NJ-2: Van Drew considering switching parties over impeachment

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Seems like a dumb move to go from the House majority to the House minority, but Van Drew was useless anyway so I don't care.

Bye! Hope you get Arlen Spectered.

[Tekken_Guy]

He’s likely going to lose the primary. I don’t think the County GOP organizations are going to be any happier with him than the dems are.

[Woody]

This could be good propaganda material for Trump.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Can we merge this thread with the other one about Van Drew?

[Bidenworth2020]

This could be good propaganda material for Trump.

... and you support him, knowing he is a propagandist?

[Xing]

And he thinks he’d win a primary against a hardcore Trumpist? LOL

[Progressive Pessimist]

This guy votes 88% with the Democratic Party and endorsed Cory Booker. Have fun shaking that off in a GOP primary!

Yeah, even if he doesn't go through with this, it makes no sense to even talk about it. It's going to be a self-fulfilling prophecy that leads to him losing one way or another, and that would be what he deserves.

[lfromnj]

Can we merge this thread with the other one about Van Drew?

Tbh maybe this could focus more on the electoral applications of Van Drew switching while the USGD is the political aspects.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I wouldn't assume that switching parties will save the seat for him. We aren't talking about a seat in Oklahoma or Kentucky here. He'll lose a lot of the Democratic votes he gets here and will have to rely on gaining Republican leaning ones to get him through. Not impossible, but it's not that easy either.

Well, it's not OK/KY, but it swung right about as hard as Ohio did in 2016 and Republicans picked up a bunch of overlapping and nearby state legislative seats this year.  I think this areas is pretty gone for Dems going forward.

As far as I can tell Republicans only picked up Van Drew's old state senate seat and the assembly districts, not "a bunch of overlapping and nearby state legislative seats". Three seats is not "a bunch" and that particular area has been traditionally Republican for quite a while.

Until absentee and provisional ballots were counted, giving the Democrats in district 2 a boost, it looked like the Republicans were going to win four seats plus Van Drew's old Senate old.

In the end though, they only flipped the two legislative seats in district 1. And I would blame low turnout more than anything. This district is still competitive.

[Pericles]

As a matter of democratic legitimacy, if he does switch he should consider resigning and running in a special election as a Republican. Most people who voted for him wanted to be represented by a Democrat and NJ-02 voters should have the chance to decide whether they want to be represented by a Republican.

[lfromnj]

As a matter of democratic legitimacy, if he does switch he should consider resigning and running in a special election as a Republican. Most people who voted for him wanted to be represented by a Democrat and NJ-02 voters should have the chance to decide whether they want to be represented by a Republican.

The thing is that special elections in NJ only happen in November so it doesn't really do anything besides remove any representative from this seat.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

What a clown

https://twitter.com/JonathanTamari/status/1206003646359654400?s=20

[Zaybay]

Governor Murphy is (rightfully) pissed:
https://twitter.com/PhilMurphyNJ/status/1206005031285207040

https://twitter.com/PhilMurphyNJ/status/1206005033860509696

https://twitter.com/PhilMurphyNJ/status/1206005035068510208

[Gracile]

What a clown

https://twitter.com/JonathanTamari/status/1206003646359654400?s=20

Van Drew doesn't seem very bright, to put it nicely.

[Calthrina950]

Isn't this something? The Democratic Party isn't going to even allow Van Drew to cast a token "No" vote on an impeachment effort which is ultimately doomed to failure in the Senate, and because of that, he's switching parties? A confused and disheartening situation on all sides. It is true that this district is rapidly trending Republican, Van Drew won by a much smaller margin than had initially been expected, and he succeeded a long-time Republican incumbent who held the seat for more than two decades. On the other hand, party-switchers do not have an unparalleled history of success, and often do so out of personal selfishness.

I'm not sure what to think about this, but what I do know is that this makes it likely Collin Peterson will be the only Democrat in the entire House of Representatives to vote no on the articles of impeachment. Even in 1998, something on the order of six Republicans voted against Bill Clinton's impeachment. Never have we seen an impeachment as partisan and polarized as this one.

