Skip to main content

Why Democrats stay in power in Delaware (at least partly)

To some extent this post piggy-backs on the one at Delawareliberal about why "moderate" Republican Cathy Cloutier manages to hold her Senate seat in a heavily Democrat district.  Basically, the conclusion is that she pays attention to her constituents--as one commenter said, she has "a ground game."

Let's extend that point, and ask why Republicans in Delaware struggle just to stay in the debate.

Last week, as noted in posts below, I started contacting DE Representatives in an attempt to influence their votes on SB 51.  The emails I sent were all polite and to the point.  I sent the messages to six Democrats and four Republicans (based on membership in a key committee and people I thought might be interested/responsive).

To date, five of the six Democrats have responded, and none of the Republicans-including my own representative.

In one sense I don't care if I had gotten the polite brush-off email--at least it would have indicated a minimal amount of attention being paid to these concerns.

From the Dems I received actual replies from the Reps, several of which contained requests for more information or suggestions of other Reps to contact.

From the Republicans ...

<>

There is something besides ideology that keeps people in power.

Comments

kavips said…
Exactly.

Republicans worship money. People are trash to them. Democrats worship people. Money is trash to them.
JackJ said…
Both sides only worship votes
Hube said…
Democrats worship people. Money is trash to them.

Precisely. That's why they waste so fucking much of it -- OUR money!
kavips said…
You know? I think there is some wisdom there.
Delaware Watch said…
Well, there is also the fact that the wingnuts have taken control of the GOP in Delaware. They actually turned down Castle, a certain win for Senate, for an ignorant right-wing clown. Look at the sheriff in Sussex. The moderates have been eclipsed by the crazies. The general voting public in DE, although not acutely politically sophisticated, are not the total rubes required to return the Republicans to power, not most of the current political GOP candidates.
Hube said…
They actually turned down Castle, a certain win for Senate, for an ignorant right-wing clown.

Indeed. Something that still never ceases to flummox me. :-P
tom said…
It certainly doesn't help that they tend to run crazy people and/or 2nd string unknowns for major office.

But more importantly, the GOP in general is so hopelessly mired in 17th century Puritan social mores that many of the demographics that ought to strongly support them are literally afraid to vote Republican.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...