2020 AZ Senate Megathread: Kelly's Race to Lose

[Zaybay]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

Theres also the fact that there is no proof whatsoever, no polling, no favorables, nothing, that suggest Grant Woods would somehow be a stronger candidate, other than 'muh centrists do better', when 2018 should have been the nail in the coffin of that "school" of thought.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Remember that in the South, the most right-wing conservatives Rs were frequently actually former Democrats who felt they needed to prove their change in loyalties was ironclad.
Same situation might apply here.

[Not Me, Us]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

[pppolitics]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

Do you know what Democrats need?

A governing majority.

Do you know what's not going to get the Democrats there?

A purity test.

[pppolitics]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

People like you sometimes struggle to realize that not everyone thinks the same way you do.

^ This

[Calthrina950]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

People like you sometimes struggle to realize that not everyone thinks the same way you do.

This exactly. Ideological purism is not good for either party.

[pppolitics]

Is Tom O'Halleran consider running at all?

He not so far left that he would scare away the moderates.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

Do you know what Democrats need?

A governing majority.

Do you know what's not going to get the Democrats there?

A purity test.

Yes because the way to get a Democratic governing majority is to run Republicans.

[coloradocowboi]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

People like you sometimes struggle to realize that not everyone thinks the same way you do.

That doesn't mean that everyone's thoughts are equally valid. Get a better argument.

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

Do you know what Democrats need?

A governing majority.

Do you know what's not going to get the Democrats there?

A purity test.

The point is that the majority is in service of our political goals, not the other way around.

I don't get why so may people reflexively defend moderates and then turn around and call the people who reflexively question them ideologues. Y'all are just centrist extremists.

As for Woods, oh boyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

We don't know his policy positions yet. If they have moved convincingly leftward, I think we should at least consider him. Gallego is just kind of grumpy and not so electable. Woods is charming. I don't know. I don't like that he was a Repub. I don't like that he gives off sociopath vibes. But I'm not willing to say HELL NO to Grant Woods yet. I probably wouldn't vote for him in a primary, but if he makes it to the general it would be insane to vote for anyone else

[adrac]

I think there's a whole lot of unreasonable chicken-counting going on in this thread. We don't have much of any evidence of what Woods' political positions will be (although yes, he probably won't be the most progressive), and we most certainly don't know how much his positions will improve his general election chances. While Sinema's persona probably helped her some, suburbs across the country revolted against Republicans not because Democrats ran moderates, but because the President is an idiot and an embarrassment to their sensibilities. There are probably some cases where running moderates is helpful, but if anyone has learned anything at this point it should be that voters are mostly non-ideological. Ideology mostly follows partisan identity, not the other way around.

[brucejoel99]

How am I supposed to trust Grant Woods to actually do that? There is nothing in his history that indicates he’d be further to the left than Joe Manchin.

[You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.]

I am understanding you; you're just wrong. But if we're going down the example road, then fine:

Donald Trump used to be a Democrat. He changed to being a Republican. When elected President as a Republican, did he reveal himself to be a Republican snake & further Democratic policy goals once in office? No. He very much implemented as many Republican policy goals as he could, & would've done a hell of a lot more too if not for incompetency & institutional roadblocks as well. Another case-in-point, there was nothing in Charlie Crist's history to indicates that he'd be further to the left than Joe Manchin either, but now he's a center-left Democrat (&, more importantly (but what you don't seem to care about), he votes as a Democrat in Congress). Maybe don't be so quick to judge party switchers (especially if said judgement actually serves to hinder any potential achievement of your own political/policy goals), & on that note...

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

You're fools, & as to why, well I couldn't have said it better myself than this...

Do you know what Democrats need?

A governing majority.

Do you know what's not going to get the Democrats there?

A purity test.

...& this...

Ideological purism is not good for either party.

Theres also the fact that there is no proof whatsoever, no polling, no favorables, nothing, that suggest Grant Woods would somehow be a stronger candidate, other than 'muh centrists do better', when 2018 should have been the nail in the coffin of that "school" of thought.

