IL-3 Dem Primary: Election Day!

[Calthrina950]

Marie under 2,000

Daniel Lipinski*
37,433   51.3%   
Marie Newman
35,550   48.7   
72,983 votes, 77% reporting (384 of 500 precincts)

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

Really? Does it really make someone a terrible human being to be unable to shake of the socialization of generations of mainstream marginalization, but still be humble enough to overcome it and accept the times are changing, despite one's personal biases? Really?

The same thing with abortion: the point at which an embryo becomes a person isn't evident to the average person - you can have your beliefs, but they are learned; they're not intuitive. Does it really make someone a terrible person to have a different understanding about when life starts? And if not, does it really make them a terrible person to place a person's survival over a second person's bodily autonomy? It's not an objective answer, it's value-based.

Personally pro-choice and pro-LGBT rights, before you go ahead and call me a bigot myself.

Thank you. This is the purpose of civil debate. You may not necessarily agree with someone on the issues, but you understand where they are coming from, debate the merits of their points, and accept that others have differing positions. When you just scream at other people, label them, and refuse to hear where they are coming from, then you lose all credibility. I have no issue whatsoever with people who are pro-choice; it is just a political disagreement, and should not become a personal one.

[Sestak]

There is no discernible difference between evolution denial and believing a fetus is a person.

I'm fine with other beliefs, but not ones that are objectively false.

[Figueira]

I'm pro-SSM, (relatively) pro-choice, and pro-universal healthcare, and yet I'd vote for Lipinski just because the SJW left is so disastrous.

You also hate Palestinians so I don't think you get to play the "I'm a good rational liberal" card.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

What happened to this thread

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

This is Dems' problem today. If you ever disagree with them, you're "a terrible human being". Totalitarian.

You are correct. And that is why I have hoped for Lipinski's victory throughout, because this kind of absolutism on the issues is poisonous to democracy.

I'm pro-choice myself, but this kind of SJW litmus-test nonsense is the reason why Dems keep losing swing voters.

Yeah the GOP sure took a beating for refusing to moderate in 2010.

The rules for the Right and Left are different. Surely, you know that.

[The Mikado]

This thread has become awful.

I blame Dan Lipinski.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Marie under 2,000

Daniel Lipinski*
37,433   51.3%   
Marie Newman
35,550   48.7   
72,983 votes, 77% reporting (384 of 500 precincts)

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

Really? Does it really make someone a terrible human being to be unable to shake of the socialization of generations of mainstream marginalization, but still be humble enough to overcome it and accept the times are changing, despite one's personal biases? Really?

The same thing with abortion: the point at which an embryo becomes a person isn't evident to the average person - you can have your beliefs, but they are learned; they're not intuitive. Does it really make someone a terrible person to have a different understanding about when life starts? And if not, does it really make them a terrible person to place a person's survival over a second person's bodily autonomy? It's not an objective answer, it's value-based.

Personally pro-choice and pro-LGBT rights, before you go ahead and call me a bigot myself.

YES. It makes you a terrible person to believe businesses should be able to discriminate and deny service to someone because their gay. It makes you a terrible person to believe LGBT couples shouldn't be entitled to the marriage rights as everyone else. It makes you a terrible person to believe that an employer should have the right to fire their employee's because of the person they love. YES. These make you a terrible person, being a public figure and attempting to vote them into law - even more so.

[Figueira]

There is no discernible difference between evolution denial and believing a fetus is a person.

I'm fine with other beliefs, but not ones that are objectively false.

Not really, one is a belief that directly contradicts actual evidence and one is a different definition of a term.

I'm very pro-choice but this argument is just stupid.

[Calthrina950]

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

This is Dems' problem today. If you ever disagree with them, you're "a terrible human being". Totalitarian.

If you disagree with basic human rights you're a terrible person. Sorry. Not sorry.

Marie under 2,000

Daniel Lipinski*
37,433   51.3%   
Marie Newman
35,550   48.7   
72,983 votes, 77% reporting (384 of 500 precincts)

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

Really? Does it really make someone a terrible human being to be unable to shake of the socialization of generations of mainstream marginalization, but still be humble enough to overcome it and accept the times are changing, despite one's personal biases? Really?

