Hard work pays off

Look, I'm sorry to offend your delicate sensibilities with my outrage, but I'm tired of this false dilemma you all have set up. If you're really going to sit here and argue that there are no differences between Republicans and Democrats, then I'm just going to laugh at you.

You people can't muster the votes needed to see your candidate carry a single precinct in the most progressive city in North Carolina. It's time for you to realize that the majority of people in this country (and certainly most of the people in this state) do not share your views. You are a minority, even in Orange County.

More than that, it's time for you to realize that David Price (and Democrats like him) are fantastic representatives for you in Washington.

For the past ten years, he's voted with the preferred positions of NARAL Pro-choice America and Planned Parenthood 100 percent of the time. For the past five years, he's voted with the preferred position for the Humane Society of the United States close to 90 percent of the time. He supports the preferred position of the ACLU 75 to 80 percent of the time. The NAACP and National Council of La Raza close to 100 percent of the time. The Human Rights Campaign 83 percent of the time. He's with the Wildlife Action Fund close to 100 percent of the time. The League of Conservation Voters 94 percent of the time. The National Organization of Women close to 100 percent of the time.

Last year, according to the National Journal, he voted more liberal on economic, defense and foreign policy issues than 82 percent of the Representatives.

And to top it all off, the man got 0 percent ratings from both James Dodd's Family Research Council and the National Rifle Association.

Leadership like that is what you hope for, and it's good to see that the voters of this district confirmed their appreciation for the quality of his work. If David Price is such a conservative, how come he got 87 percent of the vote in a primary dominated by party activists?

But that's tangential to the problem I'm having with this debate.

Democrats of all stripes -- from Mike McIntyre to Ted Kennedy -- are going to do better for this country than the Republicans. I dare any of you -- even Mark M. to suggest otherwise. You're not always going to be happy with the decisions they make, but no matter what they do, they are going to anger some constituent or another. That's to be expected --it comes with the job. So stop turning up your noses at the process.

I, for one, am not "far left." There are people here who can confirm this.

The question of how a discursive, democratic society ought to behave was the thing that birthed this little debate.

Neither Will nor I nor Ruby have once mentioned a single issue of policy or of ideology in this discussion, and thus it's difficult to see how we could all be lumped together as "far left". In fact, I happen to know that all three of us come at politics from very different angles, and have varying issues of concern. But this wasn't what we were talking about, and it does no good to lump critics of the party together and dismiss us all as "far left," out of touch with regular people. This party has not been run by regular people in forever, and that's what's I'd like to see change. I believe those outside the party elites -- a group that might include our relatives who live in small town North Carolina, or ourselves -- deserve better than a party that thinks they're stupid and will flock to Heath Shuler because (and this is the centerpiece of his biography as he presents it in his literature) he set passing records in North Carolina, won some state championships, won some other things at UT, and then played in the NFL for a few years. Because if you can see _anything_ else that recommends him as a statesman and a leader, please let me know.

I'm even willing to take the "far left" quiz: ask me where I stand on any issue, and I will give you a short and honest answer. One need not be "far left" to be disenchanted with our party. People who fall into that category include me, textile workers I know in Spindale, fourth-generation Chatham County people, my family in Wilson, and most everyone at my little, active and engaged, Bible-believing church.

matt,

again with the false choices ?

your case for price has merit from my point of view, ie. the vast voting majority of 4th district dems are happy with david price,and you cite some valid reasons why this is the case.

but that doesn't mean others should not challenge him to be stronger on some very important issues, or does it ?

would it be ok with you if price took a stand that bush/cheney should be impeached ? or would david lose your support ?

would it be ok if price committed to a time table for ending the iraq occupation ? or would david lose your support ?

if he co-sponsored conyers' national health insurance act, would that be ok with you? or would david lose your support ?

if price had not signed the bankruptcy bill, would he have lost your support ?

my point is not that david price is a "bad" rep./dem.

my point is that it should be ok to challenge him to be an even better one.

kent

"What would Price have been doing instead of dealing with a pesky primary challenge?"

