Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(15,480 posts)
Fri May 6, 2016, 11:14 PM May 2016

Got post-election debriefing from Sestak in 'Sliberty this afternoon.

Last edited Sat May 7, 2016, 09:26 AM - Edit history (1)

It's all about Schumer's push to be Dem. Senate leader

Whether it's as Majority Leader or Minority Leader. Got a post-election de-briefing this afternoon in Pittsburgh's East Liberty neighborhood from primary Pennsylvania Dem. Senate candidate, former Admiral & Congressman, Joe Sestak.

Schumer is Mr. Wall Street. He is a power broker, not a leader, and he has the Wall Street money men in his pocket. Washington insiders have shared with Sestak what Schumer has done behind Sestak's back. At one point Sestak met with Schumer. Schumer demanded to place one of Schumer's people as Sestak's campaign manager. Sestak agreed and welcomed the assistance. Then Schumer spelled it out that Schumer expected his guy to have the final say on all campaign decisions. Sestak said, "No, but if we have a disagreement, I'll call you to discuss it." Schumer agreed to Sestak's face, but behind Sestak's back began calling others in Pennsylvania, including Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald, to recruit someone to run against Sestak. Schumer promised $4 million in backing. Fitzgerald refused and his staffer called Sestak to give him a heads up. Sestak called Schumer and said "We had an agreement." Schumer replied, our agreement is whatever I say it is now."

Bottom line: No one can be allowed to get by with saying "No" to Schumer. Sestak has done so twice - once in the 2010 Senate race, and now again in 2016. All of D.C. knew that. If Sestak would have won the primary, others would be emboldened to run for Senate without promising total, unthinking, unchallenging allegiance to Schumer.

As one powerful insider explained it to Joe, "At first it was personal because you said no to Schumer. No one ever says no to Schumer. Then, when you were able to raise so much money on your own, and were so far ahead in the polls (16%) of Schumer's hand-picked candidate, it became professional."

Schumer has said that his path to Senate leadership runs through Pennsylvania. Schumer told everyone that he recruited someone to run against Sestak in the primary because Sestak couldn't win. So now Schumer has to pump in as much money as is necessary to make sure that his choice - 3rd way, pro-fracking, censored-for-ethics-violations/censure confirmed by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, funneled millions of dollars in state contracts to her fracking lobbyist husband's employer, Katie McGinty - actually wins. The first 8 people Schumer solicited with his promise of $4 million in backing in the Dem primary, either turned him down flat, or were very quickly exposed as having potential criminal charges/ethical problems of their own. McGinty was his NINTH choice!

Current expectations are that Schumer will have to put $20 million into the Pennsylvania senate race, in addition to the $4 million he's already poured in to fund his Democratic primary choice. Think about that, everyone who has donated to the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee! If you have a candidate running for Senate in your state, give the money directly to them, NOT the Dem. Senate Campaign Committee! That's $25 million going into backing Schumer's very flawed candidate in Pennsylvania, which should have been allocated among all the Dems running for Senate.

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Got post-election debriefing from Sestak in 'Sliberty this afternoon. (Original Post) Divernan May 2016 OP
K&R because this is how the corruption in politics on both sides works. JDPriestly May 2016 #1
It figures that it was Schumer who did this to Joe, and it's a damn shame. blue neen May 2016 #2
'Thanks' for posting. elleng May 2016 #3
k&R silvershadow May 2016 #4
Response to PM question re write-in votes Divernan May 2016 #5
Jury votes 3-4 to leave it Bradical79 May 2016 #7
If someone wants to protest, send a letter to DSCC saying you will not contribute to them JPZenger May 2016 #8
I agree, but the highest priority is to elect the Democratic nominee as President. MH1 May 2016 #9
Guardian of Wall Street Octafish May 2016 #6


(57,936 posts)
1. K&R because this is how the corruption in politics on both sides works.
Fri May 6, 2016, 11:28 PM
May 2016

And the need for money is at the heart of it. We cannot afford this. As a nation, we cannot afford this degree of corruption.

blue neen

(12,342 posts)
2. It figures that it was Schumer who did this to Joe, and it's a damn shame.
Fri May 6, 2016, 11:41 PM
May 2016

The other problem for Sestak in this primary was John Fetterman. Fetterman picked up nearly 20% of the vote. There's no way of knowing how those people would have voted if John wasn't in the race. It would, however, be reasonable to suggest that Sestak would have won if it would have been just him and McGinty in the primary. Fetterman had every right to run, though.

So, the PA Primary is over. We have to do everything we can to beat Pat Toomey this fall. It will be really helpful if we don't use right-wing talking points in our posts. Most of us were a little disappointed in the results, and the level of frustration is understandable, but it's time to move on.

It is Election Season in Pennsylvania. The ads are running, and it's full speed ahead.


(131,800 posts)
3. 'Thanks' for posting.
Sat May 7, 2016, 12:02 AM
May 2016

THIS is what it means (and WILL mean) IF we allow the Democratic Party powers that be to continue to run things.


(15,480 posts)
5. Response to PM question re write-in votes
Sat May 7, 2016, 06:20 AM
May 2016

"> Do you know if PA allows write-ins (Sestak) in the GE?"

