NC(Sen): My thoughts of Neal vs. Hagan and why YOU should care.

I, as much as anyone, have come out blasting the DSCC, the Democratic candidates, and anyone else who went looking for a new candidate just because Jim Neal was gay. That said, Hagan might very well make a great candidate. I would suggest that no one discount her because of when she came into the race or how. Anyone, except me that is. Because, for me, this race is about the heart of the Democratic Party in North Carolina and it is a gut check moment for Democrats around the country. At stake is this.

  1. The DSCC fails to bring in any of its top-tier candidates (Mike Easley, Roy Cooper, Beverly Perdue, Richard Moore).
  2. Bloggers put on a press to Draft Brad Miller, who we feel would be a progressive dream, a netroots hero for all of us to cheer and back. He declines.
  3. The DSCC/NC powers-to-be/bloggers decide that state Rep. Grier Martin is our man, until he says no. In the process of his deliberations, state Sen. Kay Hagan backs out gracefully.
  4. We have no one, and then up to the plate steps Democratic fundraiser extraordinare Jim Neal. Bloggers rejoice, the mainstream Dems, not so much.
  5. We find out why, Jim is gay, proudly so.
  6. Hagan is suddenly back in the race following many harried phone calls from current Democratic candidates worried that Jim's being the nominee will hurt their changes at being elected, after all, he's gay{shhhhh}.

That is where we stand folks, we have two candidates, one who came of his own free will and one who has apparently been lured by the DSCC at the bequest of the local power brokers out of fear that he's not mainstream enough. That in itself is not reason enough to support Jim Neal, this is:

Priorities

I've got 5 not 3: restoring Protecting our nation and its freedoms, fiscal reponsibility, health care for all Americans, protecting our environment and restoring government accountability to the voters who elect and pay the freight for the elected reps.

On Running

I'm not running this race to lose. I'm not running to make some social statement. I'm running to lead in the Senate for the voters in NC-- something Senator Dole has not done.

When people meet me, they'll see beyond the labels and into my character.

Energy

We have no choice-- as a state and a nation-- to move with a sense of urgency to make up ground and move forward with lightspeed to adress the assault on our environment which ths Administration has ignored. Our state and its natural resources and incredible and are treasure we can't lose-- and that's one battlefront which has been ignored.

NCLB

NCLB simply don't work. It's flawed in concept, doesn't engender positive outcomes and is underfunded by about, say, $50 billion. Catch name with no substance or money to match the moniker.

Money in Politics

As someone who's done a lot of fundraising, I've always referred to political dollars as "the dirty underbelly of democracy." It's repugnant the amount of money required to mount a national campaign-- which I'll do-- but it's gotta change. Public financing across-the-board: the only way to take dollars out of the equation. This is an election, not an auction.

Labor and Smithfield

I absolutely support the right of workers to organize and engage in collective bargaining.

Re. the situation in Tar Heel, I'll admit to not having drilled down on that specific situation as deeply as I want to.

Send me your thoughts-- please.

S-CHIP being vetoed

I think it's absolutely repugnant, appalling and if anything-- the best example of why Senator Dole is OUT OF TOUCH!!!!

We have 120,000 kids in NC who were abandoned by her vote which represent less than 1/2 of the 270,000 kids with no heath insurance.

EVERY child, man and woman in this state and this country should have access to affordable health care. Or nation-- our core values-- are under assault by an Adminstration and those who prop it up-- when a sick American goes bankrupt b/c they're sick.

From his issues page, we find out more.
Iraq

My opponent still backs the aimless policies of the Bush-Cheney administration, which have cost America taxpayers nearly $1 trillion and more than 3,800 lives.

Our troops have done everything we asked - and I don’t want to see any more of them die.

It’s time to bring them home to the heroes’ welcome they have earned, to rejoin their families, resume their careers, and be a part of their communities again.

To guarantee we don’t have to send them back in a few years, we need to redeploy small strategic units in the region to counter terrorism and train Iraqi security forces.

And then we need to redirect most of what we’re spending there to what matters more — children’s health and Medicare, Social Security, and making college affordable for middle-class families again.

