Will This Be a Trend?

Jason Thigpen, a candidate for North Carolina’s 3rd Congressional District, just announced he’s switching to be a Democrat:

“Enough is enough,” says Jason R. Thigpen – formerly a Republican candidate seeking election to the U.S. House in North Carolina’s 3rd Congressional District. “After discussing it with my wife and family, I’ve decided to run as a Democrat rather than a Republican. I simply cannot stand with a Party where its most extreme element promote hate and division amongst people. Nothing about my platform has, nor will it change. The government shutdown was simply the straw that broke the camels back. I guess being an American just isn’t good enough anymore and I refuse to be part of an extremist movement in the GOP that only appears to thrive on fear and hate mongering of anyone and everyone who doesn’t walk their line. We’ve received some wonderful support by numerous leaders and members within the NC GOP, as the vast majority of Republicans are wonderful, hard-working people that don’t agree with those radical nut-jobs either but unfortunately the extremists in the party, with their ‘burn it all down’ philosophy, appear to be the ones turning out the majority of voters in the primaries and mid-term elections. And I want the people to know there is a choice.”

NC-3 is a R+10 district represented by Walter Jones, who switched parties in 1994 and won the seat as a Republican. To win in a R+10 district, a Democrat needs a gimmick. This is Thigpen’s. I hope it works for him.

(Thanks to reader G for sending this in.)

77 replies
  1. 1

    Long past time for more Republicans to admit the racist underbelly of their party.

    Here in Tennessee, not so much: State Senator Frank Niceley tries to explain how he’s not racist just because he’s got racist ideas. Obiekaybee.

  2. 2
    ruemara says:

    Possibly. In most of CA, Republicans who want to hold office have public crisis of conscience, spout something reasonable and switch to Democrat-if they’d like a shot at a decent candidacy anywhere outside of the deepest, reddest sections in the middle and the mountainous north. I’m even planning on supporting the latest in my burgh, since I’ve found to two local candidates to be doofai who govern as repub lite even in deep blue areas. No sense enabling it, vote for the real republidem not the one who’s just a demrepub.

  3. 3
    NorthLeft12 says:

    “Nothing about my platform has, nor will it change.” – J. Thigpen

    Is this another of those more and better Democrats that I hear people talking about? Snark.

    I am really not sure the Democratic Party is gaining anything if this guy actually won this seat.

  4. 4
    srv says:

    RINO is RINO. He will get his 15 minutes on Maddow and then join the ash-heap of surrender-monkeys refusing to join the Glorious Cruzolution.

  5. 5
    maximiliano furtive, formerly known as dr. bloor says:

    Pfft. Blue Dog at best. Primary his ass, make him own his record.

  6. 6
    Peter says:

    @NorthLeft12: A seat in a +10 R district. He might not be a reliable vote on legislation, but he’ll still help hand the keys to the kingdom back to the Democrats – the shutdown crisis was a perfect example of how you can have the votes you need to pass legislation and still not be able to do jack shit if you don’t control leadership.

  7. 7
    c u n d gulag says:

    Sorry, but he’s too f’in obtuse to be a Democrat!

    He’s been a Republican his whole damn life, and now, NOW, towards the end of 2013, along came the staw(man) that broke this camel’s back.

    And, thus, are Red Dog Democrats (I calls ’em that, ’cause thar ain’t nothin’ Blue ’bout ’em) born!

    Does no one remember NC’s Heath Shuler?

  8. 8
    David Hunt says:

    @ruemara: That may be a good strategy for California, but I live in Texas and the mid-decade redistriciting that took place back in ’05 taught me that you can’t even vote a Republican in for dog-catcher. A “reasonable” Republican going to the state legislature will support GOP control there and enable all sort of vile BS.

  9. 9
    Belafon says:

    @NorthLeft12: Pelosi gets to control legislation.

    @c u n d gulag: See the previous statement. Yes, he will be a pain to listen to, but there was very little that Shuler blocked.

    Keep this up, in a few years, when the Republicans have collapsed, we can come up with some new grand sounding party name that either the conservative or liberal part can go to, and we’ll get back to a functioning two party system.

  10. 10
    Steeplejack says:

    I’m a little nervous about the underlying assumption that “Republican” or “Democrat” is just a brand that can be switched for better optics or marketing. Thigpen even says (somewhat ungrammatically): “Nothing about my platform has, nor will it change.”