Reading a good book? That would have been a better expenditure of time than quashing "the rebellion that wasn't" from Carrboro.

He hosts enough forums, meet and greet-type, lecture-style/panel-style events as it is around here.

Kent, there are other ways to challenge Price than to run against him.

The OCDP has been putting some gentle pressure on him on Iraq and I think it has had some effect, although I'd like to see him take a stronger stand too, like backing Murtha's plan.

On impeachment, very few Democrats in Congress are ready to go there now. How can they unless they regain the majority? Even then, we should not rush to impeachment. Yes they could start the hearings into POSSIBLE impeachable offenses, but only if they regain the majority.

And Duncan, that's where Heath Shuler comes in. He will be one of many, a "backbencher" and a small part of a new majority, I hope. His personal views or leadership skills will be less important than just being a "foot soldier." We need 218 votes to organize the House, he could be one.

Taylor will be tough to beat. Every election he appears vulnerable and then wins easily. If Shuler can beat him, I say "go for it." Democrats in the 11th could have nominated C. Michael Morgan, a true progressive, but he would have trounced in the fall and Dems know that, which is why he lost 3-1. Shuler has a shot.

I voted for Kent because he's a great guy with great ideas. But I also voted for Kent because I don't want David Price to grow complacent. I hope Kent's 6% was enough to make David look closer at why some voters are disaffected with his representation.

I'm not in the far left; I'm probably, like Ginny, a progressive moderate. However, unlike her, I am politically an independant. I prefer to consider myself a left leaning centrist. For folks polarized by the system and the rhetoric and the name-calling, this means I'm wishy-washy.

We progressive moderates will regain control of this country one day. Yes, sir. There will be harmony, peace, love, and understanding. We will change the national anthem to 'Kumbaya' and sing it in the original Swahili. We'll subsidize good will to all. We will overcome adversity and teach Africans modern farming techniques and win over the Middle East with our big smiles. Democracy and freedom will prevail throughout the world, and our only reward will be the good that we have done...and a steady supply of oil.

I can't wait.

David, 6% in a primary dominated by the "hard core" who are much more progressive than the voters at large should scare Price?

If Price was complacent before (which I don't think he was), he should downright smug by now!

The simple fact is that those who thought there was a solid group of Democrats dissatisfied with Price were just plain wrong.

If they were that unhappy with Price's leadership and wanted to send a "message vote" they would have voted for anyone else's whose name was on the ballot. The vote says exactly what it says: the majority of voters were happy with Price's leadership enough to check the box next to his name.

A couple of points.

Will asserts that we don't have democracy if we don't have a debate among the candidates for an elected office ("Price espouses democracy for Iraq but doesn't practice democracy in his own district"). Will, do you claim that it isn't democracy when Price talks to ME, as he has several times? Is is not democracy when he went to the public meeting on Iraq that Paul mentioned and listened to the people there (several accounts assure me that the meeting influenced Price's views)?

And surely the claims in this discussion that a debate might have enabled Priced to change the minds of Kent's supporters is absurd! You've all talked to Price and your minds are made up!

Duncan refers to the "party elites" as if that applies to the folks here in Orange County. The Democratic Party does indeed have its elite groups, but they are surely not here in Orange County, where I think some very exciting grassroots organizing is finally beginning. For the first time since I've been here (26 years), the OCDP has a year-round office and organization. We have our own voter database and are no longer beholden to candidates or the state party for our data. Believe me, we have not been directed from above to organize: we are trying our best to generate support for the party and perhaps to influence it. This is a local effort, and I think everyone here should joint us.

I recommend that people on this list read "Crashing the Gate: Netroots, Grassroots, and the Rise of People-Powered Politics" by Jerome Armstrong and Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, founders of mydd.com and dailykos.com. The New York Review of Books has an excellent summary of the book. Jerome and Markos argue quite convincingly that we need to achieve some political power before we get too worked up about just how closely our representatives mirror our own beliefs. You will have the opportunity to talk to them in person on May 12th at Quail Ridge Books.

Ok maybe that was four points.

Ginny, ditto to your response to Ruby.

