Mark Wilson drops out of Senate nomination challenge- all DINO now

[upi402]

<Senator Maria Cantwell (D) Washington State will be the nominee now. She is a Republican who holds a seat in the Democratic party. Recently she did a photo op where she drove a new diesel Volkswagen as a solution to critical oil issues. Maybe I'm the only one that saw that buying a German car is destructive to working people. Maybe I'm the last fool that tries to buy American. And real people don't go buy new cars because gas is unaffordable. Just disgusting! Here's Mark Wilson's emailed withdrawal to contributors and supporters>

July 08, 2006

Dear Tim,

I am deeply grateful for all your support. As I have come to get to know many of you I have discovered great treasures of the heart and a vast wealth of the spirit from which I draw hope, courage and confidence.

Now, though, is the time for unity.

After 16 months of campaigning in Washington State for the US Senate, I have come to terms with issues of deep conscience.

In all consideration, my opinion is the best remedy for meeting the challenges of the future, and to be victorious, is for me to withdraw my candidacy for the US Senate and to endorse and work with Senator Maria Cantwell for re-election.

This is not a concession. My conviction is that supporting Senator Cantwell is the surest way to winning for us all.

I stated all along that my goal in this effort was not to run against anyone, but to run for everyone. This has been a campaign of our values. And, that the highest priority is that we Democrats retain this important seat.

Senator Maria Cantwell is the best choice for achieving that important goal. The fact is that Senator Cantwell has time and again stood, face in the wind of adversity, and persevered on our behalf. Now is the time to get behind her and push.

Please join me in this important effort.

Not long ago Senator Cantwell withstood the blowing chill from the north and courageously faced down Ted Stevens from Alaska and won a critical environmental victory on ANWR.

There have been many instances, time and again, where her character has shined. With a Democratic majority in the US Senate she will rise and shine on our behalf again and again. Of this I am sure.

I have had a deep and personal one-on-one conversation with Senator Cantwell. I came away convinced we are on the same path when it comes to solving the crisis in Iraq and the potential crisis with Iran.

We agree there must be no permanent American military bases in Iraq.

We are also in agreement that every American should have access to quality health care. We could not get any further from these important goals and remedies than with an insurance executive.

Think about it. Access to health care or an insurance executive. You can't have both.

The Bush, Cheney, McGavick Republican policies have been tragic for the people of Washington State, for the United States and for people all around the world. It will take tremendous effort to get on course away from the rocks of the Bush, Cheney, McGavick nightmare. But, with a Democratic majority in in congress in 2006 we can do it.

As Democrats though, we cannot merely stand upon the rubble of the Republican ruins.

We must articulate a clear resolute vision for the future with sound policies grounded in peace, progressive renewable energy solutions, access to quality health care, true human and civil rights including LGBT equality, while protecting a woman's right to choose and fiscal responsibility.

We must lead the way to hopeful future for our children.

Getting Americans back to work in good paying family wage jobs that cannot be exploited overseas to the lowest common denominator is critical.

Getting control of an out of control system is possible with instant runoff voting and clean money public funded campaigns.

This is the foundation for fair access to serving in our communities for those whose call to service is deafened by big money in politics.

Unlike McGavick, who is able to campaign every day, Senator Cantwell still has a full time job-- representing us. On top of her job she is campaigning. She needs our support and help to unify all progressives behind her. She asked and I've agreed to work with her to help engage her campaign with you and all progressives.

My values and issues have not changed. My strategy has.

I will be taking an active full-time role in Senator Cantwell's re-election campaign. I will be a constant voice for the peace and justice community, for veterans, military families and labor. We all need to be fully engaged.

The Bush, Cheney, McGavick policies have been tragic for the world, the United States, and for us here in Washington State. Mike McGavick, whatever he might say if elected would be another vote for the Bush Administration.

You know we cannot do this without your help. It is time for the Washington State Progressive, Peace and Justice democratic community to come together again as a family united, working for our common goals for a hopeful future with real meaning for everyone.

United our voice has resonance and is heard. Together we will win with Team Cantwell in 2006.

I am excited about bringing our voices forward in this campaign. I am at your service.

Sincerely,

Mark Wilson

<Cantwell voted against filibustering Justice Alito, but then voted 'NO" as she knew it would pass anyway. This was a 100% weasel. Anyone surprised if the right to choose goes away can thank this Cantwell in part. Of course she is not a friend of working people. I feel it's just pointless -useless. Every time I try to contribute this crap always happens. The monied interests always win.>

[RB TexLa]

1. Volkswagen is a global company and employs many in North America n/t

[upi402]

2. Yes, it's all % content now. Funny it's cheaper to build here for Japanese

and others. Not one Volkswagon is UAW or IBEW made, according to the UAW website.

Here's a list of American made cars;

Company Model Type
Buick Lucerne Car
Cadillac CTS Car
Cadillac DTS Car
Cadillac STS Car
Cadillac XLR Car
Chevy Cobalt Car
Chevy Corvette Car
Malibu Max Car
Chevy Malibu Car
Chrysler Sebring Car
Dodge Caliber Car
Dodge Neon Car
Dodge Stratus Car
Dodge Viper Car
Ford Five Hundred Car
Ford Focus Car
Ford Freestyle Car
Ford GT Car
Ford Mustang Car
Ford Taurus Car
Lincoln LS Car
Lincoln Town Car Car
Mazda 6 Car
Mercury Montego Car
Mitsubishi Eclipse Car
Mitsubishi Galant Car
Pontiac G6 Car
Pontiac Soltice Car
Pontiac Vibe Car
Saturn ION Car
Saturn Sky Car
Toyota Corolla Car
Cadillac Escalade SUV
Cadillac SRX SUV
Chevy Suburban SUV
Chevy Tahoe SUV
Chevy Trailblazer SUV
Dodge Durango SUV
Ford Escape SUV
Ford Excursion SUV
Ford Expedition SUV
Ford Explorer SUV
Ford Exp Sport Trac SUV
GMC Envoy SUV
GMC Yukon SUV
Denali GMC SUV
Yukon XL SUV
Hummer H1 SUV
Hummer H2 SUV
Hummer H3 SUV
Isuzu Ascender SUV
Jeep Commander SUV
Jeep Grand Cherokee SUV
Jeep Liberty SUV
Jeep Wrangler SUV
Lincoln Aviator SUV
Lincoln Navigator SUV
Mazda Tribute SUV
Mercury Mariner SUV
Mercury Mountaineer SUV
Mitsubishi Endeaver SUV
Saturn Vue SUV
Chevy Silverado Truck
Chevy SST SSR Truck
Dodge Dakota Truck
Dodge Ram Truck
Ford F250 Truck
Ford Ranger Truck
GMC Canyon Truck
GMC Sierra Truck
Lincoln Mark LT Truck
Mazda B Series Truck
Mitsubishi Raider Truck
Toyota Tacoma Truck
Chevy Colorado Truck
Isuzu I-Series Truck
Buick Terraza Van
Chevy Express Van
Chevy Uplander Van
Chrysler Town & Country Van
Dodge Caravan Van
Ford E Series Van
GMC Savanna Van
Pontiac Montana Van
Saturn Relay Van