The same thing with abortion: the point at which an embryo becomes a person isn't evident to the average person - you can have your beliefs, but they are learned; they're not intuitive. Does it really make someone a terrible person to have a different understanding about when life starts? And if not, does it really make them a terrible person to place a person's survival over a second person's bodily autonomy? It's not an objective answer, it's value-based.

Personally pro-choice and pro-LGBT rights, before you go ahead and call me a bigot myself.

The thing of it is, Lipinski hasn't overcome anything. He's still anti-LGBT, and votes that way.

What would you say about those Democrats who once opposed gay marriage? Do you think that this is such an issue to define a person's entire character by?

[MAINEiac4434]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/976274896262230018

I'm pro-choice, pro-SSM, and pro-universal healthcare, and yet I'd vote for Lipinski just because the SJW left is so disastrous.

Well, you'd probably agree with his stance on immigration, too. Newman's would be disqualifying for you.

Marie under 2,000

Daniel Lipinski*
37,433   51.3%   
Marie Newman
35,550   48.7   
72,983 votes, 77% reporting (384 of 500 precincts)

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

Really? Does it really make someone a terrible human being to be unable to shake of the socialization of generations of mainstream marginalization, but still be humble enough to overcome it and accept the times are changing, despite one's personal biases? Really?

The same thing with abortion: the point at which an embryo becomes a person isn't evident to the average person - you can have your beliefs, but they are learned; they're not intuitive. Does it really make someone a terrible person to have a different understanding about when life starts? And if not, does it really make them a terrible person to place a person's survival over a second person's bodily autonomy? It's not an objective answer, it's value-based.

Personally pro-choice and pro-LGBT rights, before you go ahead and call me a bigot myself.

Thank you. This is the purpose of civil debate. You may not necessarily agree with someone on the issues, but you understand where they are coming from, debate the merits of their points, and accept that others have differing positions. When you just scream at other people, label them, and refuse to hear where they are coming from, then you lose all credibility. I have no issue whatsoever with people who are pro-choice; it is just a political disagreement, and should not become a personal one.

That's what you don't get, man. Politics is personal. When it comes down to your right to marry, your right to have healthcare, your right to make your own body decisions, it's hard to see where the other person is coming from. It can't be civil when the other side says you don't deserve to make those choices for yourself. When it's life in death, as it is in healthcare, it becomes personal.

I would love if this could be the West Wing and we could "disagree without being disagreeable" and find common ground, but that's been used to subject and oppress people in this country for years.

[Sestak]

Why do so many people want the Democrats to become an authoritarian (socialist and culturally conservative) party?

And literally what about Lipinski differentiates him from a Republican?

[YE]

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

This is Dems' problem today. If you ever disagree with them, you're "a terrible human being". Totalitarian.

You are correct. And that is why I have hoped for Lipinski's victory throughout, because this kind of absolutism on the issues is poisonous to democracy.

I'm pro-choice myself, but this kind of SJW litmus-test nonsense is the reason why Dems keep losing swing voters.

At least with me my beef with Lipinski is that he takes corporate and PAC money and isn't in favor of single payer, a higher minimum wage, and free college. Newman is in favor of all those things. Newman isn't a SJW but she's being pushed by people who arrived to politics for social issues posters on Atlas.

[Rookie Yinzer]

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

This is Dems' problem today. If you ever disagree with them, you're "a terrible human being". Totalitarian.

You are correct. And that is why I have hoped for Lipinski's victory throughout, because this kind of absolutism on the issues is poisonous to democracy.

I'm pro-choice myself, but this kind of SJW litmus-test nonsense is the reason why Dems keep losing swing voters.

