Alan Grayson Tweets: Member does phone town hall with 2000 voters-only 3 speak up for pro position

[kpete]

Rep. Alan Grayson ?@AlanGrayson 1h
I hear that one member did a telephone town hall on #Syria with 2000 voters...

Rep. Alan Grayson ?@AlanGrayson 1h
.. and set up format to have pro and con speakers alternate. After 3 pro speakers no on was left to speak up for the pro position.

https://twitter.com/AlanGrayson

[Lasher]

1. I wish he'd run for President

I've said it before and I think he would win.

[Peregrine Took]

2. Alan Grayson is 2016's Howard Dean. n/t

[TwilightGardener]

3. Obviously Obama is doing this to boost his popularity.

No one wants this--the right simply wants to oppose Obama even though they normally love military action under Repub prez's, the left is reflexively anti-war, the middle is just tired of the middle east. So ask yourselves: why do Obama, Kerry and Co. want to do this? Why can't they just ignore reports of chem weapon use, or deny it was Assad? I mean, they can manipulate the intelligence however they want to, right? Why do THESE MEN (not previously known for eagerness for war) want this? Why are they willing to undertake the risks, and endure this resistance from all sides?

[David__77]

4. No, the "left" is divided.

Pelosi, that "leftist" champion, former member of the Progressive Caucus, has firmly endorsed the pro-war position - she will be donning pom poms soon.

[TwilightGardener]

5. And for everyone in the administration and Congress who supports a strike,

I ask myself, "Why does he/she want this?" I write off Repubs, of course, it's all political games and posturing for them. But trustworthy Dems who support this make the whole cynical Obama-Is-Bush2 theme problematic. Are they just stupid, then? Easily duped? Bowing to pressure? Corrupt? Or could there be legitimate reasons for agreeing to military intervention in Syria?

[Dems to Win]

6. What AIPAC wants, AIPAC gets.

Fingers are crossed that vocal, angry, war-weary Americans can beat AIPAC (plus Saudi Prince Bandar), for once.

[David__77]

7. I don't think AIPAC is particularly relevant in this case.

There are plenty of pro-Israel forces, including right-wing ones, that are firmly opposed to intervening in Syria. And rightly so, as the current Syrian government has done a reasonably good job at keeping their side of the border with Israel calm (until the civil war broke out). The Islamist radicals fighting against the Syrian government also happen to have other fish to fry, in the form of the State of Israel. Hezbollah couldn't hold a candle to what these forces could offer up over the longer haul. It's only certain highly deluded forces that think that regime change in Syria could possibly go good for Israel.

[Dems to Win]

8. Syria is just a prelude to a US War on Iran, in the view of AIPAC

see this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023600083