The North Carolina Senate race has one man who is very progressive on the issues, every good Progressive should back him in this race. ESPECIALLY because the power-that-be don't want you to back him. This race can be the one where we set forth, once and for all: You cannot believe in civil rights for some, only for all.

True progressives, true liberals, even true libertarians should flock to this race and do the one thing that will make Beltway pundits and power-brokers take notice - bankroll it.

And, you can do this in a completely painless way, through my Pizza for Progressives page. It's a simple idea, trade in a daily latte for democracy. Trade in movie night once a month for Democracy. Say that you are willing to give up a non-essential, comfort for one day or one week EVERY MONTH, and make a difference. It's that simple. $5 a month, $50 a month, just by giving up something EXTRA.

actblue
It's time for progressives to act, it's time to put up or shut up. Do you believe in civil rights for all, or just for some? Do you want a party that still hides those the wingnut Republicans consider unacceptable? Or, do you believe that a person is judged by the character of their soul and not by the color of their skin, their sexual organs, or their sexual orientation?

John Edwards (President) $10.00
Jim Neal (NC-Sen) $10.00
ActBlue $1.00

Total $21.00

Give to Jim, show beltway Democrats that Progressives believe in civil rights.

Comments

Wow.

Another good frame. Also, I like how you brought Jerry Meek into it, to make it seem like he's somehow associated with all this, even though no one ever said that.

You summed up your problems with this post in your first comment, I offered my rebuttal, since then you've just been framing and Bushifying everything that has been said.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Bushifying?

I believe I've used complete sentences, something Bush is incapable of doing. And I think framing doesn't mean what you think it does.
I brought up Jerry Meek becuase he is the chair of the party. The ultimate insider. You claimed the insiders were against Neil because he is gay. Is Jerry aginst him? Is the NCDP against him? Is Schumer aginst him becuase he's gay? Again, who is this mysterious them and why haven't you told us who they are? Becuase seriously, screw them. I want to know so we can teach them that homophobia and discrimination have no place in our party.
No frame, no bushifying, whatever that means.

A few things

First: you have the timeline a bit wrong. Jim Neal was in the race before Martin dropped out. He didn't "step up" to give us a candidate, he was already a candidate when there was speculation that Martin was going to run.

Second: isn't it possible that some of the folks who are worried about Neal's chances (like myself) are more concerned about his lack of political experience, popular support, name recognition, etc. than his sex life? It's not like he's a gay public official - he's essentially an unknown.

Third: please don't make the assumption that those who support nominating Hagan over Neal are motivated by homophobia or lack of committment to civil rights.

Finally: Do you really not think that Hagan wants to run for the Senate? You don't think she also could be a candidate of her "own free will"?

Answers.

1. Correct, to a point. He was a non-presence to many people until after Martin stepped out.
2. I would expect people who only care about winning, not about the principles their candidate bevlieves in, to feel this way. Jim Neal isn't a local lawyer from Raleigh with no political experience and no involvement in politics, who would support a guy like that against someone with more experience in North Carolina politics?
3. I don't make that assumption, but I do think anyone who is disgusted by backroom deals and conversations aimed at finding another candidate PDQ because of someone's sexual orientation should put their money where their mouth is.
4. Of course she does, and now she has lots of people begging her to so Jim Neal won't "drag down" the party. How wonderful for her coffers.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Assumptions

You are making a pretty big assumption when you say that Hagan is being recruited because of Neal's sexual orientation. How do you know that the DSCC and other Democrats don't prefer Hagan because she's an elected official with:
1. Proven appeal to voters
2. A political base in a large NC city
3. Policy credentials
4. Some name recognition

Re: the point about "caring only about winning" and not about principles, that's just hogwash. On what principles do Hagan and Neal disagree substantively? It seems that your entire grounds for supporting Neal is the fact that he's gay. Fine, there's an argument to be made for that, but be honest. Don't couch it in terms of the old "principles vs. politics" false choice.

You said it.

isn't it possible that some of the folks who are worried about Neal's chances (like myself) are more concerned about his lack of political experience, popular support, name recognition, etc. than his sex life?

