libertarian".

She's not a moderate hero... but you're advocating for her because her opponent is too far to the left and because she's hawkish and running as a moderate.

moderate socially, not economically.

That's besides the point - Schatz is too. Her main distinctions are that's she to the right of/more 'moderate' than Schatz on several issues, and that a dead guy chose her.

And that Schatz sucked Abercrombie's d***.

Why would she be a bad senator just because Inouye wanted her to succeed him?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Hawaii is one of the most (the most?) Democratic states in the union. It stands to reason that you should thus try to get the most liberal Senator possible. Why waste Hawaii on some moderate hero like Hanabusa? It's not complicated. This is even aside from the seniority arguments.

Hanabusa isn't a moderate hero.

I'm hawkish, her too. I'm "moderate" socially, like her.

I really can't stand Schatz, too "left libertarian".

She's not a moderate hero... but you're advocating for her because her opponent is too far to the left and because she's hawkish and running as a moderate.

moderate socially, not economically.

That's besides the point - Schatz is too. Her main distinctions are that's she to the right of/more 'moderate' than Schatz on several issues, and that a dead guy chose her.

And that Schatz sucked Abercrombie's d***.

Why would she be a bad senator just because Inouye wanted her to succeed him?

Why would she be a good senator just because Inouye wanted her to succeed him?

[windjammer]

Hawaii is one of the most (the most?) Democratic states in the union. It stands to reason that you should thus try to get the most liberal Senator possible. Why waste Hawaii on some moderate hero like Hanabusa? It's not complicated. This is even aside from the seniority arguments.

Hanabusa isn't a moderate hero.

I'm hawkish, her too. I'm "moderate" socially, like her.

I really can't stand Schatz, too "left libertarian".

She's not a moderate hero... but you're advocating for her because her opponent is too far to the left and because she's hawkish and running as a moderate.

moderate socially, not economically.

That's besides the point - Schatz is too. Her main distinctions are that's she to the right of/more 'moderate' than Schatz on several issues, and that a dead guy chose her.

And that Schatz sucked Abercrombie's d***.

Why would she be a bad senator just because Inouye wanted her to succeed him?

Why would she be a good senator just because Inouye wanted her to succeed him?

I don't say it. But it just annoys me how the fact that Inouye wanted her to succeed him is always an argument made by the Schatz supporters in order to destroy her campaign.

[Franzl]

I'm still not understanding why one should support ousting the incumbent in this case. Hawaii is the last place we should be substituting a loyal party line vote for a "moderate".

[windjammer]

I'm still not understanding why one should support ousting the incumbent in this case. Hawaii is the last place we should be substituting a loyal party line vote for a "moderate".

Because Hanabusa is moderate socially, leftist economically. And Schatz seems to be much more socially left, much more to left on international issues/NSA, and globally at the same level economically.

It's just different factions which oppose each other:
Hanabusa is supported by the Blue Dogs, the Hawks and the asian minority
Schatz: left libertarians, the most leftist factions.

I understand that some posters like Sjoyce and Sawx are supporting Schatz. But you should understand too why I and some other democrats are supporting Hanabusa.

[Franzl]

I'm still not understanding why one should support ousting the incumbent in this case. Hawaii is the last place we should be substituting a loyal party line vote for a "moderate".

Because Hanabusa is moderate socially, leftist economically. And Schatz seems to be much more socially left, much more to left on international issues/NSA, and globally at the same level economically.

It's just different factions which oppose each other:
Hanabusa is supported by the Blue Dogs, the Hawks and the asian minority
Schatz: left libertarians, the most leftist factions.

I understand that some posters like Sjoyce and Sawx are supporting Schatz. But you should understand too why I and some other democrats are supporting Hanabusa.

Seems unwise to "unilaterally disarm". You can run Blue Dogs and "Hawks" in North Carolina or Arkansas....but as long as Oklahoma and Texas are producing crazies as often as they can, why take away a solidly liberal vote from a state where you can afford to run one?

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

FF.
Hanabusa should have gone for the Governor's office and ousted Abercrombie. She's old, moderate, and butthurt. She's losing the primary because she has absolutely nothing to run on. Some of you supporters claim "Oh, but she's not running on Inouye everyday!", I concur. She has no message. There is no compelling reason for anyone in Hawaii to dump a younger, more liberal Senator in favor of her, an old, centrist tool for Big Pharma.

I'm still not understanding why one should support ousting the incumbent in this case. Hawaii is the last place we should be substituting a loyal party line vote for a "moderate".

Because Hanabusa is moderate socially, leftist economically. And Schatz seems to be much more socially left, much more to left on international issues/NSA, and globally at the same level economically.

