[Peace-discuss] [Peace] Voting anti-war in tomorrow's primary (2)
David Johnson
davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net
Thu Mar 22 17:26:37 UTC 2018
That type of attitude is part of the reason why we are in the mess we are currently in, that being , voting for any democrat regardless how bad they are. Bill Clinton and other corporate dems perfected and named this strategy during the 1980's - " Triangulation " - in essence we don't care what our base thinks, we will please our corporate donors because the corporate donors will retaliate against us if we don't do what they want, where are base has no alternative but to vote for us.
I thought there was supposed to be a " revolution " within the Democratic party ?
You don't make a revolution by collaborating with the enemy by supporting corporate Democrats.
What needs to be done by those who believe that a revolution in the Democratic party is both possible and desirable is to immediately upon the election of a corporate Dem in the primary, begin recruiting someone to run against them in the general election as an independent or a Green, etc. REGARDLESS if there is a possibility of a Republican getting elected.
That would send a message and build a movement focusing on ONLY supporting candidates who will fight corporate special interests.
You have to hand it to the ruling class in this country. Through their corporate owned media and other means they have many people so brain washed that they will vote for people who have no intentions of representing the people or making change for the better. In addition to falling for a " horse race" mindset that I have heard time and time again during the Dem primaries - " Oh he/ she can't win, vote for someone who has a chance".
That is what was done to Kucinich in the 2008 primary in benefit of Obama. And look how that turned out.
As opposed to fighting like hell for the best candidate and then if they lose force concessions from the winner or the winner will face the consequences in the general election running against an anti-corporate independent in a three way race.
The lesser of two evils strategy has gotten us nowhere, while the corporate ruling class is laughing all the way to the bank.
David J.
-----Original Message-----
From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 11:06 AM
To: David Johnson
Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Voting anti-war in tomorrow's primary (2)
I did not say Londrigan would be a progressive on domestic issues or even good—just that she would be better than Davis, and I stand by that assertion.
As for Gill, I was closely involved in his 2012 campaign, and the speed and degree to which he caved once the DCCC got involved after the primary was deeply disturbing. I seriously question whether he would be able to withstand the corporate onslaught in DC.
Deb
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 22, 2018, at 9:02 AM, David Johnson <davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Londrigan will NOT be better on domestic issues or foreign policy.
>
> She is a neo-liberal to the core and a war monger and will do whatever she is told to do by Durbin, the DNC and her corporate donors.
> That is if she wins, which she won't.
>
> She will be defeated by a 15-20 % margin, just like Ann Callis ( 18 % loss ) and Wicklund ( 20 % ), and Wicklund spent 1 % of the money Callis did.
> She will be defeated because she will not support single payer or a $15 per hour minimum wage, or free post high school education which are issues that would directly help the lives of a large percentage of people in the 13th district, both rural and urban. Nor will she support abolishing NAFTA or the end to imperialist wars and the bloated military budget that is draining our economy dry.
>
> The only candidate that was NOT a DNC controlled neo-liberal and war monger was David Gill who Durbin, the DNC and the Madigans did everything in their power to make certain he would lose.
>
> Unless a Green, a populist progressive independent or a Socialist runs in the 13th, I will be voting for None of the above. Because a neo-liberal war monger democrat is no different than a republican.
>
> David J.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Debra Schrishuhn [mailto:deb.pdamerica at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 8:10 AM
> To: David Johnson
> Cc: C G Estabrook; Peace; Karen Aram; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Voting anti-war in tomorrow's
> primary (2)
>
> Quite so, David. At least Londrigan will be better on domestic issues, shows a willingness to listen and get informed on other points of view, and engages the voters more directly than Davis ever has. Let us not forget that before Davis was a Congressman he was staffer and lapdog for John Shimkus--about whom I have nothing good to say.
>
> Davis is a lost cause. Londrigan will be a step in the right (left?) direction, and as they say, every journey begins with a single step (just couldn't help myself on that one).
>
> Deb
>
>
>
>
>
>> On 3/22/18, David Johnson <davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net> wrote:
>> " Rodney may be shamed/pressured into emulating him. “NEVER” is a
>> long time."
>>
>> That will be a cold day in hell Carl.
>>
>> It will never happen because Davis is bought and paid for.
>>
>> David J.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 7:45 AM
>> To: David Johnson; Peace
>> Cc: Debra Schrishuhn; Karen Aram; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Voting anti-war in tomorrow's
>> primary
>> (2)
>>
>> David’s quite right about Tim (who’s even recently asked me to
>> lecture to his UI classes - along with Rodney, I admit…)
>>
>> Rodney may be shamed/pressured into emulating him. “NEVER” is a long time.
>>
>> But the war-mongering Democrats are today excoriating Trump for
>> congratulating Putin on his election, and talking peace with Eurasia!