(from) http://www.howtobuyamerican.com/content/db/b-db-autos.shtml

[DELUSIONAL]

3. I still WILL not vote for her

her vote FOR the invasion of Iraq was wrong and she has NEVER ever backed down.

I hold her personally responsible for the deaths of both Iraqis and others --

She also helped ensure the appointment of two vile sub humans to the Supreme Court -- I will never forgive her for her actions -- she voted for closure and thus the filibuster effort.

She lost my respect -- and will NEVER ever vote for her.

Her hands are bloody.

[upi402]

4. I will NOT vote for her either.

Tired of no party. Just get it overwith already so we can start again to rebuild our Republic.

[pnwmom]

32. There won't be anything left to rebuild. The Republicans don't believe

in global warming. And they do believe in preemptive strikes.

But you're content to stand by while they continue their stranglehold on government.

[pnwmom]

5. If you liked Mark Wilson so much, maybe you should listen to him now

and join him in supporting Cantwell.

"I have had a deep and personal one-on-one conversation with Senator Cantwell. I came away convinced we are on the same path when it comes to solving the crisis in Iraq and the potential crisis with Iran.

"We agree there must be no permanent American military bases in Iraq.

"We are also in agreement that every American should have access to quality health care. We could not get any further from these important goals and remedies than with an insurance executive.

"Think about it. Access to health care or an insurance executive. You can't have both."

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pnwmom]

31. Half of the Democrats voted for IWR. Are you saying that they're

ALL DINO's?

Cantwell was in her first year of office. She has more of an excuse than most of them.

Since then, Cantwell voted for Levin-Reed, which had virtually no Republican support. She reiterated in June her support for taking the troops out of Iraq beginning THIS YEAR.

But why is it that so many people just won't be satisfied till she's wearing a sackcloth and ashes?

[kath]

35. Well, they may not all be DINOS, but they sure don't have much fokkin'

backbone...

[pnwmom]

39. I would LOVE for them to get more of a backbone.

In the meantime, I'm not going to stand by while bone-headed Republicans continue to trash this country, and Iraq.

[eridani]

136. You're off by 9%

41% of national Dem legislators voted for the war, and 59% against. Comparing that to the two lousy votes against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, I'd say we've come a long way, baby. Though not nearly far enough, obviously.

[w4rma]

63. His family wasn't threatened. He had no chance in this contest. (nt)

[WI_DEM]

68. that's a stupid reply

yeah he drops out because his family was threatened and then he goes to work for the people who threaten him.

[upi402]

12. don't like him *that* much. he's obviously not worth following.

he lead me off the cliff. no thanks, i wont take his bad direction again. i want my money and time back, so i'll listen to a refund offer...:popcorn: :boring:

[pnwmom]

7. So you, in your desire to punish her mistakes, will help her

extremely conservative Republican opponent instead -- the one who's in favor of drilling in the Alaskan wilderness and giving Bush a blank check on Iraq.

As opposed to Cantwell, who recently reiterated her support for redeployment out of Iraq beginning THIS YEAR.

Maybe you think your position makes sense, or maybe you just don't care.

[upi402]

13. CANTWELL doesn't care. You really don't see that?

I wont give a dime to either, nor a second of time.

[pnwmom]

20. How about a vote?

[IndyOp]

71. I respect your decision and I challenge it:

What, now, is the moral responsibility of a pacifist? You and I.

If the Democratic candidates win a majority in the House and Senate then they will control the topics and timing of hearings. Bush/Cheney will be quickly impeached. The US will beat a hasty retreat from Iraq.

If you do not vote for the Demoractic candidate and a Republican takes that seat, the Democratic Party will not have a majority and cannot have an impact on the direction the nation takes.

Yes, Cantwells hands are bloody. So are the hands of both Dems for whom I can vote in November - Bayh & Hill. Their votes have led to the deaths of 100,000's.

What is my moral responsibility? My responsibility, I believe, is to put the party in power whose members include Reps. John Conyers, Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Jesse Jackson, Jr., and Russ Feingold.

This is not a theoretical debate for me. An anti-war friend of mine ran an excellent progressive primary against Baron Hill and lost. Her campaign supporters are all now where you stand.

What is our moral imperative?

[pnwmom]

88. Good post, IndyOp. I would add just one thing.

The Senate has the power to declare war. We need a Democratic majority in the Senate to reduce the chance of our getting involved in another preemptive war.

[Biernuts]

86. The Chairman of the Republican National Committee has asked

that we convey his thanks for working to elect a Republican by not voting for the Democratic Nominee. He adds that he has no douby that the Republican who replaces Senator Cantwell will reflet your views very closely. Thank you for your support - the RNC!

[pnwmom]

89. How hard would it be for the Republicans to have a few people in DU

posing as disappointed Democrats?

Who are trying to discourage other Democrats from voting?

[Biernuts]

96. Every time I see a "That's the last straw boys and girls, join me

boycotting the election. We'll teach them to disregard MY issue/candidate!" I think of two things:

1. WAHHH! I'm taking my football and going home.

2. If I can convince just a few more to not vote, we'll have it in the bag. Today the county council, tomorrow the world!

What I perceive is that despite all the rhetoric, we are anything but a big tent - conform or be pummeled, maybe even banned, would be a better description. Scoop Jackson and Sam Nunn would be vilified as agents of the antichrist.

[pnwmom]

104. I'm beginning to think we were all better off when both the

Democrats and the Republicans represented a much broader spectrum of views.

Somehow, we were better able to arrive at concensus positions that way.

But people now seem to detest the very idea of compromise.