I don't see the words principles, issues, stances, or anything along those lines there. I see "electability" framing.

As I just got done writing elsewhere, I hope Hagan brings out a ton of Democratic voters, just one less than Neal. I also hope they are voting for her for the right reasons, just as I hope people vote for Neal for the right reasons.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

You've made that clear now

However, earlier you were only talking about electability issues. I want to support an electable candidate, I'm not a Gravel type of guy. But, I also want to support someone I feel is right on the issues.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

as i said before

Point 3 is why I wont be supporting Hagan. And, knowing what I do about NC politics, 2 and 4 might be smaller than you think, even for someone as powerful in the state legislature as Hagan is.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

Thank you for pointing that out

I think there's an awful lot of condescension, false superiority, and sanctimony in this post. Not to mention statements that are outright wrong.

Do you really not think

that maybe we've thought of that?

And do you really not think that maybe we can disagree with you? As for the timeline on the Brad Miller thing - you might want to check with Blue South on that. I have a feeling he was first on that, before DSCC.

No one wants to give Hagan a bloody nose. But if she decided not to run because she wanted to give Martin a chance, then she should have said that, not "I can do more in the NC Senate". She gave Dole's supporters their best line right there.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Very good summation of the situation, Robert.

If we want our country and our state back, we are going to have to take it. As I stated in a diary regarding Kay Hagan and Jim Neal the other day, Kay has been great for us in Greensboro, yet I'm looking for a real progressive Democratic Senator to send to DC from North Carolina. Jim Neal gets my backing in this primary.

North Carolina. Turning the South Blue!

North Carolina. Turning the South Blue!

We don't know the DSCC timing of events

Phoenixdem had a good point.

We do not know why the DSCC went back to courting Kay Hagan. Many here seem to think they went back to her after Jim Neal revealed his sexuality on BlueNC. But they could have gone to her immediately after Grier Martin dropped out. We don't know their timing of events.

Robert, you say that electability is not a good reason to support a candidate, but that is exactly the DSCC's job. They are supposed to get as many Democratic Senators elected as possible, regardless of ideology. The Senate Democrats are quite a heterogeneous mix of ideologies. We all probably wish the Democrats in the Senate had stronger "principles" but we at least agree that we need to get to 60 votes first!

It is entirely plausible that the DSCC determined Jim Neal was not very electable even before he publicly announced his sexuality and therefore continued to recruit a "stronger" candidate immediately after Grier decided not to run.

I wouldn't have a problem with this.

It is entirely plausible that the DSCC determined Jim Neal was not very electable even before he publicly announced his sexuality and therefore continued to recruit a "stronger" candidate immediately after Grier decided not to run.

From a DSCC point of view, although I feel like these national outfits should wait to see who wins the primary before throwing their weight behind a candidate.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Kay Hagan

Let me make something clear, through an example, the 2008 Presidential election. I'm hoping for one person to win, John Edwards. If Hillary Clinton wins, I'll be out there trying to get her elected. But, I have to say, I don't like Barack Obama. If he gets elected, I'll mostly focus on state politics. I'll still vote for him, but I just don't like him. The why isn't important here.

Now, back to the Senate race. I want Jim Neal to win this race. But, if Kay Hagan gets elected, I'll be behind her 100% of the way. I want Liddy gone.

That said, what I was trying to say in this diary is that Jim Neal represents our chance to win and major victory for equal rights in this country. It gives us a chance to show that the south isn't just a bunch of homophobic good ol' boys. None of this is about Kay Hagan, it is about Jim Neal.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

What he said

I want Jim Neal to win this race. But, if Kay Hagan gets elected, I'll be behind her 100% of the way. I want Liddy gone.

right on man, i'll be there too no matter what the outcome is

But the language you are using in this post only divides us by making unfounded allegations of homophobia and bigotry that don't help Hagan or Neal. It only serves to weaken our party and give Libby Dole a great talking point for the general election.
I’m being so persistent here because unless you're 100% sure that party insiders are opposing Neal because he’s gay, you are weakening our party without cause. That's why I said to watch what you say.
You are playing this as a civil rights cause instead of a political cause. That frames the opposition as sympathetic to homophobes in the same way backers of Mike Easley in 1990 were painted as racists for not supporting Harvey Gannt. I see it happening again. I just don't want Liddy to be next year's Jesse Helms. Our state and our country can't afford it.