I mean, really, Ruby, I realize that few people knew who Kent was, but does that matter if it just a protest vote? Did people not see Kent's name ON the ballot either? Or Oscar Lewis? They had two chances to cast a protest vote, from the left or the right.

But from Caldwell to Carrboro, north to south, conservative to liberal, they did not.

If you can draw another conclusion from yesterday's vote other than that there was no significant dissatisfaction with Price among Democrats of all stripes, I think you are seeing things as you would like them to be and not as they really are.

George, ditto as well.

And Price DOES listen. I harangued him at a Hillsborough "meet and greet" a couple weeks ago about my feeling that the Democrats in the House need new leadership and he not only listened, he did so actively and probed for my beliefs and took them seriously, I believe.

Mind you, he didn't say he agreed with me, but at least he actively listened, as he did when I criticized him for his vote on the bankruptcy bill last year.

Consider also that he, Dave Obey, Tom Allen and Barney Frank have joined with congressional expert Norm Ornstein to draw up a comprehensive set of new House rules (or enforcing of the existing ones) which, to me, is more important than any specific issue right now.

Also consider that he and Alexis Hermann are co-chairing a party committee to consider changes to the Presidential nominating process, a tough, thankless task and not one I would have taken on.

Again, there was no basis on which to challenge Price from the left. Kent and his supporters thought there was, they were wrong.

That doesn't mean he and they were wrong about the issues or that I believe Kent had "no right to run." He and anyone else have that right, but when you don't enter a campaign to win it, why run?

I know this is an Orange county thread but I want to congratulate the voters of Durham for their School Board voting message. Hopefully the new members will bring order and integrity back to the board so they can work for the children of the district.

WillR, left, right or center, few Democrats seem to be dissatisfied with Price, at least now. Again, they had not one, but two candidates with which to "send a message" if they so desired.

And they didn't.

If Kanoy had received 20-25%, I wouldn't be saying this.

But he got 6%.

A candidate who proposed the death penalty for gays got 20% in the OH Democrat Senate primary yesterday against Sherrod Brown. I doubt whether even .1% of his voters knew this, they just wanted to protest the treatment of Paul Hackett by the DSCC earlier this year and would have voted for ANYONE to show their disapproval.

good morning guys !

now don't go thinking i've donned a tin foil hat, but brian voyce tossed out an interesting factoid in the chapel hill herald today. every candidate who appeared first on their ballot won, and with one exception, every candidate who appeared first on their ballot led the voting.

several friends asked me yesterday how it was decided that price should be first on the ballot and my name listed third.they wondered how many more votes i may have received if the names had been listed alphabetically.i scoffed at the notion but maybe my friends were on to something...hmmm?

i have grown weary of the tired argument that price can't support impeachment until the dems. take the house. surely, he has supported and voted for measures that had no chance of passing in the pub controlled house. the rational inference is that price does not think that bush/cheney has violated its oath of office.indeed, if he did,then by ignoring the violations, he would be shirking his oath to uphold the Constitution. i would strongly disagree, but i would appreciate his honesty if david would just say that he believes bush has committed no impeachable offenses.

I just got caught up on this great discussion.

I've been reaffirmed in my decision to unregister as a Democrat several years ago. Ginny - does this put me more in touch with the middle and the right?

I voted for Fred "The Chief" Heinemann with no regrets. One result was that it sent a message to Price that he better get in touch with his constituents, which he did a better job at when he ran again. Plus, Heinemann's votes were generally moderate and very similar to Price's philosophy. Ginny - did voting for Heineman put me more in touch with the disillusioned, silent majority out there in the hinterland? (Did running for county commissioner as the first independent in Orange County history with a primary issue of fair representation for rural conservatives put me any closer to folks who have different views than me on some other issues?)

Anyway - I cast a protest vote that was well-deserved and actually helped in the overall scheme of things. One of the main issues that really bothered me about Price at the time was his nuclear utility-centric views on energy. He was, and still is basically, a staunch proponent of nuclear power.