[Zaybay]

Isn't this something? The Democratic Party isn't going to even allow Van Drew to cast a token "No" vote on an impeachment effort which is ultimately doomed to failure in the Senate, and because of that, he's switching parties? A confused and disheartening situation on all sides. It is true that this district is rapidly trending Republican, Van Drew won by a much smaller margin than had initially been expected, and he succeeded a long-time Republican incumbent who held the seat for more than two decades. On the other hand, party-switchers do not have an unparalleled history of success, and often do so out of personal selfishness.

I'm not sure what to think about this, but what I do know is that this makes it likely Collin Peterson will be the only Democrat in the entire House of Representatives to vote no on the articles of impeachment. Even in 1998, something on the order of six Republicans voted against Bill Clinton's impeachment. Never have we seen an impeachment as partisan and polarized as this one.

Nobody is forcing Van Drew to stupidly switch parties. Thats his decision. Whatever happens to him from this point onward is his fault and his alone.

[LabourJersey]

Isn't this something? The Democratic Party isn't going to even allow Van Drew to cast a token "No" vote on an impeachment effort which is ultimately doomed to failure in the Senate, and because of that, he's switching parties? A confused and disheartening situation on all sides. It is true that this district is rapidly trending Republican, Van Drew won by a much smaller margin than had initially been expected, and he succeeded a long-time Republican incumbent who held the seat for more than two decades. On the other hand, party-switchers do not have an unparalleled history of success, and often do so out of personal selfishness.

I'm not sure what to think about this, but what I do know is that this makes it likely Collin Peterson will be the only Democrat in the entire House of Representatives to vote no on the articles of impeachment. Even in 1998, something on the order of six Republicans voted against Bill Clinton's impeachment. Never have we seen an impeachment as partisan and polarized as this one.

Nobody is forcing Van Drew to stupidly switch parties. Thats his decision. Whatever happens to him from this point onward is his fault and his alone.

Aren't there rumors that Pelosi isn't even going to whip an impeachment vote? He absolutely could just vote No and remain a Democrat. He's just taking this bizarre way because he thinks the liberal media has been mean to him for his opposition to holding Trump accountable

[Oryxslayer]

Isn't this something? The Democratic Party isn't going to even allow Van Drew to cast a token "No" vote on an impeachment effort which is ultimately doomed to failure in the Senate, and because of that, he's switching parties? A confused and disheartening situation on all sides. It is true that this district is rapidly trending Republican, Van Drew won by a much smaller margin than had initially been expected, and he succeeded a long-time Republican incumbent who held the seat for more than two decades. On the other hand, party-switchers do not have an unparalleled history of success, and often do so out of personal selfishness.

I'm not sure what to think about this, but what I do know is that this makes it likely Collin Peterson will be the only Democrat in the entire House of Representatives to vote no on the articles of impeachment. Even in 1998, something on the order of six Republicans voted against Bill Clinton's impeachment. Never have we seen an impeachment as partisan and polarized as this one.

The democratic party is fine with him voting No. They understand that such a vote is token. His problem is with the voters back home. Even though NJ-02 is slightly red, it's got a healthy Dem base with POC's in and around Atlantic City and suburbanites near Philly. Those outside the machines control have a right to be angry, even though it may not be the most rational choice. If your representative isn't going to be representing your opinions, then why is he your representative? The county line would probably have been able to save  him if he stayed blue, or at least dissuade all but the most determined challengers. The primary is months away after all, and some voters will forget.

He's just afraid, and he's therefore made a choice that will likely end his career in one way or another. Flippers outside of the south historically cannot answer for their time on the opposite bench, and lose the primary. The GOP machines won't like the fact he was more or less a lockstep D vote on all but the most controversial legislation. If he stayed blue he would face those angry voters, and have to rely on the  machines to prop him up.

[LabourJersey]

What a clown

https://twitter.com/JonathanTamari/status/1206003646359654400?s=20

Van Drew doesn't seem very bright, to put it nicely.

Wow; this is like breaking up with a girl, then expecting her parents to continue to invite you to their 4th of July cookout

[Oryxslayer]

Isn't this something? The Democratic Party isn't going to even allow Van Drew to cast a token "No" vote on an impeachment effort which is ultimately doomed to failure in the Senate, and because of that, he's switching parties? A confused and disheartening situation on all sides. It is true that this district is rapidly trending Republican, Van Drew won by a much smaller margin than had initially been expected, and he succeeded a long-time Republican incumbent who held the seat for more than two decades. On the other hand, party-switchers do not have an unparalleled history of success, and often do so out of personal selfishness.