LOL. Because asking politicians to stay out of women's wombs is sooooo authoritarian and an affront to democracy.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Fwiw, both Will and DuPage are about halfway done and Newman leads by 700 votes there. Which means she's likely to net about 1400 votes once these counties are fully counted. In other words, she needs to keep Lipinski's lead in Cook under 1400 votes. His lead there is currently 2600 votes, which means Newman needs to net 1200 votes out of the 1/6th of Cook County that's left. From my quick map, that would require her to lead there by 10 points.

She's probably toast.

[MAINEiac4434]

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

This is Dems' problem today. If you ever disagree with them, you're "a terrible human being". Totalitarian.

If you disagree with basic human rights you're a terrible person. Sorry. Not sorry.

Marie under 2,000

Daniel Lipinski*
37,433   51.3%   
Marie Newman
35,550   48.7   
72,983 votes, 77% reporting (384 of 500 precincts)

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

Really? Does it really make someone a terrible human being to be unable to shake of the socialization of generations of mainstream marginalization, but still be humble enough to overcome it and accept the times are changing, despite one's personal biases? Really?

The same thing with abortion: the point at which an embryo becomes a person isn't evident to the average person - you can have your beliefs, but they are learned; they're not intuitive. Does it really make someone a terrible person to have a different understanding about when life starts? And if not, does it really make them a terrible person to place a person's survival over a second person's bodily autonomy? It's not an objective answer, it's value-based.

Personally pro-choice and pro-LGBT rights, before you go ahead and call me a bigot myself.

The thing of it is, Lipinski hasn't overcome anything. He's still anti-LGBT, and votes that way.

What would you say about those Democrats who once opposed gay marriage? Do you think that this is such an issue to define a person's entire character by?

Political realities were different than they are today.

[Calthrina950]

Marie under 2,000

Daniel Lipinski*
37,433   51.3%   
Marie Newman
35,550   48.7   
72,983 votes, 77% reporting (384 of 500 precincts)

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

Really? Does it really make someone a terrible human being to be unable to shake of the socialization of generations of mainstream marginalization, but still be humble enough to overcome it and accept the times are changing, despite one's personal biases? Really?

The same thing with abortion: the point at which an embryo becomes a person isn't evident to the average person - you can have your beliefs, but they are learned; they're not intuitive. Does it really make someone a terrible person to have a different understanding about when life starts? And if not, does it really make them a terrible person to place a person's survival over a second person's bodily autonomy? It's not an objective answer, it's value-based.

Personally pro-choice and pro-LGBT rights, before you go ahead and call me a bigot myself.

YES. It makes you a terrible person to believe businesses should be able to discriminate and deny service to someone because their gay. It makes you a terrible person to believe LGBT couples shouldn't be entitled to the marriage rights as everyone else. It makes you a terrible person to believe that an employer should have the right to fire their employee's because of the person they love. YES. These make you a terrible person, being a public figure and attempting to vote them into law - even more so.

For the record, I do not support discrimination of any kind against gay people. Job discrimination, business discrimination, etc. are completely unacceptable and violate the civil rights laws and constitutional guarantees of this country, as well as being wrong from a moral standpoint. I also think that gay people should be entitled to the same marriage rights as others. But that doesn't mean one has to be a full-blown defender of gay marriage, or be absolutely committed to and invested in its advancement. It also means that one can believe gay marriage to be morally wrong, but still adhere to the letter of the law and treat others with decency.

[Sestak]

This is looking like an R hold.

[Green Line]

It's going to come down to Suburban Cook.

[Bidenworth2020]

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

This is Dems' problem today. If you ever disagree with them, you're "a terrible human being". Totalitarian.

If you disagree with basic human rights you're a terrible person. Sorry. Not sorry.

Marie under 2,000

Daniel Lipinski*
37,433   51.3%   
Marie Newman
35,550   48.7   
72,983 votes, 77% reporting (384 of 500 precincts)

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

Really? Does it really make someone a terrible human being to be unable to shake of the socialization of generations of mainstream marginalization, but still be humble enough to overcome it and accept the times are changing, despite one's personal biases? Really?