And now - a key issue for me is agriculural policy. I believe that communities must gain local control of their food systems. Price's votes reveal that he supports Big Agribusiness right down the line. I just cannot bring myslef to support someone whom I believe is supporting some very dangerous policies. I'm sorry to you "progressive" Democrats that actual strong beliefs on my part should interefere with supporting a guy who you feel we should all support for "political" reasons. My brain doesn't hurt as much when I just go by how a candidate stands on the issues that are important to me. Maybe that puts me more in touch with the all those other people out there...

ruby,

i don't believe i was making an "argument" supported by voyce, but rather i was reciting an interesting fact presented by voyce. regardless of his politics, he is either accurate in his citation or he is not. if he is, then it poses an interesting question for those who practice the science of discreet mathmatics.

and to all you anti-kanoy pols, don't be dissing my 6% constituency...in a tight race we could be the swing vote !

by the way, i plan to print some "don't blame me,i voted for kanoy" tee shirts. anyone interested in having one,let me know. no cost to you, natch...

kent

Kent, order on the ballot is determined by order of filing. I doubt if it matters much in a congressional race, maybe judicial races it does a bit, but the reason the three appellate judges who were listed first ran first is that they were the Democrats endorsed the OCDP and we pushed hard for them. In the case of the commissioners, Nelson filed first, followed by the 2 incumbents and they were the favorites and won. No mystery there.

In the Orange Co. School Board race, they were listed alphabetically and candidates listed 1,2,4 and 5 won.

Kent, speaking for myself, I was "pro-Price" not "anti-Kanoy." How could I be against you, I didn't even know you!

Kent, if you drawing up a bill of impeachment, what would you base it on?

Ruby, I iike the idea of a Price/Orange thread, I think this is an interesting discussion.

Paul,

i don't really believe that anyone is anti-kanoy. i was teasing those who have taken offense that someone(anyone) chose to run against price.

to answer your question re: bill of impeachment :

it would include:

1) the deliberate misrepresentation of military intelligence to mislead Congress into granting bush authority to invade iraq. the downing street memos,statements by paul o'neill,richard clarke,and trent lott provide enough "probable cause" for this article.

2) the authorization of a systematic program of torture in violation of the geneva accords. the un investigative report and admiral ?(blocking on his name) provide "probable cause" for this article.

3) warrantless wiretaps on american citizens in violation of fisa. bush's own admission and the opinion of the american bar that this violates the Constitution provide "probable cause"

impeachment does not equal conviction. rather, impeachment is an indictment,and i believe there is more than enough evidence already in the public arena(and i don't doubt there is even more yet to be discovered) to indict bush/cheney.

ruby,

i would join in on a price thread !

kent

Kent, I don't disagree with you that there is "probable cause" to begin impeachment hearings.

But that certainly won't happen unless and until Democrats take control of the House and is improbable even then, since the Democrat majority, if there is one, would be razor-thin.

Until then, it is moot and David Price has enough other things to work on now, in my opinion.

Paul,

i don't want to beat a dead horse here, but i am not asking price to "work on " impeachment.i will concede your assertion that he has "enough other things to work on now." but on his way to lunch or the gym or the next fund raiser, could he not find a couple of minutes to stop by and put his john hancock on the conyers resolution ?

Mark, to say Heinemann vote like Price is just dishonest. For starters, on that all important House Speaker vote when Heinemann voted for Newt Gingrich. Will, I"m glad you call it bringing up a cannon to note that Mark voted for Heinemann because I too found it remarkable. And Will, the intent of your snide little joke about the party paying us to post on here is not lost by you putting a smiley face at the end. I'm no one's shill and I don't say you are.

Re: Heath Schuler, do you know how many people have run and failed against Charles Taylor? To say that the party is controlling the nominees is just to not know the history of that district.

Ruby, saying the election proved nothing is just nonsensical. 37,000 people pulled the lever for David Price. Say whatever you want, you can say voters weren't well informed, blah blah blah, but 37,000 vote FOR David Price. They didn't choose to abstain of vote for one of the 2 other candidates.