    Here in Virginia, Republican Mark Obenshain’s ads for the attorney general campaign completely omit the fact that he is a Republican. He’s hoping to fly under the radar and not take any of the flak that the Repugs are (deservedly) getting. Is Thigpen just taking that strategy a step farther? “Hey, I’m cool—I’m a Democrat!” But then once he’s in office he can vote in lockstep with his Republican cronies. After all, nothing about his platform has changed.

  11. 11
    Redshirt says:

    @c u n d gulag: I’d take a Blue Dog over a Republican any day of the week, and twice on Weekends. Why not? Tip the numbers balance in the House, Pelosi becomes Speaker, and we can get shit done again. Sure, the Blue Dogs won’t be the most reliable votes, but they’ll fall in line on the big stuff.

    More of this, please.

  12. 12
    catclub says:

    @NorthLeft12: “I am really not sure the Democratic Party is gaining anything if this guy actually won this seat. ”

    If he gets elected and votes for Pelosi as Speaker, that is 10,000% better than the GOP candidate.

  13. 13
    amk says:

    @Belafon: @Redshirt: Yup, reality is a beetch. What part of double digit R+ do the pony seekers not understand?

  14. 14
    catclub says:

    @Redshirt: “they’ll fall in line on the big stuff.”
    Exactly. Voting against the shutdown would be a good thing.

  15. 15
    EconWatcher says:


    I wouldn’t put too much stock in his claim that nothing in his platform will change. That’s just a variation of the cliche politicians always use when they switch parties: “I didn’t leave my party. It left me.”

    When you join the other team, you’re subject to different pressures and incentives (from future primaries, different donor base, leadership, etc.) Not very plausible that your voting positions wouldn’t change at all.

  16. 16
    fuckwit says:

    @NorthLeft12: In the House, having the Speaker is A BIg Fuckin Deal. It’s very strictly majority rule. So, yeah, blue dogs annoy me too, but if this guy wins and gives us Speaker Pelosi and she appoints good Democrats as comittee chairs, then sure, welcome this guy. I haven’t looked at his platform but who knows, maybe he has been on the left side of the R spectrum for a while, and the shutdown was just too much for him.

    As for his platform, he’ll also hopefully see the error of his ways… especially when someone in his district gets ballsy enough to primary him from the left.

  17. 17
    amk says:

    @EconWatcher: The lil fucker changed his party, of course he would change his votes.

  18. 18
    Steeplejack says:


    I can see that, to a certain extent. I guess I have nightmare visions of someone like Joe Lieberman or Joe Manchin, a fifth-columnist who constantly lets the side down at crucial junctures.

  19. 19
    tuna says:

    This is a coastal district. How much did the current rep. raise the cost of flood insurance? Oh and when the Sandy like storm hits them there will the current rep. get them aid?

  20. 20
    jl says:

    @Belafon: I agree. Sometimes it is good to prioritize problems. Maybe if the crazies in the GOP did not have so much influence in the House, getting more, but not necessarily better, Democrats would not be a high priority.

    But the GOP crazies do have a lot of influence in the House, and they threaten to do immense damage. So, this particular problem has high priority.

    So, if some in the non-crazy wing of the GOP decide to jump ship because being associated with a party that has approval ratings among the general public below body lice promises unpleasant consequences in the general election, then I’ll take it for now,. Especially if they are running in GOP majority districts where a ‘better Democrat’ has near zero chance of winning.

  21. 21
    Libby's person says:

    @Redshirt: Amen. After what we’ve been through in NC this year, a statement like this sounds mighty sweet.

    There’s a ton of straw on the camel’s back in NC, and lots of potential last straws. For example, perhaps it’s not purely a coincidence that this happened so soon after the jaw-dropping Daily Show appearance of that GOP precinct chair from western NC. We NC Dems sure hope this is a trend!

  22. 22
    fuckwit says:

    @EconWatcher: Also, there’s another possibility: he could get Arlen Specter’ed.

    So far the history of R’s who change parties to D’s in a desperate and transparent and somewhat cynical attempt to hold on to their seats, is filled with fail. It’s obvious they aren’t really D’s, they just want to stay in office and keep collecting their paycheck, and if voters are angry at them for their votes or party affiliation then they aren’t fooled by the fig leaf.

    But if this is a R+10 district and he is a popular guy, then who knows, maybe he’d end up bringing R voters over to the D party, and that’s an overall win for everyone, especially his constitutents. That all in addition to Speaker Pelosi, which is really important.

    I say let this movie run and let’s see how it ends. Could be good, could be meh, won’t be tragic either way, and will be an improvement no matter what. It’s a win either way, just a question of how big the win is. That’s the best kind of problem to have.

