TN democrats kick state house candidate of ballot for being pro voucher

[lfromnj]

Also pro life
https://wpln.org/post/tennessee-democratic-party-kicks-memphis-rep-john-deberry-off-primary-ballot/
Safe D memphis district btw.

[😥]

I'm sad to hear that. Awful decision, the Democratic Party goes the wrong way. I hope Joe Biden changes that. Now this is not a party for all people, now there is no room in the party for those who are pro-life, pro-gun etc. It's very, very sad.

And one more thing: if the Democrats want to win the state of Tennessee even locally, then people like AOC or Omar will lose here by high double digits. To win here, the Democratic Party needs to go back to the good old Blue Dogs, not turn them away from the party and force them to vote Republican

[America Needs R'hllor]

I'd oppose this because it's just undemocratic. I'd support a primary challenge against this guy and the party could too if they think he doesn't represent them, but kicking him off the ballot is unacceptable.

[Podgy the Bear]

I grew up in Tennessee in the 1970s and 1980s--remembering well the 1986-1994 period when the Democrats dominated the state.  What has happened to them?  They have completely gone off the deep end.  They are rivaling the even worse Alabama Democratic Party.

[smoltchanov]

I'd oppose this because it's just undemocratic. I'd support a primary challenge against this guy and the party could too if they think he doesn't represent them, but kicking him off the ballot is unacceptable.

[brucejoel99]

I'd oppose this because it's just undemocratic. I'd support a primary challenge against this guy and the party could too if they think he doesn't represent them, but kicking him off the ballot is unacceptable.

At least he's allowed to appeal the decision.

[I’m not Stu]

How is that legal?

[brucejoel99]

How is that legal?

IIRC the party's executive committee has to certify nominating petitions.

[Donerail]

No shortage of Republicans in Tennessee. We don't need them in the Democratic Party too

[Esteemed Jimmy]

This does seem very undemocratic; they should have went forward with a primary challenge and let the voters decide.

[brucejoel99]

This doesn't seem very undemocratic; they should have went forward with a primary challenge and let the voters decide.

So it does seem undemocratic, then?

[Esteemed Jimmy]

This doesn't seem very undemocratic; they should have went forward with a primary challenge and let the voters decide.

So it does seem undemocratic, then?

Fixed

[smoltchanov]

Well, as almost everyone on forum knows - i am all for "conservative" Democrats and "liberal" Republicans - much more so, then for "loyal soldiers of the party". Though this case is really peculiar - very Democratic (86% for HRC) and generally liberal district with at least moderate-conservative Representative...

[Intell]

Opposing voucher programs in a party of teacher's unions is not acceptable. A primary challenge seems more appropriate though.

[smoltchanov]

Opposing voucher programs in a party of teacher's unions is not acceptable. A primary challenge seems more appropriate though.

What about "big tent"? According to it - there MUST be pro teacher's unions Democrats and anti teacher's unions Democrats. And the same - for Republicans)))

[Intell]

Opposing voucher programs in a party of teacher's unions is not acceptable. A primary challenge seems more appropriate though.

What about "big tent"? According to it - there MUST be pro teacher's unions Democrats and anti teacher's unions Democrats. And the same - for Republicans)))

No there shouldn't, parties have ideologies, they should follow through on their ideologies. There is no point to go against the interests of a social groups that pays you money and provides you their voter base in red states.

[Horus]

DeBerry is a known DINO but this wasn't the appropriate way to remove him.

[PSOL]

I’m ok with this.

[smoltchanov]

Opposing voucher programs in a party of teacher's unions is not acceptable. A primary challenge seems more appropriate though.

What about "big tent"? According to it - there MUST be pro teacher's unions Democrats and anti teacher's unions Democrats. And the same - for Republicans)))

No there shouldn't, parties have ideologies, they should follow through on their ideologies. There is no point to go against the interests of a social groups that pays you money and provides you their voter base in red states.

Agree when it's a parlamentary system (as in most European countries) with LOTS of political parties. In SUCH case you can allow ideologically "pure" parties to exist - after all government will (in almost all cases) be coalitional, and concessions will be made in process of it's formation. But - absolutely disagree in US case with only 2 parties. Any ideologisation in such case denies big part of electorate (moderates and centrists in this case) real choice. In the past, when both parties more or less followed "big tent" policy, it was different, but what i see now is absolute ideological foolishness and monstrosity, which has little common with democracy. 2 dumb parties led by idiotic "activists"...

[Fuzzy Bear]

Opposing voucher programs in a party of teacher's unions is not acceptable. A primary challenge seems more appropriate though.