One of the facts of politics is that it takes candidates who can appeal to a majority of voters to win. Some of you can't seem to handle the fact that a majority - and a large majority - of voters often don't agree with you. And so all that is left is the rant. Mark Sheilds used to call it the shreiking of the unichs...

Re: a David Price thread, I oppose it. We just had an election where he won going away. A thread will just be this conversation rehashed - with Mark and Will trashing Price ad nauseum and me and others defending him. I see no point in it. If there was a time for a Price thread it was before the primary.

David,

i have to agree with you that price trounced oscar and myself at the polls.,and i can't dismiss the implication that the primary voters are content with price.

on the other hand, if i'm a 9 term incumbent and a "joke" candidate (ruby' descriptive term) takes 10 % of my home county,then i would be somewhat embarrassed.

Kent, I have to disagree, 10% of the vote, especially in a primary where the "hard core" of Democrats were the only voters (only 20% of Democrats voted in Orange) is not significant or embarassing.

And you were not a "joke" candidate or a nut, as many other candidates are who run in these situations where it is almost impossible to beat an incumbent. You offered an opportunity for the left to send a message to Price and they did not take that opportunity. Whether that is because they are happy with Price or just resigned to the fact that he's there, no one can say for sure. A weak "well, why not, he's going to win anway" vote counts for 1 vote just as a "he's the greatest thing since sliced bread" vote counts for 1 vote.

I think a Price thread could be very useful. Obviously it's easy to be sucked into a back & forth about him, but I get a strong sense that there has not been much analysis and evaluation of a lot of his actual votes and stands. The agricultural policy votes I have mentioned are a good example.

Maybe by shining a little light (and where there's light, there's heat...) on the specifics of his contributions, we can actually help espouse improved positions to him if we wish.

And - on the other hand - an analysis of his postive work stands a chance of influencing the politically autistic, tribal, bubble-dwellers (like myself evidently) among us.

Jason, given the choice between Patsy Keever or Heath Shuler serving in Congress, there is no doubt at all that I would prefer her, as would most Democrats.

But she didn't win and in fact, didn't come close. Shuler has a shot and as long as he votes for the Democratic candidate for Speaker of the House, he'll be miles ahead of Taylor.

We have GOT to get this crowd of Republicans out! They are damaging this country to extent I have never seen before and could not have imagined and if left in power it will get much worse.

Will things be a lot better under the Dems? Maybe, maybe not. But given what we have now do we have any other choice?

These are not normal times.

I was born and raised in the eleventh district, and I think Patsy Keever had a better shot than Heath Shuler does. Patsy's weakness lay with the far western counties, but she did a wonderful job mobilizing the progressives. Yes, she was probably "too liberal", but she got a part of the vote than Shuler never will. I will be voting for him in the fall, but most people in the district (including myself) have not been particularly impressed. Taylor's in a more precarious position this time around, but never underestimate his power. Pouring in tons of money on negative TV ads has helped him before, and once it gets nasty, I can see many of the progressives becoming dissillusioned and not turning up to vote.

And for the record, I voted for David Price. Though I don't always agree with him, I think that he does have his heart in the right place most of the time. I am glad that Kent ran, to represent a vocal minority, but I think that the issue of Price's record is minor in comparison to other places around the country. You all do not appreciate that this district has a great man in Congress. Try living in the eleventh district, and see how much Charles Taylor represents your views.

Don't lump all of WNC together (and I don't just mean to separate Buncombe). Swain County is a democratic stronghold and, last I checked, consistently votes that way on the local and state level.

When I moved to Swain County in 1996, with my Harvey Gantt sticker still on my car, a Swain County good 'ol boy native bragged to me that Gantt beat Helms in Swain County. He was incredibly proud of that fact and told me, "Swain County is a Democratic county." And it's true.

The party is so strong out there! The primary for county commission in Swain was really contentious because people other than the party's choices were running. And there, the race for commissioner really is the primary. This race included the first candidacy of a member of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee ran for commissioner, and despite really strong support in the eastern part of the county (ie the Cherokee) and the western part of the county (the Nantahala Gorge, the outdoorsy transplants), he lost by five votes.

(Sorry for the diversion from Orange politics...)