I'll take that into consideration.

I don't want to imply in any way that supporters of Hagan are homophobic by default. In NO WAY.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

right on, again.

I love your passion and hope someday soon we're fighting together instead of arguing. I'd like to be in your corner.

watch what you say?

heh....you're one to talk.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

Logically,

Shouldn't it be "listen to what you say"?
"Watch what you do?"

:::sigh::: Semantics. It's come down to this.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

no, watch what you say

Printed or digital words after all. To say nothing of the fact that records of these words will be kept for a long time.

You had me at AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

The language you have used has accelerated any divisions, real or apparent. Don't mistake belligerence for persistence. Persistence requires sticking around here for more than 2 days 19 hours.

and what a two days!

Seriously though, I have been arguing that we need to not throw around allegations and start calling people names. What exactly is your problem with what I've said?

In my defense, I feel that I need to defend myself being the new gal in these parts, I don't think I've called anyone any names or done anything except argue for a little sanity in this otherwise overheated debate. But maybe I think too highly of myself. Honestly, Kay Hagan hasn't even made a formal announcement yet.

I've read BlueNC for many months. It was the unfounded allegations of homophobia that made me finally quit lurking. I'm glad I did, you guys are more fun while interacting, especially Anglico & BlueSouth. BTW, it's not nice to knock on new members of your community just becuase they're new. It makes 'em feel not welcome :(

Welcome

There might have been a little more sanity in the thread if you hadn't been arguing so stridently for it.

I don't knock you because you are new. I just ask you to read your own words with new eyes. I think you have demonstrated thick skin, unless of course the bark is worse than the bite.

Nobody really has alleged homophobia, founded or unfounded. That's a strawman. The thread was fairly tepid until you jumped in with "For God's sake!"

I don't agree with stifling a discussion by waving the word "homophobia" around nor do I subscribe to the notion that perfect knowledge, 100% pure, is a prerequisite for any blog post.

I don't buy the 100% rule. Clever way to redirect (hey, look over there!) and shut down debate. This is a blog, not a deposition, where opinion is a method of inquiry, a starting point, not an end. Cross examination with multiple, rapid fire questions is a "shoot the messenger" technique.

We've had our share of drive-by posters. Skepticism abounds. Here's hoping you are persistent.

all good points, thanks.

As a cat person, I don't really relate to the metaphor, but I think I can hold my own. I've been active politically for a while now.

The bellicose way I entered the thread was brought on by my reaction to the accusations in the post. That reaction was blown out of proportion after I spent time arguing the same point on this thread calling for a toning down of rhetoric. Then I see this post and I sneezed (as Anglico said). But I take your point. Thanks.

As far as the perfect knowledge thing goes, I'm with you. However, when you start insinuating that people are discriminating or being homophobic, that's a very serious allegation that should not be leveled willy-nilly. That was the whole of my point here. I think if you're going to level allegations like that, you should be able to back it up. I'm not using a clever device to prove I'm right. I genuinely want to know if folks are out there making these horrible statements. My "cross examination" was just to ask where the poster and everyone else was getting their information from? Who are you talking about? Blaming the political equivalent of "the man" is easy. Blowing the whistle on corrupt bigots in our party takes courage.

So far all I've seen, still, is broad baseless allegations against unnamed party insiders. I wish someone would say who these folks are so we can purge our party of the last vestiges of old south bigotry. Making spurious claims just creates bigger fissures between us, something Dole & Co are counting on, I assure you. Words and allegations have a lasting impact.

Silence = ?

You characterize the post as one of insinuating homophobia. You have not established that assertion yet you label the poster with it and ask him to defend your assertion by naming names or shutting up.

The fact that Jim Neal is gay is a fact. It is an issue for some voters. The poster has listed multiple other issues. Accusing the DSCC of a knee-jerk reaction to the issue is not accusing the DSCC of bigotry.