Except Kyrsten Sinema literally just won in the state relevant to our discussion (partly) b/c of her moderate centrist persona, & in the year you claim should've been the "nail in the coffin" on that school of thought too.

Yes because the way to get a Democratic governing majority is to run Republicans.

By that same "logic", then I guess it's the Republicans who get the last laugh by nominating a Democrat to be their 2016 presidential nominee, seeing him become President, & having him implement their party's policy anyway.

[MAINEiac4434]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

Do you know what Democrats need?

A governing majority.

Do you know what's not going to get the Democrats there?

A purity test.

So why not welcome Tom Cotton into the caucus, right? How about Dubya? I mean, who cares about a million dead Iraqis, he gives Michelle those werthers originals all the time and he doesn’t like Trump, so clearly that makes him a Democrat. Why not Roy Moore while we’re at it? After all, the Democrats don’t need purity tests!

What the Democrats actually need is an ideology. You can’t win just by saying “listen we’re not the other guys.” Advocate for things that will have a demonstrably positive impact on the lives of your constituents. What is the point of a governing majority if not to improve the lives of people?

I don’t want a caucus full of glassy-eyed Seth Moulton-like psychopaths who care only about their next donor meeting. There are real problems real people are really facing, and if the Democratic Party refuses to actually address those issues, then they will become obsolete.

[brucejoel99]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

Do you know what Democrats need?

A governing majority.

Do you know what's not going to get the Democrats there?

A purity test.

So why not welcome Tom Cotton into the caucus, right? How about Dubya? I mean, who cares about a million dead Iraqis, he gives Michelle those werthers originals all the time and he doesn’t like Trump, so clearly that makes him a Democrat. Why not Roy Moore while we’re at it? After all, the Democrats don’t need purity tests!

What the Democrats actually need is an ideology. You can’t win just by saying “listen we’re not the other guys.” Advocate for things that will have a demonstrably positive impact on the lives of your constituents. What is the point of a governing majority if not to improve the lives of people?

I don’t want a caucus full of glassy-eyed Seth Moulton-like psychopaths who care only about their next donor meeting. There are real problems real people are really facing, and if the Democratic Party refuses to actually address those issues, then they will become obsolete.

Nobody's saying the Democrats don't have an ideology; even as the big tent we are, we're all still advocates for social & economic equality, precisely b/c we seek to help people out as best we can. But last I checked, wackos like Tom Cotton or actual conservatives like Dubya aren't trying to become Democrats. And if a former Republican hypothetically realizes that they're no longer in agreement with their party's stances & policy, but is moreso in agreement with those of our party's, then I'm not gonna slam the door in their face if they're willing to actively help us achieve our own policy goals which, if/when implemented, helps those real people who are really facing real problems.

[MAINEiac4434]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

Do you know what Democrats need?

A governing majority.

Do you know what's not going to get the Democrats there?

A purity test.

So why not welcome Tom Cotton into the caucus, right? How about Dubya? I mean, who cares about a million dead Iraqis, he gives Michelle those werthers originals all the time and he doesn’t like Trump, so clearly that makes him a Democrat. Why not Roy Moore while we’re at it? After all, the Democrats don’t need purity tests!

What the Democrats actually need is an ideology. You can’t win just by saying “listen we’re not the other guys.” Especially when you run the people who are actually the other guys. Advocate for things that will have a demonstrably positive impact on the lives of your constituents. What is the point of a governing majority if not to improve the lives of people?

I don’t want a caucus full of glassy-eyed Seth Moulton-like psychopaths who care only about their next donor meeting. There are real problems real people are really facing, and if the Democratic Party refuses to actually address those issues, then they will become obsolete.

How am I supposed to trust Grant Woods to actually do that? There is nothing in his history that indicates he’d be further to the left than Joe Manchin.

[You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.]

I am understanding you; you're just wrong. But if we're going down the example road, then fine:

Donald Trump used to be a Democrat. He changed to being a Republican. When elected President as a Republican, did he reveal himself to be a Republican snake & further Democratic policy goals once in office? No. He very much implemented as many Republican policy goals as he could, & would've done a hell of a lot more too if not for incompetency & institutional roadblocks as well. Another case-in-point, there was nothing in Charlie Crist's history to indicates that he'd be further to the left than Joe Manchin either, but now he's a center-left Democrat (&, more importantly (but what you don't seem to care about), he votes as a Democrat in Congress). Maybe don't be so quick to judge party switchers (especially if said judgement actually serves to hinder any potential achievement of your own political/policy goals)...