>>
>> Idiots.
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 22, 2018, at 7:23 AM, David Johnson via Peace-discuss
>>> <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Indeed Deb,
>>>
>>> Tim Johnson was a Champaign county Republican who interacted with
>>> his constituents and even helped registered Democrats with problems.
>>> He also had libertarian political tendencies in regards to civil
>>> liberties and had one of the most favorable voting records in
>>> support of Unions . He changed his support of the war in Iraq to
>>> opposition while Bush and the Republicans still controlled the
>>> Presidency and Congress because he was responding to citizens in his
>>> district. Not that he didn't have his faults.
>>> Rodney Davis on the other hand is a corporate republican who is a
>>> solely owned subsidiary of the Koch brothers et al and doesn’t care
>>> what his constituents think. Davis will NEVER bite the hand of his
>>> corporate masters.
>>>
>>> David J.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of
>>> Debra Schrishuhn via Peace
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 5:26 AM
>>> To: Karen Aram
>>> Cc: peace
>>> Subject: Re: [Peace] Voting anti-war in tomorrow's primary (2)
>>>
>>> What comes to mind is a paraphrase of one of the best debate lines
>>> ever: I knew Tim Johnson, worked with Tim Johnson, and Rodney Davis,
>>> you are not Tim Johnson!
>>>
>>> Deb
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 3/20/18, Karen Aram via Peace <peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>>>> Sorry, I don’t buy it, give me a reason why Davis might change his
>>>> mind as did Tim Johnson, other than a miracle. I would prefer a
>>>> Democrat we can pressure, with our votes. Davis has already had the
>>>> opportunity to change his mind on many things due to constituency
>>>> pressure, please name one.
>>>>
>>>> And, lets be clear the Democrat Party maybe pushing Russiagate, and
>>>> war against China, but to assume the Republicans are not, is sheer
>>>> nonsense.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 20, 2018, at 06:39, C G Estabrook
>>>> <cgestabrook at gmail.com<mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No, it’s a recognition that any Democratic candidate in this
>>>> Congressional district (except Gill) will be a war supporter.
>>>>
>>>> Republican Tim Johnson, Davis’ predecessor, was, too - and changed
>>>> in office.
>>>>
>>>> Unlikely as it may be, we can hope for the same from Davis - while
>>>> the Democratic party pushes Russiagate and war provocations against
>>>> Russia and China.
>>>>
>>>> —CGE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 20, 2018, at 8:30 AM, Karen Aram
>>>> <karenaram at hotmail.com<mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Carl
>>>>
>>>> I agree David Gill is the only viable candidate to be supported.
>>>> However, Rodney Davis? Are you showing your true Republican colors,
>>>> or is this a strategy to “bring it on,” the revolution, which we
>>>> surely need.
>>>>
>>>> Just as Trump is responsible for waking up the American people to
>>>> “politics do matter,” after sleeping for eight years, I suppose you
>>>> think Rodney’s re-election might have the same affect.
>>>>
>>>> Good strategy, but I doubt it will work, the people will just wait
>>>> for another chance to elect a Democrat. Pressure on some of our
>>>> Democrat Representatives does have an impact, as we are now told
>>>> Tammy Duckworth will support the Lee Sanders Bill, given her
>>>> support for militarism, that is quite an achievement though we must
>>>> be vigilant and keep in mind the Lee Sanders Bill is flawed.
>>>>
>>>> I too like Niloofar am surprised and disappointed that Bob would
>>>> support
>>>> Betsy, when we have a candidate, David Gill who is anti-war as
>>>> well
>>>> as single payer supporter.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 19, 2018, at 20:58, C G Estabrook
>>>> <cgestabrook at gmail.com<mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> David Gill seems to be the only anti-war candidate for Congress in
>>>> IL-13.
>>>> He’s the only Democrat who said in answer to direct questions that
>>>> US troops (and weapons) should be withdrawn from the Mideast and N. Africa.
>>>>
>>>> The other Democrats - Londrigan, Jones, and Ebel - all support US
>>>> war-making. Londrigan seems uninformed, as Bob suggests, but Ebel
>>>> is even worse: he seems to be one of the "extraordinary number of
>>>> former intelligence and military operatives from the CIA, Pentagon,
>>>> National Security Council and State Department [who] are seeking
>>>> nomination as Democratic candidates for Congress in the 2018
>>>> midterm elections. The potential influx of military-intelligence
>>>> personnel into the legislature has no precedent in US political history”
>>>> [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/03/07/dems-m07.html].
>>>>
>>>> Given what the national Democratic party has done to drive Trump
>>>> back into the belligerence and war-provocations of the Obama
>>>> administration
>>>> - ‘Russiagate', notably - I can’t see voting for any Democrats for
>>>> Congress.