There is bigotry in every state. Though not necessarily corrupt it is insidious rather than blatant and does not lend itself easily to concise packets of evidence, line-ups or, whistleblowers.

To insist that bigotry must be proven is to misunderstand the insidious nature of bigotry.

There is a difference between political calculus and bigotry. What the poster has asserted is that the political calculus may be incomplete. It may indeed be bigotry but that charge has not been made.

This is a teachable moment for the party and the State. Silencing the discussion by framing it as "broad baseless allegations" and "spurious claims" is not constructive.

Have I told you lately

that I love your mind? :)

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

i don't doubt there is bigotry in this state

I've been been the victem of Carolina-style bigotry on more than one occasion. I know it well.

It may indeed be bigotry but that charge has not been made.

The poster said that the powers that be are discriminating against Jim Neal because he is gay. That is bigotry. Read what the poster said:

I, as much as anyone, have come out blasting the DSCC, the Democratic candidates, and anyone else who went looking for a new candidate just because Jim Neal was gay.

...

Hagan is suddenly back in the race following many harried phone calls from current Democratic candidates worried that Jim's being the nominee will hurt their changes at being elected, after all, he's gay{shhhhh}.

It's right there. He said that Democratic candidates and the national party are scurrying to recruit another candidate just because Jim Neal is gay. That's discrimination. Not political calculation. The poster and a few others are alleging that Democratic leadership is discriminating against Neal (not in doubt) because he is gay (no evidence presented... at all).

I think it is a fair question, and one that remains unanswered, to ask who is saying such things? Is there are proof, at all? Or is all of this based on what a few people assume is being said?

This is a blog, not a courtroom, as someone said earlier. Sure. But accusing people of discrimination and bigotry is a serious charge that should not be leveled lightly.

I don't want to silence discussion. Far from it. I want to silence allegations of discrimination if there's nothing there to back them up.

This is a teachable moment for the party and the State. Silencing the discussion by framing it as "broad baseless allegations" and "spurious claims" is not constructive.

With all due respect, if you make accusations of homophobia and discrimination and you don't have any evidence and can't name even ONE PERSON who engaged in these supposed actions, I believe that qualifies as baseless.

Burden of proof

For the record I am not the poster.

You continue to claim the poster's words as accusations of discrimination, bigotry and/or homophobia with little more than repetition to substantiate the claim. You present no evidence yourself. You inject your own words and expect the poster to explain them.

You expect us to accept your own assertions at face value yet hold others to a higher standard.

If "accusing people of discrimination and bigotry is a serious charge" with a heavy burden of proof shouldn't accusing people of "accusing people of discrimination and bigotry" be subject to a similar burden? However the law does not require a home run for discrimination cases.

For example in employment discrimination law there is often an absence of direct evidence of discrimination. The plaintiff need only establish a "prima facie" case initially. The burden switches to the defendant to provide a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the alleged discriminatory action. The burden switches back to the plaintiff to prove that the "legitimate" reasons were false.

Even if I accepted your hypothesis that the poster is claiming discrimination he would be well within his bounds to ask the party to "provide a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the alleged discriminatory action".

Are you familiar with the implication of the blockquote tag?

It means that I am directly quoting someone, like you:

You present no evidence yourself. You inject your own words and expect the poster to explain them.

Above your comment, you will see that I directly quoted, indicated by the blockquote tag, the original poster, Robert P and not yourself, as I'm aware.

shouldn't accusing people of "accusing people of discrimination and bigotry" be subject to a similar burden?

Yes. I am saying that Robert P, Betsy Muse, Anglico, and others here have said that the NCDP and national Democratic leadership are discriminating against Jim Neal just because he's gay. I'm giving specific examples and quotations to back up my claim. My evidence has been presented here quoted directly. For example this from the poster:

I, as much as anyone, have come out blasting the DSCC, the Democratic candidates, and anyone else who went looking for a new candidate just because Jim Neal was gay.