You don’t actually believe Donald Trump, whose brain is disintegrating faster than the goddam speed of light, has any actual political ideology beyond “help Donald Trump”, do you?

The man comes out of one-on-one meetings parroting whatever the other person just told him. Historically he joined parties and espoused political views that he felt would help his business. That’s why he signed that climate change open letter, despite saying it doesn’t exist now.

And Charlie Crist is not a center-left Democrat. He is not equally between Dan Lipinski and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Charlie Crist is a middle of the road, staid centrist. It’s just unfortunate that the Democrats are the party of middle of the road staid centrists.

Electing Grant Woods would hinder my policy goals, just like electing Tom Carper hinders my policy goals. The difference is, Tom Carper was at least a Democrat for his entire life. Grant Woods saw everything nasty about the modern Republican Party, and stayed. Not for electoral reasons, because he hasn’t run for anything in a quarter of a century. He stayed because the party represented him. But he’s also smart. He sees a state that’s rapidly getting younger and more Latino, and he knows Arizona is prime to become the next Virginia — from solid red to solid blue without any purple stage in between.

We can do better. You keep trying to draw this false equivalence between Sinema, who was a freaking Green Party activist, and Woods, as if they are politically similar at all. They are not.

Beto O’Rurke ran a progressive campaign in Texas of all places, and nearly knocked off a Republican incumbent. He did not lose excuse he was too far left, he lost because Texas is too Republican at this point to elect a Democrat. I guarantee though, if the TXDems had trotted out some former Republican Attorney General from 25 years ago who also served as chief of staff to, like, Sam Johnson or Kay Bailey Hutchison or whoever, they would’ve done worse than Beto, because the natural supporters of the Democratic Party — young people and minorities — would not have wanted to vote for this person and therefore would not save voted for this person.

Democrats don’t win elections by flipping Republican voters. They win elections by effectively turning out their base. Grant Woods would suppress the base. Because what appeal does Republican Attorney General from 25 Years Ago But He’s A Democrat Now, Promise, have to Democrats’ natural base?

Conversations like this are why I hate the Democratic Party and why I don’t really consider myself a Democrat anymore. The entire party seems to be whistling past the graveyard, unaware of the very real and very prescient future consequences of its actions right now.

[Zaybay]

Theres also the fact that there is no proof whatsoever, no polling, no favorables, nothing, that suggest Grant Woods would somehow be a stronger candidate, other than 'muh centrists do better', when 2018 should have been the nail in the coffin of that "school" of thought.

Except Kyrsten Sinema literally just won in the state relevant to our discussion (partly) b/c of her moderate centrist persona, & in the year you claim should've been the "nail in the coffin" on that school of thought too.

This is something I would call, "not seeing the forest for the trees". There are candidates that did win this year that you can attempt to point to and draw the conclusion that it was moderation that caused them to win, but by looking at the bigger picture, this was certainly not the case. Not only did the Blue Dogs lose the most winnable races out of the 3 factions(2 in PA, 2 in NC, KS, TX, etc.), but the results from district to district were all rather in sync with each other, with little variation. The ones that saw the biggest swing were also not moderates, and were rather mixed in their ideological focus.

Thats why it was the nail in the coffin, for it was the first time you could use an entire election to show that this phenomenon doesnt exist. Instead, what you are doing is prescribing a victory based on a, most likely, non-factor, especially since others, including Progressives, ran in AZ and also won, such as the new SoS and Superintendent of Education.

If it were ideology, you would have to see an overpreformance from the Blue Wave, as that makes sense, if her ideology carried her through, it would have just increased her margin. But Sinema underpreformed the Blue Wave, not overpreformed. If you want to talk ideology, go ask why Tester overpreformed the state lean by so much compared to his fellow rural senators(hint: its because of the state's downballot and Tester's popularity, but my point is that an ideology argument could easily be made).