[pnwmom]

6. She's a progressive, not a DINO, which you can verify by looking

at her actual voting record. Progressive Punch puts her in the top fifth of the Senate on progressive issues.

www.progressivepunch.com

P.S.

Volkswagen, way back in 1978, was the first European car manufacturer to begin building their cars in the United States.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Golf

And if at least some "real people" don't buy new cars, there won't be any used cars for the rest of us to buy -- or jobs for the workers producing those cars.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SquireJons]

11. I think delusional pretty much says it all.

By not voting for a democrat, you practically ensure that the supreme court will be filled with the likes of Alito and Thomas. Bad move... some would say delusional. Unless we change to a multi-party parliamentary system of government, which we won't, than it is up to us all to compromise. The pugs earned the right to nominate Roberts and Alito by wining the elections. Focus on wining and the rest at least has a chance of taking care of itself.

Or you can go to your room and sulk in the corner until they come to take you away to the re-education camps.

[upi402]

17. Don't you see? Both R and D will be corporatists now!!!!!

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[emulatorloo]

18. I WOULD RATHER HAVE JOHN D ROCKEFELLER THAN PAT ROBERTS

as chair of the intelligence committee. All Pat Roberts has done is COVER UP FOR THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION and refuse to let the Dems investigate IRAQ.

So keep banging your head against the wall.

But the real contest here is for WHO HAS THE MAJORITY and WHO HAS THE COMMITTEE CHAIRS.

And don't tell me a Dem committee chair like Rockefeller is "no different" because it is not true.

[pnwmom]

23. I'm betting, with your repetition of the word "corporatist" that

you're a Naderite or a Green.

[kath]

33. Jeebus - so only Naderites use the word "corporatist"?!?! Bullshit.

Plenty of us here (who have always voted Dem)realize that many of the Dems have sold out to the corporations. Think of the bankruptcy bill, and many other recent abominations. There's plenty of reason to be pissed at the DINO Dems. Yeah, Dems are still better than the Repugs, but WAY, WAY too many of them do not work in the interests of working people. WIth many of them, no matter how many phone calls, letters etc that they receive from We the People, they will still vote for the interests of their corporate donors in the end.

[pnwmom]

40. The way to stop them, then, is to take control of one of the

major parties -- not to jump ship when the going gets rough.

I SHOULD have said repeatedly using the word corporatist (a term popularized by Nader) -- TOGETHER WITH a person's willingness to stand aside while the Republicans take over -- makes me think that person could be a Naderite or a Green.

[kiahzero]

24. So, rather than make some improvements

It's better to be "pure" and watch things get even worse. That kind of "the perfect as the enemy of the good" thinking is what allowed Nader voters to help Bush get elected in 2000. People like you could potentially keep us from getting the Senate in 2006. Thanks.

[pnwmom]

26. I think some of the people who talk this way are

the same people who voted for Nader in 2000 and are still utterly convinced of the righteousness of their decisions -- no matter how bad the consequences to the country as a whole.

[kiahzero]

29. Consequences don't matter to some.

Some people would rather be ideologically pure than save or improve lives.

:shrug:

[SquireJons]

70. Let's fight one battle at a time n/t

[upi402]

16. That "no" to a filibuster may ruin US more than the Iraq position.

We have torturers being elevated in America. The more one kills, the shinier the medal -the higher the promotion. And these Supremes will cause the phonebook of our lives to be ripped one page at a time, until more Americans are dead and damaged than from 9-11.

People just refuse to see what has come to pass here. Want to pretend it's all okay if we just go along kissing the devil.

[pnwmom]

25. Her not going along with a filibuster didn't affect anything.

It would have been a purely symbolic vote.

If she had voted against cloture, we still didn't have enough votes to go all the way -- Kerry and Kennedy tried to round them up, but they just weren't there.

And your choice is to stand by while an extreme conservative wins instead, who will help solidify the Republican lock on the Senate.

Sounds like you're the one kissing the devil.

[pnwmom]

21. Of course you decide what to do with your vote, and if you choose

to put a couple of votes above everything else, that's your decision -- but you might want to rethink whether you will be happier with a guy who wants to give Bush a blank check on Iraq, will work with Ted Stevens to bring oil drilling to the Alaskan wilderness, and favors a number of serious restrictions on abortion.

You should realize, too, that in voting the way she did Cantwell wasn't sending a personal message to you. She has a whole stateful of constituents to represent, and you and I are only two of them.

[SquireJons]

10. I don't know what all the fuss is about

Cantwell may not vote 100% the way you want, but she is hardly a DINO. I'm even reluctant to call Lieberman a DINO because many of his votes are fine. The problem with him is that the times he breaks with his own party really hurts them, and so his negatives outway his positives. But if you consider every senator who voted for the Iraq war and for the two supreme court nominees to be republicans, than there are only a handful of democrats anyways. So much for a two party government. As for myself, I don't see it that way. In my opinion, the democrats should have stood firm against preemptive war (virtually none of them did), but neither Alito or Roberts were unreasonable choices for the supreme court. They wouldn't have been my nominations, but that's why it's more important to win elections than to have ideological purity.

Two things bug me about the democratic party. First, they are (usually) inarticulate and fearful. Second, they are disorganized and way too idealistic. This is the real world we live in, and that means compromise. Many democrats can not curb their appetite for pushing things too far, and so they get nothing, and I'm stuck with a$$holes like bush and cheney. It is much the same way with the gay rights movement. Sure, most reasonable people don't have a problem with gay relationships, but timing is everything. Push to expand your rights when you have the strength to accomplish something. Gay marriage vs. civil unions is a difference in semantics, but the insistence of some to use the term 'marriage' greatly helped elect those who are truly evil. Progressives, democrats, gays, whatever... need to get a grip on reality, cause we're on the brink of disaster here. It's time to unite and fight the bad guys as smart as we can, not shoot dicks off.

[upi402]

15. You say you're reluctant to call Lieberman a DINO...

Now that's a mouthful!
Made me lose mine:spray:

[pnwmom]

28. Lieberman votes the progressive position 76% of the time

according to www.progressivepunch.com

This does put him among the most conservative group of Democrats,

But the Republicans are a whole different story.

Of the Republican Senators, 39 out of 44 take the progressive position LESS than 15% of the time.