I'm not sure what to think about this, but what I do know is that this makes it likely Collin Peterson will be the only Democrat in the entire House of Representatives to vote no on the articles of impeachment. Even in 1998, something on the order of six Republicans voted against Bill Clinton's impeachment. Never have we seen an impeachment as partisan and polarized as this one.

The democratic party is fine with him voting No. They understand that such a vote is token. His problem is with the voters back home. Even though NJ-02 is slightly red, it's got a healthy Dem base with POC's in and around Atlantic City and suburbanites near Philly. Those outside the machines control have a right to be angry, even though it may not be the most rational choice. If your representative isn't going to be representing your opinions, then why is he your representative? The county line would probably have been able to save  him if he stayed blue, or at least dissuade all but the most determined challengers. The primary is months away after all, and some voters will forget.

He's afraid, and it's a choice that will likely end his career in one way or another. Flippers outside of the south historically cannot answer for their time on the opposite bench, and lose the primary. The GOP machines won't like the fact he was more or less a lockstep D vote on all but the most controversial legislation. If he stayed blue he would face those angry voters, and have to rely on the  machines to prop him up.

https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/1205935885168119816

Party =/= Voters. Party is machine apparatus, insiders, politicians. They know how to wheel and deal. Voters are people on the ground. people are emotional. People get pissed, even when it may not be rational.

X's, X, and X Party all imply three different things.

[lfromnj]

Isn't this something? The Democratic Party isn't going to even allow Van Drew to cast a token "No" vote on an impeachment effort which is ultimately doomed to failure in the Senate, and because of that, he's switching parties? A confused and disheartening situation on all sides. It is true that this district is rapidly trending Republican, Van Drew won by a much smaller margin than had initially been expected, and he succeeded a long-time Republican incumbent who held the seat for more than two decades. On the other hand, party-switchers do not have an unparalleled history of success, and often do so out of personal selfishness.

I'm not sure what to think about this, but what I do know is that this makes it likely Collin Peterson will be the only Democrat in the entire House of Representatives to vote no on the articles of impeachment. Even in 1998, something on the order of six Republicans voted against Bill Clinton's impeachment. Never have we seen an impeachment as partisan and polarized as this one.

The democratic party is fine with him voting No. They understand that such a vote is token. His problem is with the voters back home. Even though NJ-02 is slightly red, it's got a healthy Dem base with POC's in and around Atlantic City and suburbanites near Philly. Those outside the machines control have a right to be angry, even though it may not be the most rational choice. If your representative isn't going to be representing your opinions, then why is he your representative? The county line would probably have been able to save  him if he stayed blue, or at least dissuade all but the most determined challengers. The primary is months away after all, and some voters will forget.

He's afraid, and it's a choice that will likely end his career in one way or another. Flippers outside of the south historically cannot answer for their time on the opposite bench, and lose the primary. The GOP machines won't like the fact he was more or less a lockstep D vote on all but the most controversial legislation. If he stayed blue he would face those angry voters, and have to rely on the  machines to prop him up.

https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/1205935885168119816

Party =/= Voters. Party is machine apparatus, insiders, politicians. They know how to wheel and deal. Voters are people on the ground. people are emotional. People get pissed, even when it may not be rational.

Damn you replied to my post before I fully understood yours. I deleted mine lol. Anyway the party machine isn't supporting Van drew either because he isnt supporting impeachment although it could also be because he's acting like an ass while not supporting impeachment unlike Collin Peterson.

[Calthrina950]

Isn't this something? The Democratic Party isn't going to even allow Van Drew to cast a token "No" vote on an impeachment effort which is ultimately doomed to failure in the Senate, and because of that, he's switching parties? A confused and disheartening situation on all sides. It is true that this district is rapidly trending Republican, Van Drew won by a much smaller margin than had initially been expected, and he succeeded a long-time Republican incumbent who held the seat for more than two decades. On the other hand, party-switchers do not have an unparalleled history of success, and often do so out of personal selfishness.