[_]

I hope to god Kelly runs so this whole argument can be completely avoided, the party can unite around him right? 

I would take Gallego over Grant Woods if it came down to it, ironic for a former Republican to say though

[pppolitics]

Will Grant Woods back single payer? Will Grant Woods seek to break up the military industrial complex? Will Grant Woods fight to protect the rights of labor unions? Will Grant woods fight for environmental justice? Because those are things many Democrats in the senate won’t do, but Ruben Gallego would.

You’re not undestanding me: electing Grant Woods is keeping this seat in Republican hands, even if he has a D next to his name.

I do not want someone like Grant Woods to be welcome in this party.

I couldn't have said this better. Grant Woods is an oppurtunistic, right-wing Republican. He is not a Democrat and never will be. So-called “moderates” have no place in the Democratic Party and they will be the first ones selling out the working class to corporate interests. They are complacent in the destruction of our democracy. Anyone supporting Woods over Gallego should be ashamed of themselves.

Do you know what Democrats need?

A governing majority.

Do you know what's not going to get the Democrats there?

A purity test.

So why not welcome Tom Cotton into the caucus, right? How about Dubya? I mean, who cares about a million dead Iraqis, he gives Michelle those werthers originals all the time and he doesn’t like Trump, so clearly that makes him a Democrat. Why not Roy Moore while we’re at it? After all, the Democrats don’t need purity tests!

What the Democrats actually need is an ideology. You can’t win just by saying “listen we’re not the other guys.” Advocate for things that will have a demonstrably positive impact on the lives of your constituents. What is the point of a governing majority if not to improve the lives of people?

I don’t want a caucus full of glassy-eyed Seth Moulton-like psychopaths who care only about their next donor meeting. There are real problems real people are really facing, and if the Democratic Party refuses to actually address those issues, then they will become obsolete.

Nice straw man.

Nowhere did I said that Democrats should be helping to elect someone to office someone with nothing in common with the party.

Even Joe Manchin has something in common with the party otherwise he wouldn't be a Democrat.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

How many Justice Democrats flipped a district, again?

[Zaybay]

How many Justice Democrats flipped a district, again?

None, but TBF to the group, they only had 1 candidate in a swing district(Eastman).

[Peanut]

How many Justice Democrats flipped a district, again?

None, but TBF to the group, they only had 1 candidate in a swing district(Eastman).

Who came closer than anyone expected after basically being forgotten by the national party.

My view on this debate is basically this:

If it looks like we're in a position to retake the Senate (say, flipping NC, ME, IA, CO, MT, etc.), then ideological purity in the caucus is something we should aspire to. If we're having a Democrat in the White House in January 2021, we want to be able to pass bold, progressive legislation, and avoid impasses like, say, the Obamacare differences inside the caucus. It's important to govern as a government party, and to enact policies that will accomplish our goals, something we will not do with a Senator who was a Republican for 2016. From a governing perspective, Gallego is better. If Woods looks like he's going to perform better than Gallego statewide, AND accomplishing a Senate majority looks difficult or impossible without AZ, then one could see the merits of nominating Woods, if for nothing else than having another vote for D leadership in the Senate during a potential Trump second term.

In an environment similar to 2018, all things considered, I'd support Gallego in a primary, because we're more in agreement ideologically. I would be open to some strategic voting if it looks like Gallego has no chance (something hard to believe considering the accomplishments of Beto and Abrams, for example.)

[Calthrina950]

How many Justice Democrats flipped a district, again?

None, but TBF to the group, they only had 1 candidate in a swing district(Eastman).

Who came closer than anyone expected after basically being forgotten by the national party.

My view on this debate is basically this:

If it looks like we're in a position to retake the Senate (say, flipping NC, ME, IA, CO, MT, etc.), then ideological purity in the caucus is something we should aspire to. If we're having a Democrat in the White House in January 2021, we want to be able to pass bold, progressive legislation, and avoid impasses like, say, the Obamacare differences inside the caucus. It's important to govern as a government party, and to enact policies that will accomplish our goals, something we will not do with a Senator who was a Republican for 2016. From a governing perspective, Gallego is better. If Woods looks like he's going to perform better than Gallego statewide, AND accomplishing a Senate majority looks difficult or impossible without AZ, then one could see the merits of nominating Woods, if for nothing else than having another vote for D leadership in the Senate during a potential Trump second term.