The whole point of the post was to point out that discrimination is happening. From the post:

Hagan is suddenly back in the race following many harried phone calls from current Democratic candidates worried that Jim's being the nominee will hurt their changes at being elected, after all, he's gay{shhhhh}.

Still, no one has given even one example of ANYONE saying anything discriminatory about Jim Neal just because he's gay, as the poster and many here have accused those in the party of doing.
This is an accusation of bigotry and discrimination that is based on assumptions of what people think is happening in Raleigh and D.C. and nothing else... nothing.
This post and those furthering this baseless allegation are doing harm to Kay Hagan's campaign and reputation and those that support her. It's also dividing our party, needlessly. Something Dole & Co are loving right now. I'm sure.

The law doesn't require a "home run" in discrimination cases. But it does require a specific person to prosecute and some, any, evidence of discrimination. There has been none so far. Not one shred.

And a decent woman's reputation has been harmed because of it.

bad one

You closed your previous comment with this statement:

With all due respect, if you make accusations of homophobia and discrimination and you don't have any evidence...

Just be clear who you are talking to. I am making it clear that it wasn't me.

As a front page poster I am not only familiar with blockquotes, I am intimate with delete and edit controls for all commenters as are other front pagers Robert P, Betsy Muse and, Anglico. You gave examples of things they said. You did not demonstrate that they were saying this was discrimination, bigotry or homophobia. You merely asserted this yourself. You are the one waving those flags. You're the one "furthering this baseless allegation".

You remind me of the occasional errant firefighter who intentionally sets fires in order to put them out and be declared a hero. This has become a Munchausen thread. You deserve no further response.

Get over it

The first time I posted here Anglico and I went at it for awhile.

We manage to get along quite nicely now.

Most of the people who post here are not just talkers. We're do'ers. You'll see us at the rallys, at the fund raisers, at the precinct or district meetings...and we'll be giving the Republicans and Blue PIGS Dogs living hell.

You wanna play? Then hang around and show what you're made of.
SE NC Dems

Stan Bozarth

Honestly, Stan.

You need to learn how to express yourself more clearly and not be so wimpy. ;)


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

We do indeed.

Get along quite nicely, that is.

Hagan for NC-06

If Hagan is strong enough to be considered for US Senate, she is strong enough to contest in NC-06. It's time for Howard Coble to retire, no matter how popular he has been or how good his constituent services are. And the citizens of NC-06 should be given a choice in the matter, which they won't unless Democrats run someone strong.

Citizens should be given a choice. Isn't that democracy? And aren't we talking here about the Democratic Party, which exists to preserve and extend our democracy? Or has the wimpiness in the Congress infected our officials here. Don't we want to see principled politicians?

So draft Hagan. If she doesn't run, she absolutely doesn't win; if she does, what are the odds if things move strongly toward the Democrats? The last three elections are not predictive of 2008.

50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

The 6th is VERY red.

Any Dem running in the 6th has a 60,000 deficit in reg. voters versus Reps to overcome. 75% of the una's would have to go blue and that assumes few Dino's which seems unlikely. It is likely that Hagan has done the math and sees the statewide senate race as way more viable.

Person County Democrats

I actively oppose gerrymandering. Do you?

Speaking as someone who worked the 6th

up and down last time, all over the district, I heard time and time again, I heard from Dino's and UNA's alike: We just need a strong choice against Coble.

I'm telling you, that's Hagan. Does Freakin' Howdie Coble have to die in office?

Hagan could take the 6th by working it. She's personable, she's smart, they already know her in Greensboro. The Dems here, who refused to vote for Rory Blake, when asked if they would vote for her, said "hell, yes, of course we would.".

Believe it or not, Moore is not the reddest of the counties, but Hagan would give us a shot.