I'm not sure what to think about this, but what I do know is that this makes it likely Collin Peterson will be the only Democrat in the entire House of Representatives to vote no on the articles of impeachment. Even in 1998, something on the order of six Republicans voted against Bill Clinton's impeachment. Never have we seen an impeachment as partisan and polarized as this one.

Nobody is forcing Van Drew to stupidly switch parties. Thats his decision. Whatever happens to him from this point onward is his fault and his alone.

The polls from that district indicate that Van Drew has lost considerable support among the Democratic base and the Democratic party machine, precisely because of his opposition to impeachment. Now, I will agree that he may be facing the end of the road either way. If he were to remain a Democrat, and voted no on impeachment, he would be booted in the primary. And if he becomes a Republican, then he has no guarantee of winning that party's primary. However, this party switch is apparently being done, in part, on Trump's urging, and Trump is apparently set to appear with Van Drew this coming week. A Trump endorsement is gold in the eyes of his base, and could very well help Van Drew gain the support of the Republican machine in his district and to win that primary.

[Tekken_Guy]

Isn't this something? The Democratic Party isn't going to even allow Van Drew to cast a token "No" vote on an impeachment effort which is ultimately doomed to failure in the Senate, and because of that, he's switching parties? A confused and disheartening situation on all sides. It is true that this district is rapidly trending Republican, Van Drew won by a much smaller margin than had initially been expected, and he succeeded a long-time Republican incumbent who held the seat for more than two decades. On the other hand, party-switchers do not have an unparalleled history of success, and often do so out of personal selfishness.

I'm not sure what to think about this, but what I do know is that this makes it likely Collin Peterson will be the only Democrat in the entire House of Representatives to vote no on the articles of impeachment. Even in 1998, something on the order of six Republicans voted against Bill Clinton's impeachment. Never have we seen an impeachment as partisan and polarized as this one.

Nobody is forcing Van Drew to stupidly switch parties. Thats his decision. Whatever happens to him from this point onward is his fault and his alone.

The polls from that district indicate that Van Drew has lost considerable support among the Democratic base and the Democratic party machine, precisely because of his opposition to impeachment. Now, I will agree that he may be facing the end of the road either way. If he were to remain a Democrat, and voted no on impeachment, he would be booted in the primary. And if he becomes a Republican, then he has no guarantee of winning that party's primary. However, this party switch is apparently being done, in part, on Trump's urging, and Trump is apparently set to appear with Van Drew this coming week. A Trump endorsement is gold in the eyes of his base, and could very well help Van Drew gain the support of the Republican machine in his district and to win that primary.

Because that worked so well with Luther Strange.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Any chance Mike Assad challenges in the primary?

[Calthrina950]

Isn't this something? The Democratic Party isn't going to even allow Van Drew to cast a token "No" vote on an impeachment effort which is ultimately doomed to failure in the Senate, and because of that, he's switching parties? A confused and disheartening situation on all sides. It is true that this district is rapidly trending Republican, Van Drew won by a much smaller margin than had initially been expected, and he succeeded a long-time Republican incumbent who held the seat for more than two decades. On the other hand, party-switchers do not have an unparalleled history of success, and often do so out of personal selfishness.

I'm not sure what to think about this, but what I do know is that this makes it likely Collin Peterson will be the only Democrat in the entire House of Representatives to vote no on the articles of impeachment. Even in 1998, something on the order of six Republicans voted against Bill Clinton's impeachment. Never have we seen an impeachment as partisan and polarized as this one.

Nobody is forcing Van Drew to stupidly switch parties. Thats his decision. Whatever happens to him from this point onward is his fault and his alone.

The polls from that district indicate that Van Drew has lost considerable support among the Democratic base and the Democratic party machine, precisely because of his opposition to impeachment. Now, I will agree that he may be facing the end of the road either way. If he were to remain a Democrat, and voted no on impeachment, he would be booted in the primary. And if he becomes a Republican, then he has no guarantee of winning that party's primary. However, this party switch is apparently being done, in part, on Trump's urging, and Trump is apparently set to appear with Van Drew this coming week. A Trump endorsement is gold in the eyes of his base, and could very well help Van Drew gain the support of the Republican machine in his district and to win that primary.

Because that worked so well with Luther Strange.

That's a legitimate point. But in the vast majority of cases, a Trump endorsement has proven to be a valuable asset for Republican candidates in the primaries.