This is not about "ideologies".  This is about a conflict between two (2) mass constituencies within the Democratic Party.

This is a conflict between the Teachers Unions, which provide both money and "boots on the ground" for Democrats nationwide, and inner city African Americans, a great many of whom are in favor of vouchers because it will provide their children with the possibility of attending a school that is both safe and offers an opportunity to achieve at a level comparable to the norms of Tennessee (at a minimum). 

It is also a conflict between the Feminist Left (which is another mass constituency of the Democratic Party) and a portion of African Americans, many of whom are pro-life Evangelicals.  These African American voters have voted straight Democratic for years for reasons that have to do with "survival issues" (voting rights issues, criminal justice issues, anti-discrimination issues) but have had to sublimate their beliefs on an issue that goes to a question of Biblical Morality in favor of the National Democratic platform.

What the TN Democratic Party has done is deny voters in its most loyal constituency the opportunity to choose their own Representative in the Legislature.  This Democratic Primary is, after all, tantamout to elections; it IS the General Election in practical terms.  The Democratic Party has acted in an UN-democratic fashion toward its most faithful constituency in this case. 

This episode bears out the Republican talking point of Democrats taking African American voters for granted.  While that point is often made insincerely by Republicans (though not, oddly enough, by Trump), it really does ring true here.  Black voters in this Democratic district in TN are effectively being told by their own Democratic Party, "No, you may not reelect the person you've sent to the Leigislature previously."  The Democratic Party of TN has managed to disrespect its socially conservative African Americans who are part of the party's base and support it loyally, because of pressure from teachers unions.  Why Black Evangelicals with socially conservative instinct (based on Scripture) should just accept this without pushback is beyond me. 

[Fuzzy Bear]

Now TN has "sore loser" laws that would, I believe, prevent this man from running as a Republican.  What would happen, however, if the black community here was able to vote for this man as a Republican, while the GOP allowed this man freedom to vote however he wanted, as well as avoiding overt support for the GOP Presidential ticket, in exchange for this man supporting State Republicans and voting with the GOP to organize the TN legislature?

[VPH]

Ironically, the precedent this move sets could be weaponized against left-wing candidates too. We should all stand up for the integrity of the balloting process! Let the voters speak.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Ironically, the precedent this move sets could be weaponized against left-wing candidates too. We should all stand up for the integrity of the balloting process! Let the voters speak.

[lfromnj]

Opposing voucher programs in a party of teacher's unions is not acceptable. A primary challenge seems more appropriate though.

This is not about "ideologies".  This is about a conflict between two (2) mass constituencies within the Democratic Party.

This is a conflict between the Teachers Unions, which provide both money and "boots on the ground" for Democrats nationwide, and inner city African Americans, a great many of whom are in favor of vouchers because it will provide their children with the possibility of attending a school that is both safe and offers an opportunity to achieve at a level comparable to the norms of Tennessee (at a minimum). 

It is also a conflict between the Feminist Left (which is another mass constituency of the Democratic Party) and a portion of African Americans, many of whom are pro-life Evangelicals.  These African American voters have voted straight Democratic for years for reasons that have to do with "survival issues" (voting rights issues, criminal justice issues, anti-discrimination issues) but have had to sublimate their beliefs on an issue that goes to a question of Biblical Morality in favor of the National Democratic platform.

What the TN Democratic Party has done is deny voters in its most loyal constituency the opportunity to choose their own Representative in the Legislature.  This Democratic Primary is, after all, tantamout to elections; it IS the General Election in practical terms.  The Democratic Party has acted in an UN-democratic fashion toward its most faithful constituency in this case. 

This episode bears out the Republican talking point of Democrats taking African American voters for granted.  While that point is often made insincerely by Republicans (though not, oddly enough, by Trump), it really does ring true here.  Black voters in this Democratic district in TN are effectively being told by their own Democratic Party, "No, you may not reelect the person you've sent to the Leigislature previously."  The Democratic Party of TN has managed to disrespect its socially conservative African Americans who are part of the party's base and support it loyally, because of pressure from teachers unions.  Why Black Evangelicals with socially conservative instinct (based on Scripture) should just accept this without pushback is beyond me. 

Fuzzy nailed it here, Cory Booker while as mayor of Newark supported school vouchers and so do African Americans in new Orleans.

[lfromnj]

Oh btw school vouchers issues are peak white liberals telling inner city minorities what's good for them
https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/08/ednext-poll-democrats-divided-over-school-choice
There is 0 reason he should be kicked out for his school voucher choice.