The same thing with abortion: the point at which an embryo becomes a person isn't evident to the average person - you can have your beliefs, but they are learned; they're not intuitive. Does it really make someone a terrible person to have a different understanding about when life starts? And if not, does it really make them a terrible person to place a person's survival over a second person's bodily autonomy? It's not an objective answer, it's value-based.

Personally pro-choice and pro-LGBT rights, before you go ahead and call me a bigot myself.

The thing of it is, Lipinski hasn't overcome anything. He's still anti-LGBT, and votes that way.

What would you say about those Democrats who once opposed gay marriage? Do you think that this is such an issue to define a person's entire character by?

maybe not define a person, and I really dont care whether he believes in gay marriage or not, but you gotta represent your district, not your interests.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I would love if this could be the West Wing and we could "disagree without being disagreeable" and find common ground, but that's been used to subject and oppress people in this country for years.

And I would love it if people in this thread could stop trying to imitate The Newsroom.

[Sestak]

Marie under 2,000

Daniel Lipinski*
37,433   51.3%   
Marie Newman
35,550   48.7   
72,983 votes, 77% reporting (384 of 500 precincts)

You're not necessarily a homophobe just by opposing gay marriage. And for me, it's perfectly reasonable if you still don't support it personally, while at the same time accepting that Obergefell is the law of the land.

Holy hell you are a terrible human being

Really? Does it really make someone a terrible human being to be unable to shake of the socialization of generations of mainstream marginalization, but still be humble enough to overcome it and accept the times are changing, despite one's personal biases? Really?

The same thing with abortion: the point at which an embryo becomes a person isn't evident to the average person - you can have your beliefs, but they are learned; they're not intuitive. Does it really make someone a terrible person to have a different understanding about when life starts? And if not, does it really make them a terrible person to place a person's survival over a second person's bodily autonomy? It's not an objective answer, it's value-based.

Personally pro-choice and pro-LGBT rights, before you go ahead and call me a bigot myself.

YES. It makes you a terrible person to believe businesses should be able to discriminate and deny service to someone because their gay. It makes you a terrible person to believe LGBT couples shouldn't be entitled to the marriage rights as everyone else. It makes you a terrible person to believe that an employer should have the right to fire their employee's because of the person they love. YES. These make you a terrible person, being a public figure and attempting to vote them into law - even more so.

For the record, I do not support discrimination of any kind against gay people. Job discrimination, business discrimination, etc. are completely unacceptable and violate the civil rights laws and constitutional guarantees of this country, as well as being wrong from a moral standpoint. I also think that gay people should be entitled to the same marriage rights as others. But that doesn't mean one has to be a full-blown defender of gay marriage, or be absolutely committed to and invested in its advancement. It also means that one can believe gay marriage to be morally wrong, but still adhere to the letter of the law and treat others with decency.

But Lipinski supports allowing discrimination.

[MAINEiac4434]

As we tick over 80% of the precincts reporting, Lipinski leads by 1,700 votes

Daniel Lipinski*
38,828   51.1%   
Marie Newman
37,100   48.9   
75,928 votes, 80% reporting (400 of 500 precincts)

Newman can do it but it's uphill.

I would love if this could be the West Wing and we could "disagree without being disagreeable" and find common ground, but that's been used to subject and oppress people in this country for years.

And I would love it if people in this thread could stop trying to imitate The Newsroom.

Never could get into The Newsroom.

[Rookie Yinzer]

This is looking like an R hold.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

At least with me my beef with Lipinski is that he takes corporate and PAC money and isn't in favor of single payer, a higher minimum wage, and free college. Newman is in favor of all those things. Newman isn't a SJW but she's being pushed by people who arrived to politics for social issues posters on Atlas.

You might have a nuanced view, but let's be real, the only reason this race has gotten to be a disaster for Lipinski are angry, single-issue, low-info SJW's with no politics outside of their bubbles.

[MAINEiac4434]

https://twitter.com/ActorAaronBooth/status/976277123672424449https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/976277868450852864

It'd be interesting to see how many voted in the R primary in the district. I wonder if it matches with the lean of the district. Republicans may have bailed out Lipinski.