It's goddamn disappointing to be written off every year. Maybe I'll start writing in Che Guevara. I'm so fucking sick of it.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Believe me I am all for someone taking Coble down

but, IMHO, this is what has to happen.
The dem leadership of the 6th has to take a somewhat long view of things. In each county in the 6th key neighborhoods, precincts, need to be canvassed. Start with where the registered dems are and have a less than stellar track record of voting dem. (You might do volunteer recruiting canvassing in the areas that are strong dem) Voting stats can be analyzed to see how many votes are available in which precinct. Those voters need to be encouraged, face to face and/or with voting recommendations left at their door, encouraged to vote dem. Over the course of several election cycles the number of target precincts are increased to go after the more marginal democratic voters.
Over time the effect will be to shift voting trends from rep to dem.
Voter reg in targeted areas - Community colleges, colleges and universities, or any other gathering places for young potential dems. Check to see if minorities are under registered.
This all takes time but only about 8-10 persistent volunteers in each county.
Get teen dems going. Contact active lefty liberal high school teachers to see if they can get teen clubs (and so more foot soldiers).
The payoff is that people will appreciate the contact and being asked for their vote. and the electoral landscape will change.
We seem to have done a bit of this in Person Co. We have done door to door in the city of Roxboro for 4 straight years now. 2008 will be a huge test to see if we really got the traction we seem to have gotten in 2006 and 2007.

Person County Democrats

I actively oppose gerrymandering. Do you?

GREAT comment, persondem

persondem. Everyone is always waiting for a candidate to come along and spark a district. That's not the candidate's job. That's the party's job. A party that's active and working their voters (as you have explained clearly in your comment) will attract a great candidate.

It's not fair to expect candidates to run a campaign while at the same time building the local parties. Now, that's what happens a lot of the time but it's not fair to your candidates.
 
News of the 10th district: See Pat Go Bye Bye,

Thank you much.

Pats on the back are certainly appreciated. :-)

You make a good point yourself. Parties prepare the landscape in which a good candidate can flourish.

Person County Democrats

I actively oppose gerrymandering. Do you?

My Point Still Stands

The folks of the 6th deserve an alternative other than another Democratic no-show.

Why have a Democratic presence at all in the 6th if no one strong is ever going to run for Congress?

I wish people would stop doing math and start doing politics. Politics can change the math.

50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

thank you.

I agree. At least I feel like you've heard me.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

hear hear n/t

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

Here here.


"If boiling people alive best served the interests of the American people, then it would neither be moral or immoral." Max Borders, Civitas Institute

Voting and elections are all about the math

If your candidate doesn't have 50% +1 vote, you lose. Every election should involve math and an analysis of voting history and voter registration.

I wish people would stop doing math and start doing politics. Politics can change the math.

I emphatically disagree. Unless blessed by having a clear advantage, a candidate has to know where the votes are. That starts with math.
Otherwise that candidate places himself at the mercy of uncontrollable and unforseeable political winds.

Person County Democrats

I actively oppose gerrymandering. Do you?

Yeah, I know.

I've canvassed most of my own county, and a lot of the other counties in the 6th. It's hard without the right leadership. But, you know, living here, I get the opportunity to know a lot of people here. There are even Republicans in Moore County would have voted for her.

That bodes well for her in the Senate race, I'm sure.

I'm just disappointed that Democratic leadership - down to me - at least - seems to think that Coble is unbeatable. He's not. It just won't be easy for an inexperienced candidate. (I count myself leadership because i'm an officer in the county party and when I'm not sitting here complaining about politics online, I'm working on it offline. It gets tiring and makes you wonder why you bother.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Why not talk issue's

I for one will not vote for a person based on whether he or she is gay or not. I also will not vote on whether the candidate is a male or female. I hear more objection to Neal being from Chapel Hill than from being gay. I hear the old joke by Jessie Helms that North Carolina does not need a new zoo in North Carolina Just put a fence around Chapel Hill. Why don't we talk about who would be best candidate based on their stances on the issues.

That would be good

and that would be Neal.

Hagan is one of a only a few Democrats ranked by NCFREE as "business friendly" during the recent legislative session. She was also part of the Senate leadership that orchestrated the deal to cut taxes on the richest North Carolinians.

Information is needed and appreciated

When two relative unknown (Statewide) run in a primary the difference in their policies need to highlighted. Hagan has a long record which can be evaluated. Jim Neal does not have as public a record so the more we hear what he has to say the better we can judge.

Pages