It's just different factions which oppose each other:
Hanabusa is supported by the Blue Dogs, the Hawks and the asian minority
Schatz: left libertarians, the most leftist factions.

I understand that some posters like Sjoyce and Sawx are supporting Schatz. But you should understand too why I and some other democrats are supporting Hanabusa.

But there is no reason to support a Blue a Dog in Hawaii. It's one of the most left-wing states in the country. We should go for the most left-wing Senator possible. That's the way our party works. We run moderates in red states and liberals in the blue states. Hannabusa brings nothing to the table that's better than Schatz. The only good thing about her primary challenge is that when she loses she'll be out of the House too, and we can get someone more liberal.

[windjammer]

I'm still not understanding why one should support ousting the incumbent in this case. Hawaii is the last place we should be substituting a loyal party line vote for a "moderate".

Because Hanabusa is moderate socially, leftist economically. And Schatz seems to be much more socially left, much more to left on international issues/NSA, and globally at the same level economically.

It's just different factions which oppose each other:
Hanabusa is supported by the Blue Dogs, the Hawks and the asian minority
Schatz: left libertarians, the most leftist factions.

I understand that some posters like Sjoyce and Sawx are supporting Schatz. But you should understand too why I and some other democrats are supporting Hanabusa.

Seems unwise to "unilaterally disarm". You can run Blue Dogs and "Hawks" in North Carolina or Arkansas....but as long as Oklahoma and Texas are producing crazies as often as they can, why take away a solidly liberal vote from a state where you can afford to run one?

But at least understand that I prefer Hanabusa by far ideologically.

And Batman: she's not a Blue Dog.

-----
Well, Sjoyce, Oakvale, Franzl, with all respect I have to you as persons and posters, you're just a different democratic faction than mine. But you're definitely not "far-leftists" like TNF. You support Schatz because he's closer to you ideologically, like I support Hanabusa who is closer to me ideologically.
Hanabusa is definitely not a blue dog, her supports don't support her because she should have been appointed (not the majority at least).
So that's all, it's Hawaii, so there is no need of democratic party's unity for being elected. That's why our different factions can fight each other.

[Vega]

How is Hanabusa conservative, socially? She's Pro-Choice, Pro-Gay Marriage, uh.... Pro-Gun Control....

[windjammer]

How is Hanabusa conservative, socially? She's Pro-Choice, Pro-Gay Marriage, uh.... Pro-Gun Control....

She's more socially conservative than Schatz.

[SWE]

How is Hanabusa conservative, socially? She's Pro-Choice, Pro-Gay Marriage, uh.... Pro-Gun Control....

http://dc808.blogs.civilbeat.com/post/23478819642/hanabusa-says-marriage-should-be-between-a-man-and-a

[windjammer]

How is Hanabusa conservative, socially? She's Pro-Choice, Pro-Gay Marriage, uh.... Pro-Gun Control....

http://dc808.blogs.civilbeat.com/post/23478819642/hanabusa-says-marriage-should-be-between-a-man-and-a

She backed SSM few months ago.

[Hifly]

I support Hanabusa (and Mercado Kim) so he's HP to me.

[Zioneer]

I support Hanabusa (and Mercado Kim) so he's HP to me.

I still can't believe that anyone supports Mercado Kim.

[Vega]

I support Hanabusa (and Mercado Kim) so he's HP to me.

I still can't believe that anyone supports Mercado Kim.

Why? Because she's anti-SSM (and I'm sure she will "evolve" on that)?

[Oakvale]

Sidenote: Any time I see "SSM" I think it's S&M and that some Senator or whatever has been outed as being kind of kinky.

[Vega]

Sidenote: Any time I see "SSM" I think it's S&M and that some Senator or whatever has been outed as being kind of kinky.

Yeah... same here.

[PiMp DaDdy FitzGerald]

How can you be more electable than someone guaranteed to win the general election?

The same thing was said about Al Gore and Kerry. Look where that lead this country.

Maybe if the United States had a 20 point democratic advantage you'd have a point

In 1976 Carter had a 30 point advantage and almost lost as a moderate. I don't want the same thing to happen in Hawaii.

[IceSpear]

Schatz isn't entitled to the seat because he's an incumbent (especially since he was never elected).
Hanabusa isn't entitled to the seat because Inouye wanted her appointed.

A lot of entitlement all around in this race.

[free my dawg]

I really can't understand what's so compelling about Hanabusa, guys. Please enlighten me.

I can understand why someone like windjammer would support Hanabusa - both of them are very similar ideologically. However, I feel like she spent her state Senate career fighting against the same interests that she "evolved" on oh-so-coincidentally after the election.

As far as marriage goes, it's pandering at its finest. Same with birth control.