OT Democrat Conor Lamb Wins in Pennslyvania

First, you gotta believe in those things.

 

I voted for Hatfield, Goldwater and McCall every time. When I told that to retired Senator Hatfield and also told him about the lecture he gave us at Tektronix about morality and high tech. he told me I made his day. My wife chatted with his wife who was just as nice as the Senator. So, I can cross party lines if there is an outstanding candidate on the other side.

Trump is probably the worst candidate I've ever seen in my life and probably the worst I'll ever see. He's a con man = The End

 

Conor ran on expanded background checks, stabilizing the Affordable Care Act, legalizing medical marijuana, protecting social security, pro-union, and opposing restrictions on abortion despite his "personal opposition" to abortion. It slays me that 2 days ago he was a foaming at the mouth leftist pro-abortion open border gun-taking flaming lefty and now that he has apparently won he's really just a Republican.

The Republican candidate had a strongly anti-union record and would not even say if he would vote to continue the coal miners' pension fund.
He was also reduced to accusing his opponent's supporters of "hating America" and "hating God".

I grant that Lamb is probably closer to Claire McCaskell than to Elizabeth Warren. But he's not Ted Cruz.

 

Just like we absolutely need more (R)’s who will cross party lines and be pro choice, pro gun “control”, pro immigration and pro healthcare.......right?

 

Six degrees of separation about Hatfield, he was married to one of my dad's good friends (who was an awesome race car driver locally at the Portland Speedway and along the west coast named Kuzy Kuzmanich) sister.

 

It's not always voting for the candidate that necessarily shares the same views as often times it's the lesser of two evils which was the case in the presidential election. I knew once I heard some of Trumps campaign speech, I wanted nothing to do with Don the Con. When I was old enough to register to vote, I registered as an independent and didn't want to be associated with either party. I would rather see no political parties and the best two candidates put up for election. The party system over the last several years is what's dragging this country down. I want our Oregon reps to vote for what Oregonians support and believe in, not what their party supports and believes in.

 

OK - there was an independent candidate who got around 1500 votes - in such a close election could have swung it. Anyone know who he/she was? You get the political trivia award if you do (I don't).

As for issues/parties: there was a time when Republicans were more likely to favor legal abortion than Democrats, due to most Catholics being Democrats at that time. Now, opposing legal abortion in all cases except maybe the woman's life is mandatory for Republicans. There was a time when science-types were Republicans, who supported scientific research, while many liberal types associated science with weapons and the cold-war Apollo program. Now, rejecting global warming is mandatory for Republicans and rejecting evolution preferred. There was a time when it looked like a bipartisan immigration bill might pass; it did pass the Senate but was blocked in the House. And when some Democrats (Jackson) were bigger hawks than some Republicans (Hatfield). Now more orthodoxy, I think especially among Republicans. Democrats seem more about identity, which is why you have I think still a greater diversity of viewpoints. A pro-choice, pro-immigration, pro-union politician could not run as a Republican.

 

It’s definitely interesting how Lamb is being portrayed. A few days ago he was liberal and now he’s being portrayed as conservative.

But he does likely lie somewhere in between. And from all accounts a good guy. I do agree that this party line stuff is wackadoo. There is no way that every issue has only two sides and that one group had selected the right side on all issues while the opposing side is wrong on all issues.

I would vote for a Republican I respected over some douchy Democrat. There are a few issues I won’t bend on, assistance for the poor in society, respect and promotion of science being two of the top. But I’m for more fiscal responsibility. I would just prefer that fiscal responsibility come via cutting down the military agencies a bit. I was not for Romey, but I would have been supportive of him if he had been elected. I was on board with Mcain for a brief time but then even before Palin he started to Change his previously stated view to align more with traditional R views. But i always respected him.

 

You sound a lot like me.

 

Irony. There was a special election because the incumbent, who made opposition to all abortion his core issue, along with the sanctity of hetero only marriage, was forced to quit after it was learned he was 1) having an extra-marital affair and 2) tried to coerce his mistress into having an abortion. He wants abortion illegal but personally favors it when it is to his advantage. He is replaced by a candidate who personally opposes abortion but wants it legal.

 

And yet our highly revered President along with this dipshit have proven that to a certain base morality no longer means anything unless it's immorality by a Democrat.

 

I feel the same. It took me a long time to reach that opinion, though, For a long time I was strongly in favor of abortion as both a personal opinion and as a woman's right to choose. Now, just like Death with Dignity, I believe an adult has the right to choose their own destiny in spite of my personal opinion unless it negatively impacts me or someone else I care about out there like you.

 

I always found this "personally opposed to abortion" pretty weird, especially from men. I understand a woman saying she personally would not have an abortion but supports others having access, although I sometimes wonder if that woman might change her tune if, good forbid, she was raped or was carrying a fetus with a lethal defect. But what on earth does it mean for a man to say that? He is not going to ever need an abortion. He will never face that choice. So either you support the right of women to make their own choices or you don't.

Meanwhile...

Best headline: Trump Silenced by a Lamb

Learned the third candidate was the Libertarian and his vote total was well over the margin of victory. As those who vote Libertarian tend to run conservative, there are some Republicans pissed off at him, although he exaggerated when he said he is on the way to becoming the most hated man in America (Shkreli, anyone?) But if Republicans could not get people to vote for them it's not his fault, I disagreed with those who excoriated Nader for taking votes from Gore in Florida. It was the Democrats' job to win votes for their candidate.

 

I am fine personallly and policy wise with abortion, however I fully respect the other side and admit my stance has a big flaw that I can’t fully rationalize. The day before s baby is born it’s a life as far as I’m concerned, when it’s s blastocyst, a small grouping of cells I don’t believe it’s s baby or snything more tgan avfew felka. But between those two points those cells become that baby. I can’t answer when as I don’t believe it’s a when, but a gradient. So that’s my dilema, having a moral point of view on a gradient.

 

Question, why was there an election this time a year and only in Penn?