  23. 23
    Mnemosyne says:


    Is Thigpen just taking that strategy a step farther? “Hey, I’m cool—I’m a Democrat!”

    I doubt that he’s taken this step without some long (and confidential) conversations with Nancy Pelosi and other members of the Democratic leadership in the House. It’s one thing to try and sneak under the radar, but it’s something else to try and screw your new leadership, because there’s no going back to the Republicans now.

    And the whole “don’t mention I’m a Republican” thing has been tried here in California. Didn’t work.

  24. 24
    c u n d gulag says:

    Point taken.

  25. 25
    Mnemosyne says:


    He’s actually being pretty smart about it by making the switch well before the 2014 election. It will give his constituents a chance to get used to him being a Democrat and give his local Tea Party a chance to dig up a really fascinating gibbering idiot that he’ll be able to contrast himself against.

    I say, if they’re willing to play with the rest of the team, bring ’em on board. I’m sure he’ll have various compromised votes, but Pelosi has always been good about figuring out ways to release caucus members from certain votes so they can mollify their constituents but still have the legislation pass.

  26. 26
    p.a. says:

    @Steeplejack: Senators are different; more like at-large representatives of their own egos, and can be real pains in the ass. HouseCritters, however, are basically small potatoes and can get thumped if their leadership has the stones. They are usually only a problem, like the teatards, if they can caucus a large enough and nuts enough group to to burn down the village so they can save it.

  27. 27
    gvg says:

    He has some courage of his convictions because in an R+ 10 district I think he has very little shot of winning(hope I’m wrong). Choosing to change parties has a very real consequence of making his election chances less but he did it anyway.
    There is a chance he is really bad. I’d like to know more about him just to make sure he doesn’t have some toxic problem like oh taking bribes but otherwise he’s probably OK and might help us.
    He might also have some problem that makes him unelectable anyway.
    On the other hand I really think the only way we end the GOP no compromise stage involves a small flood of GOP leaving the party. Several in a row could get some notice.

  28. 28
    comrade scott's agenda of rage says:


    I am really not sure the Democratic Party is gaining anything if this guy actually won this seat.

    Exactly. At the risk of sounding like a firebagger, by letting this guy be the Democratic candidate in such a district and assuming he gets re-elected, aren’t we just bringing the equivalent of more Blue Dogs back into the caucus?

    Sure, his most important vote as a Dem would be to hand that gavel back to Nancy SMASH! but afterwards, then what? Too many of them and the caucus becomes hard to manage, not unlike what Ms SMASH! had to deal with in 06 and to a lesser extent in 08.

    Like I said, I’m beginning to sound like a teaturd of the right. I need to now take a long, hot shower.

  29. 29
    Cassidy says:

    Wheeeee! Purity bukkake inbound.

  30. 30
    GRANDPA john says:

    @Steeplejack: Hell, just changing the speaker from boner to Pelosi would be huge

  31. 31
    FlipYrWhig says:


    I guess I have nightmare visions of someone like Joe Lieberman or Joe Manchin, a fifth-columnist who constantly lets the side down at crucial junctures.

    He certainly wouldn’t be alone. Even Mathieson and Barrow and those other shape-shifting nominally-D clowns are a damn sight better than the alternative, though.

  32. 32
    FlipYrWhig says:

    Walter Jones, BTW, is both the “freedom fries” guy and a Paul-ish war-and-executive-power skeptic, right?

  33. 33
    GRANDPA john says:

    @fuckwit: he is not the current rep so its not his seat to hold onto. he is trying to unseat the incumbent

  34. 34
    Sublime33 says:

    A good sign is that the stream of defectors are going pretty much one direction, a la Mr. Cole. As a kid in the 60’s, the fact that defectors were exclusively moving from the East to the West gave me comfort in believing America was on the correct side of the ideological battle.

  35. 35
    Cassidy says:

    @comrade scott’s agenda of rage: No, you don’t sound like a firebagger. Those are reasonable concerns.

  36. 36
    GRANDPA john says:

    @comrade scott’s agenda of rage: he is NOT the incumbant, he is trying to unseat the incumbant

  37. 37
    gwangung says:

    @comrade scott’s agenda of rage:

    Sure, his most important vote as a Dem would be to hand that gavel back to Nancy SMASH! but afterwards, then what? Too many of them and the caucus becomes hard to manage, not unlike what Ms SMASH! had to deal with in 06 and to a lesser extent in 08.

