The New Republican Trick?

[1pooh4u]

Is this gonna be the new thing where everyone will be like Sinema and claim to be progressive democrats and run on progressive platforms that are wildly popular, only to say “tee hee jk” and switch parties shortly after winning the election as a democrat.  The only thing this tells me is politicians know what the majority of voter want but they just dgaf

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/04/05/politics/north-carolina-republican-supermajority-democrat-switch-parties/index.html

[Jman]

You’re going to start seeing support for bills demanding automatic recall elections if reps switch parties.  Because this is horseshit to an incredible degree.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Jman

[scoobdog]

It most definitely is horse shit, but it's also not that unsurprising given the state of politics.  Progressives in particular, are susceptible to this ploy because it's far easier to espouse progressive ideals than to actually enact them.

[Raptorpat]

In the past, electeds would switch party out of self-preservation. The obvious example is Arlen Specter (PA) flipping and giving the US Senate Dems their supermajority in 2009. He knew he'd lose as GOP but lost the 2010 Dem primary anyways.

But from what I see, this was a comparatively safe Dem district but she had personal grievances against the party.

[Doom Metal Alchemist]

1 minute ago, Raptorpat said:

In the past, electeds would switch party out of self-preservation. The obvious example is Arlen Specter (PA) flipping and giving the US Senate Dems their supermajority in 2009. He knew he'd lose as GOP but lost the 2010 Dem primary anyways.

But from what I see, this was a comparatively safe Dem district but she had personal grievances against the party.

If she had personal grievances with the party, sounds like she sold herself out, considering how different the parties are. What's her excuse for changing all her ideals by going to the Republican party over going Independent?

[Raptorpat]

spite

[Doom Metal Alchemist]

1 minute ago, Raptorpat said:

spite

I'm not asking her reason, I'm asking her excuse. 😆

[1pooh4u]

48 minutes ago, Jman said:

You’re going to start seeing support for bills demanding automatic recall elections if reps switch parties.  Because this is horseshit to an incredible degree.

I completely agree that she did that bullshit is beyond ridiculous. So not only states being gerrymandered to hell and back we now have the added obstacle of fake democrats running on fake platforms and then refusing to resign once they switch over. It should be criminal to do this shit 

[1pooh4u]

46 minutes ago, Raptorpat said:

In the past, electeds would switch party out of self-preservation. The obvious example is Arlen Specter (PA) flipping and giving the US Senate Dems their supermajority in 2009. He knew he'd lose as GOP but lost the 2010 Dem primary anyways.

But from what I see, this was a comparatively safe Dem district but she had personal grievances against the party.

So she takes her personal grievance and makes her constituents suffer?  She abandoned every issue she campaigned on

[1pooh4u]

She switched because her feelings were hurt cuz someone cried that she used an American flag and high five (praying hands) emoji. Is she fuckin seriously?

[1pooh4u]

For that she just neutered the dem governor in her state. Unbelievably childish 

[scoobdog]

27 minutes ago, Raptorpat said:

But from what I see, this was a comparatively safe Dem district but she had personal grievances against the party.

That seems like a bit of overkill if she's only doing it out of spite.  Even Trump doesn't do what he does solely out of spite - he does it because he has the base to make it work for him, at least to a degree.  She's has no seniority in her new caucus; she has no political capital to make any constituent or, God forbid, personal priorities; and now she's has no political allies.  I don't really see what she's getting out of this other than to hasten her own political demise.

[1pooh4u]

Everyone is a stupid fuckin idiot falling for bullshit culture wars instead of shit people really want. The people want healthcare abortion access cannabis legalization in record numbers but nah let’s talk about CRT that no child is learning and ban drag for kids which is 100% a parental permission issue and most importantly let me cry and abandon my ideals because my feelings got hurt. 

[Raptorpat]

4 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

I don't really see what she's getting out of this other than to hasten her own political demise.

And Arlen Specter did great things for the national Dems when he flipped, but he became toxic to GOP voters and Dems rewarded him by voting for a real Dem in the primary. It's rarely ever a great long-term play. 

[scoobdog]

19 minutes ago, Raptorpat said:

And Arlen Specter did great things for the national Dems when he flipped, but he became toxic to GOP voters and Dems rewarded him by voting for a real Dem in the primary. It's rarely ever a great long-term play. 

After he had, what, 27 years of political capital in the Senate to cache?  By comparison, she had a third of that experience and she most likely used whatever that decade earned her in the 6 years she was out of office.

Contrary to what out instincts might tell us, loyalty doesn't garner success in the political world, and that holds true even for experienced politicos.  Loyalty is a means to an end and is as useful when it's shed as it was when it was used to build up currency.  A guy like Specter was already at the upper end of his political lifespan (his actual lifespan as well) and making the switch was going to reap far more benefits for him in the short term given he had nearly three decades of political connections and favors to cache.  Ms Cotham had little to offer her new party other than a veto proof supermajority which isn't going to translate into a successful post-political career.  Specter may have cemented his legacy by making the switch, she's cemented her perpetual obscurity with hers.

[Master-Debater131]

1 hour ago, scoobdog said:

It most definitely is horse shit, but it's also not that unsurprising given the state of politics.  Progressives in particular, are susceptible to this ploy because it's far easier to espouse progressive ideals than to actually enact them.

Not just Democrats. Look at Santos for how easy it is to trick Republican voters as well.

 

(general comment from here)

Its no surprise this happened, and frankly I'm surprised it hasn't happened more often. The nature of our politics right now is that the safer your district, the further to the extremes of the political spectrum get rewarded. When you are in a district that is very safe you get rewarded for going to the furthest extreme you can. Thats also where it becomes much easier to run totally fake campaigns . Its much easier to just yell slogans that you know generate buzz than to run a campaign in a competitive district.

Deep blue district and you are asked about an issue? Blame racism, sexism, homophobia, policing, and Trump. Same thing for a deep red district. Just scream MAGA, Democrats, transing your kids, and stolen elections. You can win in these deep districts without ever having to have a true campaign if you just scream buzzwords and slogans the loudest. Its much harder to do that in a true swing district where yelling partisan buzzwords and slogans doesnt attract voters.

With how highly polarized things are its not hard to see this tactic popping up across the country. Ironically, that could result in the highly partisan atmosphere starting to cool down a bit. If you don't trust that the person screaming the most partisan buzzwords wont swap parties you may move away from those positions to the "safer" pick.

[scoobdog]

Just now, Master-Debater131 said:

Not just Democrats. Look at Santos for how easy it is to trick Republican voters as well.

Tricking constituents isn't really the question here.  All politicians create an image for themselves that makes them electable; most aren't conclusively fraudulent human beings like Santos.

[Master-Debater131]

1 minute ago, scoobdog said:

Tricking constituents isn't really the question here.  All politicians create an image for themselves that makes them electable; most aren't conclusively fraudulent human beings like Santos.

Thats fair. Santos looks to be a total fraud to his core. Not sure about the lady in the story.

[PenguinBoss]

31 minutes ago, Master-Debater131 said:

Thats fair. Santos looks to be a total fraud to his core. Not sure about the lady in the story.

The lady is also Santos.

[1pooh4u]

6 hours ago, PenguinBoss said:

The lady is also Santos.

Fuckin dead thread over 😆😆😆😆

[scoobdog]

1 minute ago, 1pooh4u said:

Fuckin dead thread over 😆😆😆😆

I totally missed the joke until just now.