[SquireJons]

69. I didn't say I liked him

But he does vote on our side most of the time, unlike true DINO's like Zel Miller. It would be nice to have a congress full of people who think just like me, but that's just a dream and not even a very good one, I might add. I like the dream where I get all the girls better.

[upi402]

14. DINO followed her for many years

many disappointments as a Rep and a Sen

Kerry had a liberal vote record amd HE voted for NAFTA. That's the #1 thing the corporatists wanted before this cabal got in there.

[pnwmom]

22. The Greens like to call her a DINO, because they're trying to

peel away Democratic votes. But nobody who checks her actual voting record should be falling for that line.

This is her first term as a Senator, by the way. Her vote on the IWR -- in which she was joined by 76 other members of the Senate, including half the Democrats -- came in her first year of office.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

37. Her continuing support for the war is stilll there 5 years later.

Which disqualifies her for my vote.

[pnwmom]

46. Unlike the Republicans, she joined most Democrats in voting for

Levin-Reed. In June, she reiterated her support for beginning withdrawal THIS YEAR.

The war in Iraq didn't begin 5 years ago, by the way (even though I would agree that it feels like it has been forever).
It began in 2003.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

49. She voted no on the Kerry bill.

As did, to my surprise, our other senator who I thought had more integrity.

[pnwmom]

52. McGavick opposed Levin-Reed as well as the Kerry bill.

And he's the other choice.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

94. Oh, I don't know. I think there will be a 3rd choice.

[pnwmom]

103. Only a 3rd choice that would swing the election to the Republicans.

Not a 3rd choice that could actually bring about a more progressive government.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

111. Yet.

[pnwmom]

119. We don't have time for "later." Right now is the CRITICAL moment.

We're slipping into a dictatorship and some people here appear to be content to let that happen. Amazing.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

120. It's always a "critical" moment in politics.

I've heard that song since I first started voting in 1966. Especially in '68 when the Dems nominated Humphrey, the "moderate" hawk. Which was the only time I didn't vote for the Democratic presidential candidate.

The "not as bad" party is only going to change when it discovers that it's losing votes to the left.

[pnwmom]

126. I've been voting almost as long as you and I've never seen a time

like this. I've never seen a President as threatening as Bush, and I've never seen a Republican congress so willing to completely let the President have his way.

And now we have electronic voting systems that can switch votes with the touch of a few buttons on a blackberry.

[eridani]

137. When WA state Greens have even one PCO

Let me know.

[Terran1212]

76. She'll also be the first vote of the Iran war, too nt

[skipos]

19. Well now voters choose between the (D) and the (R)

and trying to get a Democratic majority in the senate or enabling a greater Republican majority and all the power that comes with it.

It is against my morals to allow Republicans to continue to destroy America with their control of our government. I'd happily for for Cantwell.

[AtomicKitten]

38. a voice of reason

well done

[WA98296]

27. IF true, it is in the BEST interest of the Democratic Party

I also disagree with SOME of what Cantwell has done, however at thisp point our main objective must be to gain control of one or both houses. Once that happens (that assumes we can actually have a clean election) then it's time to hold all their feet to the fire.

[pnwmom]

30. That's right. Once we have a majority, those on the left will

have more influence, as the leadership tries to keep everyone on board.

Just as those on the Republican far right were able to obtain much more influence ONCE the party had a majority.

[KingFlorez]

34. Good

We don't need primary challengers when we are trying to win the Senate

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

36. Well, I'll be voting "selectively" come November.

Too bad about Wilson, I would have liked to vote for a Democrat. Now, I have a choice between a warmongering Republican and a warmongering (part-time) Democrat. So, I guess I'll have to look elsewhere for a Progressive.

[pnwmom]

42. Did you read this?

Part of Mark Wilson's statement:

"I have had a deep and personal one-on-one conversation with Senator Cantwell. I came away convinced we are on the same path when it comes to solving the crisis in Iraq and the potential crisis with Iran.

"We agree there must be no permanent American military bases in Iraq."

He's supporting her fully now -- as a progressive. If you want to know why, maybe you should read the entire email in the O.P.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

43. Well, Mark and I differ.

Her vote for the IWR, followed by her vote for continued occupation, has failed to convince me that she has any interest in anything other than saving her place at the trough.

[pnwmom]

51. She voted for Levin-Reed. McGavin opposed it.

McGavin will give Bush a blank check. Cantwell has called for redeployment out of Iraq beginning in 2006.

The choice is clear.

[Diane R]

60. Great....a lot of Nader Voters made the same decision

This is the kind of short sighted, 'shoot yourself in the foot', cut off your nose to spite your face thinking that let little george bush get close enough to steal the election.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

62. Of course it had nothing to do with Gore not going after those votes.

They were available. But, Gore and Lieberman decided to play it safe and pursue the right wingers instead of the left.

[pnwmom]

74. Gore didn't pursue right wingers. But a third of the country consider

themselves independents and it would be crazy for a politician to ignore them.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

90. Well, ignored a segment of the independents who didn't vote for him.

Namely, the ones who voted Green.

[pnwmom]

107. The vast majority of independents consider themselves "moderate" --

that is, somewhere between Republicans and Democrats. Those are the swing voters Gore hoped to draw support from.

[Generic Other]

41. I am having a hard time convincing myself that she's worth my vote

I have called Cantwell's office repeatedly since she became my senator. Her staff has been short with me, unwilling to explain her positions, and totally oblivious to warnings that she was committing political suicide.

I told her that her vote on the Iraq War went against the expressed desires of the voters of her state, and that her decision to back such an invasion was the price of my vote. HER VOTE told me to go "fuck myself." Now she wants MY VOTE, my money and my yard on a high-traffic street for her signs. Screw that. I won't advertise for her. I won't support her. While I won't vote for the GOPig, neither will I violate my own ethics by voting for ANYONE who will not repudiate their IWR vote first. That's the price of my vote. And since I'm one of the 1000 vote margin she had last election, that puts her at 999 votes left. If she hasn't totally lost those voters as well.

I don't like the idea of leaving the space blank next to her name, but until she proves to me that she is a better senator than Slade Gorton (a pretty low bar if you ask me), I can't see myself voting for her.

I feel no joy in saying these things.

Even John Kerry had to repudiate his vote to win the nomination in 04. If he hadn't, I wouldn't have voted for him either.