"a Swain County good ‘ol boy native bragged to me that Gantt beat Helms in Swain County. He was incredibly proud of that fact and told me, “Swain County is a Democratic county.” And it's true."

I'm from Fayetteville where everyone who's anyone is a Democrat, but ever Democrat ain't a Democrat. Remember when you're debating who you would like to see elected in a district that most of you guys have very, very little in common (ideologically or otherwise) with the people who are registered Democrats elsewhere in the state.

"to my own UNC-YDs sending out fundraising letters which detail how many volunteer trips we can get per donation to go work for Heath Shuler, months before the primary. It's disgusting, in a way."

The UNCYDs are continuing their freefall into irrelevancy anyway. Also, if I remember correctly, they were discussing lining up fall campaign trips for Tim Dunn in January. I'm waiting for the day when they give up the pretense of "let's watch Crash -- a movie about race relations!" and just start handing out their resumes at conventions.

I'm from Fayetteville where everyone who's anyone is a Democrat, but ever Democrat ain't a Democrat. Remember when you're debating who you would like to see elected in a district that most of you guys have very, very little in common (ideologically or otherwise) with the people who are registered Democrats elsewhere in the state.

My thoughts exactly (on this, and especially on the YD comment). WNC Democrats, even a lot of Asheville Democrats, are nothing like Orange County Dems. It's a completely different world here than it is in WNC. Most elected Dems in WNC (outside Buncombe County) are moderate at best.

And don't say I'm lumping things together. I've lived in WNC longer than anyone in this thread, and have worked on an 11th district campaign, so I think I know what I'm talking about.

Like I said before, I hope everyone realizes how fortunate we are here in Orange County. Getting Shuler elected would be a great step for people in WNC, but it would take about twenty of those steps for the district to be as progressive and strong as the fourth district. And that's all I'm going to say about the 11th.

For PRIMARIES, the law says:
"GS 163-165.6 (c) Order of Candidates on Primary Official Ballots. - The order in which candidates shall appear on a county's official ballots in any primary ballot item shall be determined by the county board of elections using a process designed by the State Board of Elections for random selection."

The process is laid out to each County by the State BoE in a 2002 memo.

"1) In 2002 and 2003, candidate's names shall be placed on primary ballots in reverse alphabetical order, starting with the letter “z” and ending in “a”.
2) In 2004 and 2005, candidates' names shall be placed on primary ballots in alphabetical order starting with the letter “b” going through to “z” and ending with
the letter “a”.
3) For the next two-year cycle, the order would revert to another reverse alphabetical order starting with the letter “y” proceeding in reverse order and ending with the letter “z”.
4) Then the next two-year cycle would revert to an alphabetical order starting with the letter “c” and ending in the letter “b”.
5) And so on, alternating between regular and reverse alphabetical order with a new
starting letter, every two years.

The above arrangement only applies to primaries. On general election ballots, candidates
are still listed in alphabetical order of the parties they represent (See G.S. 163-165.6)"

Since you can determine which letter will be the base letter in advance, this is NOT RANDOM, and the State will change this process to one that is in fact random. They do not know when that will happen, but they expect it to be done prior to the next primary. Otherwise, somebody named Alota Cash would surely be first on the ballot for whatever seat!

Fred, thanks for claryfing that. I had posted earlier that it was based on who filed first and coincidentally, in the commissioners race, it was almost the same order.

So, I was wrong. First time this year! :)

Part of the hard work on the part of the local Sierra Club didn't include proofing their pre-election newsletter very well. Instead of offering support to FRED BATTLE in the Democratic Primary (something positive I guess, but not an endorsement), the newsletter said FRED BLACK! (Note: I'm registered as unaffiliated). I also understand that many didn't receive the newsletter until after voting, so maybe it didn't hurt FRED BATTLE too badly.

Easy mistake to make, I guess, especially since we look so much alike. I hope the other Fred received a heart-felt apology from those responsible; I certainly did not.

SO, from one Fred to another: FRED BATTLE, I'm sorry that the Sierra Club made that mistake and hope it didn't hurt your candidacy too badly.