Saturday, August 4, 2012

Yeah, only those nutty Libertarians nominate whacky candidates . . . .

. . . unless, of course you examine the official Democratic nominee for US Senate in Tennessee.

Yep, there's a guy I'd be proud to have standing beside Harry Reid to form the new Democratic majority in January.


pandora said...

The Tennessean reports:

"Less than 24 hours after a man espousing conservative and libertarian views surprised the state’s political scene by winning the Democratic nomination, the Tennessee Democratic Party disavowed him, saying he’s part of an anti-gay hate group.

The party said Friday that it would do nothing to help Mark Clayton, 35, who received nearly twice as many votes as his closest challenger in Thursday’s seven-candidate primary, winning the right to challenge Republican U.S. Sen. Bob Corker in November."

Every party has nuts. At least the Dems have disavowed him and stated that they will do nothing to help him. Can you give me examples of the GOP or Libertarians doing the same with their nuts? (Serious question, btw)

Hube said...

Can you give me examples of the GOP or Libertarians doing the same with their nuts? (Serious question, btw)

David Duke would be one.

Hube said...

Did the Dems disavow Al Sharpton? Jesse Jackson? Robert Byrd?

You just turned this into one of your usual silly DL games, pandora. No surprise there.

delacrat said...

Tennessee is an "open-primary" state, where opposing party members can vote for the weakest candidate of the opposite party in order to give their own party the advantage in the general election.

Steven H. Newton said...

Here's the problem, delacrat: almost all those kinds of nuances apply to Libertarian candidates and how they are selected, but you guys rejoice in using a few crackpots to tar and feather the entire movement.

So don't expect me to play by different rules. So-called "real" Democrats in Tennessee simply didn't work hard enough to keep this nut off the ballot, so they--and all other Democrats--now own him.

When you guys start playing nice in the first place, come back and talk.

delacrat said...


No. Those "nuances" do not apply to Tennessee Libertarian candidates.

No one outside a party is going to trouble to influence a party primary when that party garners less than 1% of the total vote in a general election. In 2008, even Ralph Nader out-polled Libertarian Bob Barr by over 3,000 votes in Tennessee.

The Libertarian Party of Tennessee is just not big enough to be taken so seriously by the D and R parties.

Republican David said...

It shows the arrogance of the party elite, they have a moral obligation to support their candidate who was selected by the voters. I read his stuff. After reading the article. There is nothing nutty about it. There are some things that are inaccurate or misconceptions, but everything he said has a basis in reality. The NAFTA highway was a real proposal that never got off the drawing board, it has been exaggerated and blown into something interesting, but believing that someone wants to build a highway to link our three countries does not make you a poached egg nut.

As for Public Advocate, I have no idea about the organization, but you could pretty much take the Republican Platform's social agenda and find its mirror. That is hardly a hate group. It is mainstream. Now that is the real reason the Democratic party in TN is losing more and more. They are calling a large segment of their own party let alone a majority of the state haters and nuts for believing traditional values. Then refuse to acknowledge the duly nominated candidate based upon it. That is outrageous. The Democrat headquarters should be surrounded with protesters demanding the leadership's ouster. Your job is to listen to the people if you can't do it, leave.