[pnwmom]

44. Her vote was NOT a personal repudiation of YOU or your views.

She has the difficult challenge of being a Senator, having to walk a sort of tightrope as it were, in a closely divided state. Living in the Seattle area, it is easy to think that she isn't properly representing her constituents. But she has an entire state to represent, not just liberals in Seattle.

Please don't forget how close we were to an arch conservative like Dino Rossi becoming governor. We are not living in a liberal state, we're living in a swing state, and Cantwell has to be very careful with each and every one of her votes.

Even so, her voting record on progressive issues puts her among the top fifth of Senators overall, ahead of many other Democrats who don't come in for nearly the same amount of criticism.

[Generic Other]

56. But my non-vote will be a personal repudiation of her views however

Like I said, I don't want to be put in this position, but I feel that if I help elect the VICHY government, I am a NAZI collaborateur too. How is a vote for Cantwell NOT a repudiation of my beliefs?

It may be true that I always vote Democrat, but not every Democrat always gets my vote. Norm Dicks, for example. But the war vote is my line in the sand. I can't seem to cross it no matter how hard I try.

The way Dems rolled over for this illegal occupation was/is very painful for many of us to see. I am losing faith in their ability--or desire--to turn things around. *Sigh*

[pnwmom]

77. Because Cantwell's position on Iraq -- which is that we should

begin redeployment out of Iraq THIS YEAR -- surely must be closer to yours than McGavick's -- which is that we should stay in Iraq "as long as it takes."

Even if you are determined to be a one issue voter, the difference between Cantwell and McGavick on this issue is clear.

And the only way for the Democrats to begin to turn the whole ship of state around is to get control of AT LEAST the Senate or the House.

[uppityperson]

45. Keep pressure on Cantwell. Mark Wilson did this, we need to continue it

I think (hope anyway) she has noticed the lack of support and growing dissatisfaction with what she has done. Thank you Mark Wilson for giving up a choice, I am sorry that you are no longer a choice. Her office put out a call for people to help with the campaign and were shocked at how few responded.

I you are dissatisfied with her "representation", as I am, now it is up to us to continue to keep pressure on Cantwell. Call, write, call, write, tell them that you are reluctantly supporting her as the least bad of 2 options but you do NOT feel she represents you and you wish there was another choice.

Keep up the pressure. Of course the monied ones win. It is up to the rest of us to keep the pressure on our representatives. Vote as you will come fall, your vote is private and personal. But please help keep the pressure on Cantwell. Thank you.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

47. I wrote and told her she could whistle for my vote.

The only "pressure" we can apply to politicians is to withold our money and votes. When they want them, they'll come to us.

[pnwmom]

50. And what sort of influence do you think you'll have on the Republican?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

53. About the same as I have on Cantwell.

How about you?

[Generic Other]

57. Aint that the truth!

Why do I get all cynical and sick to my stomach at the very thought of another election cycle?

[pnwmom]

78. Maybe because the Republicans keep winning?

Because some people have already given up?

[skipos]

58. What are the benefits of a Republican win to you?

I can tell you what some of the benefits of a Democratic win are.
If you don't care about ANWR, minimum wage increase or any of her other progressive votes, a vote for her will be a vote for getting a Senate majority, getting Dems to head committees instead of Republicans, getting more Dems on committees than Republicans.

I can't see the advantage of a Republican win. :shrug:

[pnwmom]

73. I'll have zero influence on McGavick. For the sake of argument,

let's assume the same figure for Cantwell. (I am just one person after all. How do I know what she is hearing from other people?)

I'm still better off, because -- despite the votes of hers that I do regret -- I know that there would be FAR MORE votes from McGavick that I would regret. I'm pro-choice -- like Cantwell. I'm pro-environment -- like Cantwell. I support Jack Murtha's position on Iraq, and with a majority of Democats in the Senate, his position may become the dominant one. But even now, Cantwell's position in favor of Levin-Reed sets her clearly against the Republicans.

McGavick's positions put him all the way to the right. He says that he supports staying in Iraq as long as he takes. He's for restrictions on abortion. He's for drillling in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge.

The worst that can be said about Cantwell is that a few of her individual positions put her in the middle of the pack. But by an large, she's a solid progressive.

[pnwmom]

48. I agree, keep up the pressure on Cantwell.

Before and AFTER the election.

But when it comes down to voting, use your head. Honestly -- how much influence can you hope to have if the Republican wins?

[uppityperson]

54. Sometimes things have to get really bad for things to change

I keep thinking we might be approaching that point, but never quite there. I understand why we need to get control of 1 branch of the tirad (legislative) but can also understand the feelings of those who will NOT vote for Cantwell. Perhaps it is not bad enough yet.

I do wish her office would not send me back chipper "thank you for supporting my position on (whatever)" letters when I write her saying I do not support her position. Aside from her voting record and support of things I disagre with, this shows me that she truly doesn't care enough to have enough staff to even quickly sort her mail into pro/con stacks. (Perhaps they could get a computer email program to scan for "support" and "disagree, don't support" if they don't have staff to at least read email headers?)

[w4rma]

64. Perhaps that's only when the whole world is engulfed in Nuclear fallout?

I think its a bad idea to pull this Naderite crap. Go after her in the primary, not the general.

Don't fall into the Rovian trap of splitting the party and wasting needed resources.

[uppityperson]

66. "Naderite crap"? excuse me?

Things have to get bad before people will change. I keep thinking we have hit that point, but not sure. There is nothing that says the USA empire must stand forever.

"Naderite crap"? wtf?

[pnwmom]

81. We ARE steadily slipping into a dictatorship. Right now. It might

already be too late, but I have to ACT as if it is not.

Once the Bushies have solidified their hold on the government, it WON'T MATTER HOW BAD THINGS GET. There won't be anything we can do, short of civil war. And THAT we won't win.

If the Republicans maintain their majorities in the House and the Senate, imagine what they could do just in the next two years. Iran? North Korea? Do you really want to have to find out?

[uppityperson]

84. I don't. I know. I am.

I don't think your argument is with me, just pointing out that things have to get bad before some people can change and I don't know if we are there yet. I am NOT advocating making things worse, or letting things develop worse, just saying what I am saying. Of course act, of course work for positive change. Just realize too that things may get worse. That if things get worse, change may happen for more people, the more people are directly affected the more chance change will happen.

But I still don't like Cantwell and that remains as a fact. This does not mean I will just walk away from it yet, but am trying to work with her, let her know how I feel and encourage others to do so also.