In an environment similar to 2018, all things considered, I'd support Gallego in a primary, because we're more in agreement ideologically. I would be open to some strategic voting if it looks like Gallego has no chance (something hard to believe considering the accomplishments of Beto and Abrams, for example.)

Their accomplishments? Both of them lost.

[pppolitics]

How many Justice Democrats flipped a district, again?

None, but TBF to the group, they only had 1 candidate in a swing district(Eastman).

Who came closer than anyone expected after basically being forgotten by the national party.

My view on this debate is basically this:

If it looks like we're in a position to retake the Senate (say, flipping NC, ME, IA, CO, MT, etc.), then ideological purity in the caucus is something we should aspire to. If we're having a Democrat in the White House in January 2021, we want to be able to pass bold, progressive legislation, and avoid impasses like, say, the Obamacare differences inside the caucus. It's important to govern as a government party, and to enact policies that will accomplish our goals, something we will not do with a Senator who was a Republican for 2016. From a governing perspective, Gallego is better. If Woods looks like he's going to perform better than Gallego statewide, AND accomplishing a Senate majority looks difficult or impossible without AZ, then one could see the merits of nominating Woods, if for nothing else than having another vote for D leadership in the Senate during a potential Trump second term.

In an environment similar to 2018, all things considered, I'd support Gallego in a primary, because we're more in agreement ideologically. I would be open to some strategic voting if it looks like Gallego has no chance (something hard to believe considering the accomplishments of Beto and Abrams, for example.)

That's one big delusion right there.

Except for CO, AZ, and maybe ME (if Collins retires), each if the other races (MT, IA, NC, GA) is going to be an up climb.

Then there's AL, which we are almost certain to lose.

[Zaybay]

How many Justice Democrats flipped a district, again?

None, but TBF to the group, they only had 1 candidate in a swing district(Eastman).

Who came closer than anyone expected after basically being forgotten by the national party.

My view on this debate is basically this:

If it looks like we're in a position to retake the Senate (say, flipping NC, ME, IA, CO, MT, etc.), then ideological purity in the caucus is something we should aspire to. If we're having a Democrat in the White House in January 2021, we want to be able to pass bold, progressive legislation, and avoid impasses like, say, the Obamacare differences inside the caucus. It's important to govern as a government party, and to enact policies that will accomplish our goals, something we will not do with a Senator who was a Republican for 2016. From a governing perspective, Gallego is better. If Woods looks like he's going to perform better than Gallego statewide, AND accomplishing a Senate majority looks difficult or impossible without AZ, then one could see the merits of nominating Woods, if for nothing else than having another vote for D leadership in the Senate during a potential Trump second term.

In an environment similar to 2018, all things considered, I'd support Gallego in a primary, because we're more in agreement ideologically. I would be open to some strategic voting if it looks like Gallego has no chance (something hard to believe considering the accomplishments of Beto and Abrams, for example.)

That's one big delusion right there.

Except for CO, AZ, and maybe ME (if Collins retires), each if the other races (MT, IA, NC, GA) is going to be an up climb.

Then there's AL, which we are almost certain to lose.

They preface the comment with if, so its not delusion, its a scenario.

Also, the Senator of NC is pretty unpopular, so its really CO, AZ, ME(if Collins retires) and NC that are there so far.

[Zaybay]

http://representmeaz.com/who-is-grant-woods/?fbclid=IwAR1R6oYpgWs6Ueq8i5iTfMuQi0cAljI41oEHHkEIM6csuGV_dH-3BfyQUFs

Sheesh, I didnt like Woods before, now Im starting to despise him.

[henster]

I hope Gallego runs just so it nullifies muh female patriot fighter pilot schtick from McSally. Half of the crap she tried to pull against Sinema won't cut it against an ex Marine.