    Didn’t we get the ACA passed under those conditions?

  38. 38
    Berial says:

    Well apparently the ‘Club for Growth’ think’s Mississippi wants MOAR CRAY and not less. I’d laugh my ass off if some of the MS senators or reps changed affiliation. Hell you’d think Wicker was a socialist from the commercials, and we’re HOW far from elections? These things are already showing during the news down here.

  39. 39
    comrade scott's agenda of rage says:

    What was mentioned above bears repeating:

    Let him switch and then let him go thru a robust primary process. I don’t mean that specifically be a tactic to “primary him out of existence” but use that as the venue to see just what kind of Democrat we’re getting. If the primary voters of the district are good with what they see, great.

    The key is that these “converts” understand that if they go to the House as a Dem, the damn well better vote like one when it counts. Otherwise, they get no support running for re-election back home and yeah, we might then try to “primary them out of existence”.

    I will say that at least in the near term, if it meant that the President had the final two years in office to enact some of his legislative agenda, I’d probably mail the guy a $10 check if that would help.

  40. 40
    Peter says:

    @gwangung: Yes. And I would remind them that it wasn’t blue dogs in the House that were the problem; it was blue dogs in the Senate.

    (I mean yes, there was a bit of fussing in the house about abortion restrictions at the end, but that was a tiny speed bump and easily overcome. Senate blue dogs threatened to derail the whole thing)

  41. 41
    cleek says:

    @comrade scott’s agenda of rage:

    aren’t we just bringing the equivalent of more Blue Dogs back into the caucus?

    there’s no “we” here. it’s up to the people in NC 3.

    but, it would be a great win, IMO, even if he’s not Pure. if they elect a Dem and get used to the idea, they might just do it again with someone else.

  42. 42
    Chris says:


    Also, there’s another possibility: he could get Arlen Specter’ed.

    That’s what occurred to me too. I don’t know anything about the guy, so it’s possible that he personally has a strong and established enough political base that he can change party and still keep enough trust from the public to win. But otherwise it just seems like the main result of this will be a bunch of pissed off Republicans going “TRAITOR!” and a bunch of wary Democrats going “why should I trust you, especially if you’re promising that your platform will stay the same?”

    None of which means I’m sorry he did this. If the most we get out of this is a few months with another Blue Dog before the election restores the seat to a teabagger… that’s still more than we’d have gotten if he stayed teabagger the entire time.

  43. 43
    Steeplejack says:


    Golly, that ad omits Chris McDaniel’s (Republican) party affiliation as well. Just a trivial oversight, I’m sure.

  44. 44
    comrade scott's agenda of rage says:


    Didn’t we get the ACA passed under those conditions?

    Yes, that thought crossed my mind. If I went truely all firebagger here, I’d say that if the caucus back then had fewer Blue Dogs in it, we might have gotten closer to single payer. Heh heh, I don’t believe that for a second but I can hear em squawking now.

    So yeah, I’m a big believer in the power of Nancy SMASH! but damn, there’s no way we should welcome these asshats into the party with open arms. Crossed arms with a skeptical glance until they prove themselves.

  45. 45
    NonyNony says:

    @comrade scott’s agenda of rage:

    aren’t we just bringing the equivalent of more Blue Dogs back into the caucus?

    Let’s see. The most recent example of this would be 2008-2010 where a Democratically controlled House with a number of Blue Dogs passed landmark health care reform that Democrats had been looking to get done for decades, passed Lilly Ledbetter, and didn’t once try to shutdown the government in a fit of pique.

    All in all, I’ll take a few Southern Blue Dogs into the coalition if it gets us legislation we want. Even if they vote against it, having the Speaker’s Gavel means controlling the conversation (and hell, Pelosi never had problems controlling her caucus when she needed to – she wasn’t a John Boehner).

  46. 46
  47. 47
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    There are three things that you want from a Democratic Rep. in a marginal district. 1. Vote with the Party for speaker. 2. Vote with the party when it is needed. If a bill is going to pass anyway, it is perfectly alright to have some guy in a marginal seat vote against it. If the vote is needed to pass major legislation, it had better be there. 3. Don’t come out against the leadership on anything big.

  48. 48
    Aaron says:

    @NorthLeft12: Another step towards regaining control of the House and removing Boehner or his successor from power.

  49. 49
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: I agree, and in general this is a good time for any “Republicans in disarray” stories that can filter through the media.