[pnwmom]

87. I think you're right that progressives need to let her hear our

concerns loud and clear. I've certainly let her know where I stand on Iraq (get out now.)

But we absolutely need a majority in the Senate so that the next time Bush wants to start a preemptive war, the Senate vote will be NO.

As it stood in 2002, it didn't matter how many Democrats opposed Bush -- he still had the support he needed in the Senate to go ahead.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. Cantwell stands ground on Iraq.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/274038_cantwelliraq15.html

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Maria Cantwell declined again Wednesday to endorse a date for pulling U.S. troops from Iraq, calling instead on President Bush to name a special envoy to promote regional diplomacy and for more foreign involvement to stabilize the fractured country.

Despite mounting pressure from the liberals in her Democratic Party to change her policy on Iraq, Cantwell held firm, refusing to apologize for her 2002 vote in support of the war. In Washington state, Cantwell's position on the war has emerged as the dominant issue among Democrats, with many expressing disappointment in Cantwell.

Iraq has deeply divided Democrats at all levels, as the party has been unable to reconcile vastly competing visions for how best to deal with Iraq.

Cantwell's moderate approach, in fact, is similar to one held by Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., which has been ridiculed by party activists.

[skipos]

59. If you want to argue that her position on Iraq sucks, it is easy to do

Do any of her progressive votes mean anything to you, or do you vote exclusively on Iraq? I am not being snarky, I realize some people only care about the war and nothing else.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

61. The "war" is not one issue.

It has to do with the "defense" budget.
It has to do with veterans.
It has to do with corruption.
It has to do with diplomacy rather invasion.
It has to do with our standing in the world.
It has to do with the integrity of politicians.
It has to do with the whole situation in the middle-east.
It has to do with the morality, or lack of morality, of this nation.
It has to do with dissent and the right of dissent.
It has to do with racism.
It has to do with xenophobia.
It has to do with colonialism.
It has to do with domestic spying.

I could list more but, hopefully, you get the idea.

But, my main objection to Cantwell's stance, and those like her, is that people, real people, are being killed every day because of it.

[skipos]

72. Again, do you vote exclusively on Iraq?

I realize it is far from a single issue, just as it is far from encompassing everything a a senator ever votes on.

McGavick supports the War 100%, and looks to have all of the usual anti-woman, anti-poor, anti-environment stances that you'd expect from a Republican.

If non-Iraq issues mean little to you, if a Democratic majority and all the leadership positions that come with that means little to you, if McGavick's right wing policies don't bother you, I could see not voting for Cantwell.

I know some people will feel that way, I guess I just can't relate. America would be so much better off with a Democratic majority, and I couldn't live with myself if I didn't do everything I could to make it happen.

McGavick or Cantwell is going to be sitting in that senate seat, no ifs ands or buts. It is easy to see which of the two would be the better choice for America. IMO of course. :)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

106. I'm all for a Democratic majority.

But, issues do count. And, getting Democrats in who actually are progressives count.

We had a DINO rep, Jolene Unseld, who sold her sorry soul to the NRA. In 1994 she lost her seat to an ultra-conservative republican, in part because a lot of progressives sat on their hands. In 1998 we elected Brian Baird who has been a solid progressive on all issues, including the the war in Iraq.

The way to get the pro-war people out of congress is to not vote for them.

[pnwmom]

109. Jolene Unseld wasn't running in a statewide election.

It's much easier for House members, like Jim McDermott, to take very liberal across-the-board positions, because they represent well-defined, liberal districts.

Maria Cantwell represents a very divided state. Patty Murray -- who no one seems to be complaining about this time around (though maybe only because she isn't running) -- votes progressively about 90% of the time, as opposed to Cantwell, with 88% of the time. That's about as good as it gets in a state like ours.

Much as we might like to be Massachusetts, we aren't.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

116. Murray voted against the war. How did she win?

In this divided state? BTW the 3rd district is a "swing" district.

Not only did Patty win, she won by 12%. And, she won in 2004, before the public had turned decisively against the war.

Gregoire ran as a "moderate" and barely scraped in.

Cantwell is doing the same this time around and will probably do the same. Unlike Murray who ran as a progressive.

[pnwmom]

121. Patty Murray was a two-term incumbant and Nethercutt was a weak

opponent. Reneging on his term limits pledge made him a laughingstock. Also, he was a first time Senatorial candidate with very little name recognition in the western half of the state.

Cantwell, on the other hand, had a much stronger opponent in Slade Gorton, who was the incumbant with a total of 18 years as U.S. Senator.

[skipos]

125. No.

"The way to get the pro-war people out of congress is to not vote for them."

If every Democrat took your advice, WA would elect McGavick, who is more pro-war than Cantwell.

I think this is closer to your beliefs:

The best way to get pro-war Democrats out of congress is to not vote for them. They will probably be replaced by a Republican who represents our views even less, but hopefully a more progressive Democrats can defeat that Republican in 6 years, but you never know.

Do you agree?

[pnwmom]

127. I think his real position is:

"They will probably be replaced by a Republican who represents our views even less, but hopefully by then everyone will have given up on both the Republicans and the Democrats and a Green will win the seat in six years."

[pnwmom]

82. This is her more recent statement:

http://cantwell.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=257594&&days=30&

WASHINGTON, DC – Thursday, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) released the following statement in support of the Levin-Reed Amendment to the Defense Authorization bill. Cantwell underscored the need for Iraqi security forces to step up so the United States can begin bringing our troops home, and reiterated the need for the administration to do more to garner international support and foster diplomatic collaboration. She also made clear that the United States should not stay in Iraq indefinitely and must work to get U.S. troops home safely and as soon as possible.

“I support the Levin-Reed Amendment to encourage the Iraqis to take complete control of their own future. The amendment recognizes the increasing number of Iraqi troops being trained but calls on those troops to take the lead so U.S. forces can be redeployed beginning this year. It makes clear that the president should convene an international conference on Iraqi stability and reconstruction. This amendment calls on the Iraqis to take action to achieve a broad-based political settlement such as adopting amendments to the Iraqi Constitution on fair sharing of political power and economic resources. It also urges the Iraqi government to promptly disarm the militias.

“Last year, by a vote of 79-16, the Senate declared that 2006 should be a year of transition. The Levin-Reed Amendment is consistent with that goal and adds to my own calls for both the Iraqis and the international community to step up. We must make it clear that the United States is not going to stay in Iraq indefinitely. As I have said before, we must get the Iraqi people on their feet and U.S. troops home.”