>>>> If Gill is not nominated, I’ll vote for incumbent Rodney Davis - a
>>>> war-supporter, yes, but one who might follow the example of his
>>>> predecessor, former Rep. Tim Johnson (a Republican), and turn
>>>> against the administration’s wars. —CGE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 19, 2018, at 9:34 PM, Niloofar Shambayati via Peace
>>>> <peace at lists.chambana.net<mailto:peace at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Robert,
>>>>
>>>> I'm surprised by your endorsement. She's totally an establishment
>>>> candidate.
>>>> She has a big smile and no real agenda, except the generic "caring
>>>> for families". Like her mentor, Durbin, she doesn't even support a
>>>> national health care system (improved medicare for all). I hope to
>>>> hear stronger arguments in her favor. Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Niloofar
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 7:57 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace
>>>> <peace at lists.chambana.net<mailto:peace at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>>>> https://www.facebook.com/robert.naiman/posts/10157099169132656
>>>>
>>>> I endorse Betsy Dirksen Londrigan for Congress in IL-13.
>>>> I like all four serious candidates. I met with all of them. I went
>>>> to every forum I could. They're all thoughtful, knowledgeable, and
>>>> progressive, their intentions are pure, and they're in it to win it.
>>>> I will vigorously support whoever wins the primary, in order to
>>>> defeat Rodney Davis in November.
>>>> But in the primary, I have to choose one. I choose Betsy Dirksen
>>>> Londrigan.
>>>> First: I engaged the four candidates about our campaign to end
>>>> unauthorized U.S. participation in the catastrophic Saudi war in
>>>> Yemen. Of the four candidates, Betsy Dirksen Londrigan listened to
>>>> me the best. It wasn't close, actually. I explained how this war is
>>>> different from the other wars, and she got it. The first time I
>>>> engaged her, she didn't really understand what I was talking about;
>>>> but none of them did. Betsy Dirksen Londrigan
>>>> said: send me something to read. So I did. The next time I saw her,
>>>> Betsy Dirksen Londrigan knew exactly what I was talking about.
>>>> Because she read the thing I send her and she understood it.
>>>> I don't need a know-it-all representing me in Congress.
>>>> Know-it-alls are a dime a dozen. I need someone who listens to what
>>>> I have to say and tries to understand it. By that criterion, it's
>>>> Betsy Dirksen Londrigan in a walk.
>>>> Second: I like the fact that Betsy Dirksen Londrigan is endorsed by
>>>> Dick Durbin. It's not that I think Dick Durbin is the alpha and omega.
>>>> I've had frustrations with Dick Durbin. But as a practical matter,
>>>> on my issues, if we don't have Dick Durbin, we're not even on the field.
>>>> But if we do have Dick Durbin, then we can get all the Dick Durbin
>>>> people onside. Today was a perfect example. I was very frustrated
>>>> that on the eve of the Senate vote on the Sanders-Lee-Murphy
>>>> resolution, I didn't know where Tammy Duckworth was.
>>>> So I engaged Durbin's people and said: where's Tammy Duckworth?
>>>> Within an hour Tammy Duckworth's staffer, who had been dodging me
>>>> and other peace activists, got back with me to confirm that Tammy
>>>> Duckworth would vote yes on the Sanders-Lee-Murphy bill. So the
>>>> fact that Betsy Dirksen Londrigan is a Dick Durbin person is a big
>>>> plus for me, because it gives me great confidence that I can rely
>>>> on Betsy Dirksen Londrigan when I need her.
>>>> Third: all else equal, I like the fact that she is endorsed by
>>>> Emily's List.
>>>> Not that I'm totally in love with the politics of Emily's List in
>>>> general.
>>>> But they are also in it to win it, and I'm confident that if Betsy
>>>> Dirksen Londrigan wins the primary, Emily's List will be all-in to
>>>> help her win the general, and she's going to need a lot of money
>>>> and help to beat Rodney Davis in November.
>>>> Fourth: I strongly support increasing the diversity of our Illinois
>>>> Congressional delegation. Obviously that doesn't mean I have to
>>>> support someone whose politics are diametrically opposed to my own.
>>>> But if it's a jump ball, if it's close enough, "the tie goes to the
>>>> runner." And, in fact, Betsy Dirksen Londrigan is my best candidate
>>>> anyway. She points out that only three members of our current
>>>> delegation are women, and says that's unacceptable and we should
>>>> change that. I agree. She's right about that. So while I certainly
>>>> wouldn't make the decision on this criterion alone, and I wouldn't
>>>> want anyone else to, I think it's perfectly wonderful to have this
>>>> criterion in the mix. Given everything else that's true, I count
>>>> this as a strong plus.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list