  50. 50
    Turgidson says:


    At the very least, in the probably unlikely event that he wins that seat as a Democrat but the House stays in GOP control, you’d think he’d at least be a firm vote against the domestic terrorist stunts the House is pulling now. He’d vote to raise the debt ceiling, keep government open, etc.

    It’s not much, but any vote to get that bullshit out of the way is a useful vote. As insufferable as the Blue Dogs could be, they never pulled shit like that, nor could they stop Nancy Smash from bringing good bills to the floor (even if they ultimately voted against).

    semi-OT but really I’d have little problem with the Blue Dog types if they’d just keep their goddamn mouths shut. Too many of them are preening camera whores who get off on kneecapping their party in the media. And then, lo and behold, all their “independence” counts for jack squat when they face their next election. Just STFU and vote how you’re gonna vote.

  51. 51
    sparrow says:

    HIs page has all kinds of boilerplate republican sounding positions like “limited government” and “free market” but I did run across this:

    Republican Calls NC Voter ID Bill ‘A Turd’
    Posted on August 30, 2013 by Alisha Mims •
    Congressional candidate Jason Thigpen (R) spoke out against North Carolina’s recently-passed voter ID law. On his Facebook page, Thigpen called the restrictive voter bill “discriminatory” and “a turd.”

    “You can paint a turd and sell it as art, but it’s still a turd,” Thigpen said. “This is 2013 and any legislator that puts forth such a discriminatory bill should be laughed out of office.”

    “You have those that honestly believe our country would be better off turning back the clock to years ago, also known as the ‘good-old days,’ which weren’t all that good for everyone,” he continued. “After suppressing the right to vote, what’s next? Are these so-called Representatives going to push for preventing our military, veterans, and women from voting?… These policies are archaic and in no way reflect the values of the people in the great State of North Carolina.”

  52. 52
    Commenting at Balloon Juice since 1937 says:

    @Steeplejack: If you think that was was ungrammatical, go read his ‘About’ bio at his website. I can’t figure out if he has ever been elected or was going to try to primary somebody. His bio reads like a professional grifter.

  53. 53
    boatboy_srq says:

    I guess being an American just isn’t good enough anymore

    Actually in the Teahadist Pekoeran, it is. But Teahadists define American about narrowly as they define Christian – so in their lexicon “American” equals “born in the USA, white, Xtian (of the proper persuasion), hetero, gainfully-employed and/or job-creating-business-owner, and generally One of The Right People.”

    In other words, no. No, it isn’t.

  54. 54
    Berial says:

    @Steeplejack: Oh, and while I’ve been hearing commercials against Wicker, McDaniel is actually trying to primary Thad Cochran, that bastion of liberalness (apparently).

  55. 55
    feebog says:

    I agree with Fuckwit and NonyNony. This may be a tactic to increase his chances of winning the nomination or he may be well and truly fed up with the crazies in the Republican party. The people in NC 3 have a whole year to figure out which it is. I personally hope he wins the nomination and the general, and I am not in the least concerned that he will likely be a Blue Dog. Big tent people, big tent.

  56. 56
    raven says:

    Gunplay at LAX

  57. 57
    Greg says:

    Let’s remember, though, that there was a *world* of difference between Arlen Specter and Joe Lieberman. Specter (as a Republican) supported the save-the-economy bill in spring 2009, and then was both a strong and reliable vote for the Democrats–on the ACA, financial reform, and everything else. He was also *vocal* about it. And even after he lost the primary–unlike Lieberman–he continued to support the party. I can’t think of any case in 2009-10 where he pulled a Lieberman or even a Ben Nelson.

    Thigpen should absolutely have to go through a primary process, and asked why he’s not going to be Joe Lieberman, but he wins the primary, I might even donate to his campaign.

  58. 58
    NorthLeft12 says:

    Uncle! I get that this guy might help Pelosi become speaker and help the Dems to get to drive the agenda in the House.
    I just wonder how a guy can get elected who says something as stupid as “not changing my platform” when he switches his affiliation. Are the two parties that close in philosophy?

  59. 59
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @NorthLeft12: It’s an attempt at saying, “I didn’t leave the Party, the Party left me.” He is in an R +10 district. To win, he needs some nominal Republicans to vote for him.

  60. 60
    RaflW says:

    Noticed that the GOP is upset that Libertarians are siphoning off votes and spoiling their elections.

    The response of course is to make it harder for libertarians (and any other 3rd parties) to participate in, erm, uhh, “democracy.”