Here is McGavick's position on Iraq:

http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Mike_McGavick_War_+_Peace.htm

America must steadfastly work to root out the sources of radical terrorism. The U.S. cannot retreat from the War on Terror or countries like Iraq will turn into the worst hotbeds of terror the world has ever witnessed.

U.S. forces will come home from Iraq when the job is finished. Setting a timetable for troop pullout gives the advantage to America's terrorist enemies.

[Reckon]

65. I understand how you feel, but if the best we can do

at this point in time, is elect a 3/4 Democrat, that's still better than a full goose stepping right wing-nut.

[WI_DEM]

67. well he decided to drop out and take an active role in Cantwell's

campaign. He probably came to the conclusion that Cantwell was going to win anyway. But still if he truly believed in what he was talking about I would have thought that like Ned Lamont he would have stayed in and fought regardless of the outcome.

[pnwmom]

83. I believe he thinks he can influence Cantwell to listen to progressives.

And that he's in more of a position to know that than we are.

[eridani]

138. Lamont has a buttload of money

Wilson does not, nor did he have the organization to overcome that problem.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[helderheid]

79. actually, please don't and here's why:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1552626

From Kevin Spidel's post:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

snippet:

- At least 9 Congressional Progressive Caucus Members would become Committee Chairmen or Chairwomen
- An additional 35 Congressional Progressive Caucus Members would become Subcommittee Chairmen or Chairwomen.

The following Progressive Caucus Members would become Committee Chairs:

- Congressman George Miller, Chairman of Education and Workforce Committee
- Congressman Barney Frank, Chairman of Financial Services
- Congressman Henry Waxman, Chairman of Government Reform
- Congressman Bennie Thompson, Chairman of Homeland Security Committee
- Congressman Tom Lantos, Chairman of International Relations Committee
- Congressman John Conyers, Chairman of Judiciary Committee
- Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, Chairwoman of Rules Committee
- Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez, Chairwoman of Small Business Committee
- Congressman Charles Rangel, Chairman of Ways and Means Committee

The following Progressive Caucus Members would become Subcommittee Chairs:

- Appropriations Subcommittees -- Congresswomen Rosa DeLauro and Marcy Kaptur and Congressmen John Olver, Jose Serrano, and Ed Pastor
- Armed Services Subcommittee, Congressman Neil Abercrombie
- Education and Workforce Subcommittees, Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey and Congressman Dennis Kucinich
- Energy and Commerce Subcommittees, Congressman Ed Markey and Congresswomen Jan Schakowsky and Hilda Solis
- Financial Services Subcommittee, Congresswoman Maxine Waters and Congressman Luis Gutierrez
- Government Reform Subcommittees, Congresswoman Diane Watson and Congressmen Dennis Kucinich, Elijah Cummings, Danny Davis of Illinois, and William "Lacy" Clay
- International Relations Subcommittee, Congressman Donald Payne
- Judiciary Subcommittees, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee and Congressmen Jerry Nadler and Melvin Watt
- Interior Subcommittees, Congressmen Raul Grijalva and Tom Udall and Congresswoman Donna Christensen
- Rules Subcommittees, Congressman Jim McGovern
- Small Business Subcommittees, Congresswomen Madeleine Bordallo
- Transportation and Infrastructure, DeFazio, Filner, Holmes-Norton, and C. Brown
- Ways and Means Subcommittees, Congressmen Pete Stark, Jim McDermott, and John Lewis of Georgia



Folks, it is that serious.

snippet

(Thank you Kevin Spidel!!)
This is SO IMPORTANT

[Terran1212]

91. Oh come on, she won't lose because the Greens get a few

percentage points -- but it will send a strong antiwar message to the Democrats

[pnwmom]

99. The Green vote COULD EASILY swing the election to the Republicans.

You say you're from Georgia. How do you know that Cantwell couldn't lose by a very small number of votes?

In her first Senatorial election, she won by only a very small number of votes. The current Democratic governor won by a tiny number of votes. This is an extremely divided state and it is quite possible that a few percentage points going to the Greens could swing the election to the Republicans.

[Terran1212]

105. Then maybe the WA Dems will think twice next time

About fielding hawks.

I'm sorry, but continuing to throw votes at prowar people is not going to help in the long run; it'll only validate their positions.

[pnwmom]

112. Cantwell is not a hawk. McGavick IS a hawk.

Cantwell's position on Iraq is strongly to the left of the only candidate who actually has a chance to beat her.

[Terran1212]

113. I wonder how far left a prowar person can be

You're going for the lesser of the two evils argument here, so at least stick to it! Don't make her out to be something she's not.

[pnwmom]

118. She's not a hawk and she's not prowar.

She made a mistake, as a first term Senator, months after the 9/11 attack, in listening to Colin Powell AND following the recommendation of the Democratic leadership. And then, like 76 other members of the Senate, she voted for the Iraq War resolution.

Now that we're in there, she's taking a complicated, nuanced position in how we should be getting out. I happen to disagree with her. I prefer Jack Murtha's position. But I don't consider her position to be prowar.

And I can't imagine why ANY progressive would step by and let the Republican win -- the guy who equates the Iraq war to fighting terrorism and says we should stay there as long as it takes. At least, not any progressive who actually cares about getting out of Iraq. (As opposed to getting a few more percentage points for the Greens.)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

123. Now that we're in there...with her help.

She didn't make a "mistake". She made a decision to play politics with the war. Just as the other alleged "liberals" did when they voted to back Bush. She went with the tide of public war fever when she voted for the war.

She's now taking a complicated, nuanced, position to save her seat. A sop to the left with a meaningless vote for a meaningless and toothless amendment. While still supporting "success" in Iraq.

May I remind you of what the founder of the Democratic Party has to say about "party loyalty":

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to Heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." Thomas Jefferson

[pnwmom]

128. This is your opinion, and you have nothing to back it up

except the opinions of other Greens.

I think she made the best decision she could, with what she knew at the time. I didn't agree with her vote, but I don't blame her -- or all the other Democrats who made the same difficult decision. We KNOW that the Congress did not have access to all the information that the White House did. We KNOW that they were deceived. We KNOW that Colin Powell presented false information. Congress, when they voted, did NOT know.

[Terran1212]

124. If she's not strongly denouncing this murderous, horrific, immoral war

Then, yes, she's prowar.