Yes, it does. Caveat: Joe Sestak did NOT suggest anyone do a write-in for him. But I'm thinking that such write-ins make a statement to both Pennsylvania and national Democratic power brokers that we want elected officials who are responsive to their constituents, and not to out-of-state millions of special interest money.

I've been a judge of elections for over 10 years. The tricky part about write-in votes is that similar names for the same candidate are not lumped together for totals. For example, on the primary ballot, Sestak's name was "Joseph A. Sestak". In the general election, any write-in votes for "Joseph A. Sestak", "Sestak", "Joe Sestak" or "J. Sestak" or "Joseph Sestak" or even "Joseph A Sestak" (with no period after the middle initial A) would not be counted in a single group. Here's a link to the election results: Note that some candidates used no middle initial; some used a middle initial without a period following it; some used a middle initial with a period. http://newsinteractive.post-gazette.com/electionresults2016/

The Pennsylvania election code does provide write-in candidates with an option of petitioning the court to consolidate similar designations of a candidate, but it's a cumbersome procedure. You can see the state law at Title 25 - Elections, of the Pennsylvania Statutes. Here's some language (with my emphasis added in all caps) re EVS, i.e., Electronic Voting Systems: 25 P.S. Section 3031.7:
"Voter must be able to select candidates of either party for that office up to the number allowed OR WRITE IN AN INDIVIDUAL'S NAME AS PROVIDED AT 25 P.S. Section3031.7 (5) and (6)."

("P.S". stands for Pennsylvania Statutes)

What a turbulent election season this is - Thanks to social media and the masses of newly politically involved youth, we are in a sea change of the American political system. I don't know how much the results of the fall election will reflect this, but there's no going back. The Democrats currently running the show (Wasserman, Schumer, et al.,) have abandoned the traditional Democratic party values. I know many people who are planning to change their registration from Democrat to Independent. Now that Pennsylvania has on-line voting registration, it's simple to do. And one can always change registration back to Democrat for a brief period to vote in the state's closed primary.

I related to Will Pitt's title of his recent piece for Truthout: William Rivers Pitt | "Election 2016: Let's Drop Acid and Have a Presidential Race".




(4,490 posts)
7. Jury votes 3-4 to leave it
Sat May 7, 2016, 04:58 PM
May 2016

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
On Sat May 7, 2016, 04:40 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Response to PM question re write-in votes


This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.


This poster is basically giving people all the info they need to do a write-in ballot for Joe Sestak. The Pennsylvania Primary is over and Joe Sestak lost. Poster should not be advocating for write-in candidates when we have a Democratic nominee named Katie McGinty. Advocating for write-ins is advocating for Democrats to lose the very winnable Senatorial race in PA. Also, this poster is giving instructions on how to register as an Independent in Pennsylvania. Both of these things go against the TOS, as the General Election has already started in this state. Our nominees are chosen. If you don't believe it's General Election time here in PA, just ask Republican Pat Toomey. He's been running a whole lot of ads this week. It's unfortunate the poster doesn't like the Democratic nominee, but that is no reason to wish for, and advocate for, her defeat.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat May 7, 2016, 04:56 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The poster is advocating for a Democrat, so what's the problem.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Advocating for the defeat of a candidate of the Democratic Party does not belong on this board.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: What the alerter says seems to be true. I too have zero patience for people advocating splitting the left vote in the general election.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.


(6,819 posts)
8. If someone wants to protest, send a letter to DSCC saying you will not contribute to them
Mon May 9, 2016, 03:28 PM
May 2016

If someone wants to protest this primary, they can send a communication to the Dem. Senate Campaign Committee criticizing their waste of over $1 million of donations on a Dem Primary, and saying that you will not contribute to them. Instead, please select individual candidates for contributions.

(By the way, the same dollar of contributions to a candidate will go much farther than a dollar sent to other groups, because federal law requires TV stations to offer the cheapest available ad rates to candidates. A PAC may pay twice as much for the same ad time.)

However, keep the eye on the prize. The highest priority is to remove Toomey. A write in vote will just be a waste.


(17,689 posts)
9. I agree, but the highest priority is to elect the Democratic nominee as President.
Fri May 20, 2016, 12:32 PM
May 2016

Personally, I'll be voting straight D, as I do in pretty much every GE these days, unless I know something specific about one race that would make me de-select that Dem and do something else. (Can't remember that happening though.)

That said, I will not be voting "for" (ugh) McGinty, any more than I expect Sanders supporters to vote "for" Hillary.

I'll be voting straight D. That will get the distasteful job done, without me having to push the selector "for" the candidate I can no longer stand. (I actually have no such problem with voting "for" Hillary, though she was neither my first nor second choice. But we all have different priorities.)

And all that said, I'm preparing to get used to Toomey as being our (quadruple ugh) Senator for a long time. As well as Trump possibly winning PA. Because Schumer just kneecapped Democratic activism in PA. At least my area of it. Good job Chuckie.


(55,745 posts)
6. Guardian of Wall Street
Sat May 7, 2016, 09:18 AM
May 2016

Predators need a champion as they're outnumbered by sheep.

Glad to see it revealed by a donkey that won't go along.

Thank you for the heads-up, Divernan.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Pennsylvania»Got post-election debrief...