  61. 61

    In San Diego we have a war of the plutocrats to replace Bob “Headlock” Filner. A real estate developer who wants to develop the harbor area lost to Filner when he put up an openly gay city GOP city council member. So now the developer (Doug Manchester–who has also bought up the local newspapers and pushed them rightward) is backing another city council member.
    On the other side we have Irwin Jacobs backing Nathan Fletcher, who renounced the GOP, tried to run as an independent, and is now running as a Dem. I like the guy (worked with him when he was a state assemblyman) and it appears he’ll beat out the “conventional” dem candidate.

  62. 62
    artem1s says:


    I’m a little nervous about the underlying assumption that “Republican” or “Democrat” is just a brand that can be switched for better optics or marketing.

    unfortunately this will be the direction that the GOP will try next. the party can only be failed. never, ever consider that the underlying policies of the party are the problem and the reason the mouth droolers are taking over the party is because those policies attract exactly those sorts of supporters.

    he’ll fail miserably for the same reasons the Rmoneybott did. Empathy can’t be faked for any extended period of time.
    And only sociopaths think they can get away with faking it.

  63. 63
    Turgidson says:


    Do you expect him to say “now I’ll vote however Nancy tells me”? Candidates are supposed to have sincere beliefs and positions on the issues they arrived at on their own that aren’t dictated by party affiliation (ok, you can stop laughing), so I’d be surprised if he said anything else upon his announcement.

    He said the right things about the GOP going barking mad, and his comments above about the voter ID law could have just as easily come from a member of the progressive caucus. So he may not be all that bad, at least on some things.

  64. 64
    Liberty60 says:

    I think there is a value in even a Blue Dog ex-Repub inside the tent. As a member of the Democratic Party, he needs to rely on the county and state party apparatus for funding and support, and that allows for some arm-twisting at critical times.

    And he can bray all he wants about his agenda not changing, but he will discover soon enough that his old friends are now his enemies, implacable and determined- probably right about the time that the RedState Strike Force delivers a thousand bags of dog crap on his porch or something. So he will have to make new friends and allies, whether he likes it or not.

    Besides, in an R+10 district, there isn’t going to be a progressive or anything close, in that seat.

  65. 65

    I’m amazed at how dudes like Justin Amash (effectively) become progressive-friendly because they take a civil-libertarian stance on a couple of issues.

  66. 66
    artem1s says:


    As insufferable as the Blue Dogs could be, they never pulled shit like that,

    uh stupak; lieberman

  67. 67
    AnonPhenom says:

    A trend? No. Not until you see incumbent Republicans running for reelection switching to the Democratic ticket because of a Teatard primary they know they won’t win.

  68. 68
    Turgidson says:


    They shut down the government and held the debt ceiling hostage? I don’t remember that.

  69. 69
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @artem1s: Stupak voted for the healthcare bills and took a lot of shit from anti-abortion groups for doing so.

  70. 70
    drkrick says:


    As insufferable as the Blue Dogs could be, they never pulled shit like that,

    uh stupak; lieberman

    Lieberman was a Senator, a distinction that was the point of the post. Stupak created some extra but inconsequential drama at the end and exterminated his political career in the process. That’s not going to be lost on those who consider following his path in the future.

    The most important vote of the session is always that leadership vote. If Pelosi can win that we can stop worrying about the damage another session of GOP control would do. Putting together the votes to actually make some progress without the Blue Dogs is a much smaller problem.

  71. 71
    burnspbesq says:

    @c u n d gulag:

    Dumbfuck, he’s going to run against WALTER JONES. Anything that discomfits Walter Jones is a good thing.

  72. 72
    liberal says:

    @jl: there is no non crazy wing. There’s just different degrees of crazy.

  73. 73
    jefft452 says:

    Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin

  74. 74
    Swellsman says:

    Hey, this is my district!

    Between this guy and Jones, I know who I’m voting for. (Actually, I always vote for the same candidate — the Not Walter Jones candidate.)

  75. 75
    Marc says:

    @comrade scott’s agenda of rage:

    Too many of them and the caucus becomes hard to manage, not unlike what Ms SMASH! had to deal with in 06 and to a lesser extent in 08.

    When she got us the stimulus, the ACA, and cap and trade (which died in the Senate).

    It’s the Senate that enables prima donnas with its supermajority requirements. I’m confident Nancy Pelosi can handle a backbencher or two.

  76. 76
  77. 77
    The Moar You Know says:

    Those bitching about his red roots – relax. Even if he ran in a Klan outfit, as a Dem he cannot be elected in an R+10 district, so the Democratic Party’s sacred purity will remain unbesmirched.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

Comments are closed.