We might have the luxury to obfuscate her position until it looks "friendly" to us; the innocent people being blown away deserve more, though.

[pnwmom]

129. If you're not doing everything you can to fight the Repub --

who vociferously supports the war -- then you are helping to support the war, just as much as he is.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

110. In this "swing" state, the even more liberal Patty Murray won by 12%.

Despite the fact that she voted against the war. Unlike "progressive" Maria. Who I voted for in hopes that she was a progressive.

[pnwmom]

114. Patty Murray's overall voting record is slightly more liberal

than Cantwell's -- voting progressively 90% of the time as opposed to 88%.

She is now a very popular figure in the state but I think it is more due to her personality than her positions on the issues.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

117. It's a lot more liberal on the war.

She voted against it, even when it was unpopular to do so.

[pnwmom]

122. I prefer Patty Murray's votes, and I've told Cantwell what I think.

But there's no way I'd sit by and do nothing while this election swings to the Republicans.

Since I DO CARE about what happens in Iraq -- I have two teenage sons who I'm afraid will end up in this thing -- there's no way I want another Senate seat handed over to the Republicans who started this war.

[pnwmom]

85. Before you listen to pitches for Green votes, remember what

the Green party in Washington is after -- the 5% of votes that will get them federal funding.

They are not above twisting Cantwell's record to achieve this, because they DON'T CARE whether the Republican or Democrat wins. They are trying to peel off Democratic votes in order to grow their own party.

[Terran1212]

92. Hey I support Democrats at home

In Redder than red Georgia, all I can hope for is a centrist Dem.

But a place as liberal as WA should NOT have a right wing DEM.

[pnwmom]

95. Washington is NOT a liberal state. It's a closely divided, swing state.

The Democrats won the last gubernatorial election by something like a hundred votes. . . before our third and final vote count, we almost lost to an extreme conservative by 47 votes! This is the challenge that any politician running for statewide office faces.

And Cantwell's overall record puts her solidly among the progressives -- in the top fifth of the Senate overall on progressive issues. Voting progressively 88% of the time, according to ProgressivePunch, she scores within ONE point of Russ Feingold and within two points of Patty Murray.

Meanwhile, 39 out of 44 Republicans take the progressive position less than 15% of the time.

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Maria_Cantwell.htm

www.progressivepunch.com

[Terran1212]

100. Cantwell can't be called progressive

[pnwmom]

102. That's YOUR personal opinion.

As a supporter of the party that wants to destroy the Democrats.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pnwmom]

115. When, by voting 3rd party, you willingly help to swing an election to

the Republicans, you might as well be a Republican.

Your actions speak for themselves.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

93. How dare they!!

Golly, a political party that wants to peel off votes from other political parties.

What's next? Democracy????

[pnwmom]

97. Of course they can do it. But if people here at Democratic Underground

want to know more about Maria Cantwell, they should know that the Greens have a motive NOT to portray her positions honestly.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

98. Her support of the occupation is well documented.

And, still continues. The Levin-Reid Amendment was a counter to the Kerry-Feingold Amendment which had a timetable and enforcement provisions.

Please point out where the evil Greens are not portraying her positions honestly.

[pnwmom]

101. Right on their website. Here's one example.

They say that she supports the Patriot Act. They DON'T say that she voted AGAINST its reauthorization.

[JetCityLiberal]

132. You really don't help Cantwell

on these forums.

You have done and said nothing to persuade me at all.

You tend to bully people here. That will never help.

[MisterP]

134. that's all they have--bullying and threats

"if you don't support us we'll lose Congress, but don't expect anything in return, except the blame if the public chooses the admitted conservative instead of the closeted (or 'pretending'-to-be-conservative-for-the-moderate-votes-but-only-for-the-election-they'll-reverse-in-January-for-sure) one"

[raysr]

80. Well, you and I may

not like Cantwell but if she wins Ted Stevens will probably drop dead, so there is some good in her re-election. The bad thing is she isn't campaining at all. McGavick has signs up EVERYWHERE.

[iconoclastNYC]

130. American car companies are a joke

I swear to god they are in bed with the oil companies. Wonder how much Exxon gives GM and Ford to ignore consumer demand for more efficient cars.

DINOS have so many advantages over real democrats. They get corporate money thrown at thier feet, they get positive coverage from the corporate media... this is a set back but the inertia is on our sides.

DINOS are an threatened species.

[MisterP]

131. don't forget Hong Tran, another challenger to Sta. Maria

http://www.hongtran.com/issues.php

[WilliamPitt]

133. Ask yourself

if it is worth it to vote for her if her election means Democrats regaining the majority in the Senate and taking control of the Judiciary Committe, the Intelligence Committee, the Finance Committee, the Armed Forces Committee, etc.

I think it is.

[Hawkowl]

135. I despise Cantwell

Her staff is rude and incompetent. She is unapologetic about the war. She is a poor campaigner. SHE IS NOT PROGRESSIVE. Despite the babblings of the shrill poster who dominates these threads. She appears to have no principles except saving her own ass. She has no backbone.

And this is not a closely divided swing state. If the democratic party puts up a strong, opinionated candidate that strongly opposes rethuglican talking points, instead of "nuancing" them they win big, e.g; Patty Murray.

Otherwise the average voter can't tell the difference between the parties. It's all heads you lose tails I win.

I'm very disappointed in Wilson withdrawing, and If I vote for Cantwell it will be out of fear. Fear of the continued fascist domination of this country by rethuglicans. If I with old my vote, it will be out of hope of something better in the long run.

[eridani]

139. That isn't why Murray won

She won because she has successfully hauled water for WA state interests for 12 years.

[cascadiance]

140. Let's see how she votes on William Haynes nomination in the Senate soon...

That will be a true test of her ACTIONS on how committed she might be towards representing our concerns, and not corporate America. If she actually participates or leads a filibuster against Haynes, I might reconsider that she's finally embracing more progressive values that folks like Mark Wilson would like a senator of Washington to have. She really disappointed me when she didn't help with a fillibuster on Alito earlier!

http://www.civilrights.org/issues/nominations/details.cfm?id=45298

But folks like me want to see actions, not words. I hope later she can distance herself more from the DLC too, but I'm not holding my breath just yet!

I'm hoping my campaign contribution to Mark Wilson was well spent in him being able to have some substantive effect on influencing her stances and agenda.