Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Politics Time for Democrats to Back McWherter? Maybe Not
Posted by Jeff Woods on Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 8:47 AM
He conceded "there's a place for talking about evolution in our schools" as long as it didn't interfere too much with the teaching of intelligent design. He thought "it's unfortunate Arizona had to pass that law" cracking down on immigration, but opposed President Obama's lawsuit to overturn it. He said he's a big fan of freedom of religion but not necessarily for Muslims looking for a place to worship."I truly understand the concerns of some of these neighborhoods about bringing these kinds of institutions in," he said of mosques and Islamic community centers like the one proposed for Murfreesboro. "You just can't drop these into the middle of a very quiet neighborhood and expect the same type of quality of life."
Actually, after that debate performance, maybe now isn't exactly the time for Democrats to get behind McWherter. In fact, maybe that time isn't ever going to come. Aunt B expresses what many Tennessee Democrats are thinking right now:
The Democratic strategy this silly season, instead of even tossing an occasional bone to the progressives, has been to make it as clear as possible that the progressives can go fuck ourselves. And not just the progressives. It’s not like immigrant communities or science teachers are well-known progressive constituencies. Our Muslim community is not a bastion of progressive beliefs. So, it’s not just progressives Democrats have asked to suck it with McWherter.There are a lot of people in this state who need the Democrats to stand up (and I would hope stand up proudly) for them and the Democrats, McWherter especially, has signaled that our problems are not his problem.
Fine.
Then his problems aren’t mine.
Comments (41)
Showing 1-41 of 41
^5 for Aunt B.
I don't care that McWherter has shoveled barbecue at Memphians or that he is his daddy's son. He is the token Democrat because they couldn't get anybody else to run. If a Democrat with experience in government and a track record of leadership ran, he'd whip McWherter in the primary.
Instead, the party threw up their hands 18 months ago and resigned itself to a loss. Now it looks like that's what they'll get.
Personally, I think Mr. Haslam gets it. I think he's most likely to protect our state's natural beauty and resources. He's the only one that's had to balance a budget. He has public executive experience. Knoxville is better because he was mayor. I think he shares alot of Phil Bredesen's good qualities.
And he's not Ron Ramsey or Zach Wamp.
like
dislike
I am with Auntie. If he were a yellow dog, I'd vote for him. But he ain't that nice. For me the opposition to gay adoption was a deal-breaker and he just keeps on going. The evolution one was totally jaw-dropping. It kills me to think of turning the governor from D to R. But I can't vote for McWherter. Just. Can't. Do. It.
Not supporting McWherter "just cuz." I'm just not. I'm not going to do it. I'm not going to tell the TNDP that I will take my shit sandwich and enjoy it. Not I'm not. I'm not voting for a Republican wannabe. Mike McWherter espouses half a dozen ideas that belong on the Republican platform. I would rather have a real Republican drag Tennessee back to the 18th century, not a candidate with a D behind his name. Let Republicans turn this state into a recidivist racist quagmire and let everyone see how much they enjoy it. Then maybe we can get a real Democrat in office. Until then, TNDP can just stop asking me for money because they aren't getting a dime from me.
I'm so depressed. Any politician that gives any quarter to Intelligent Design is off my list. Period. I generally dislike litmus-test politics, but that sticks in the craw for so many reasons. I'm just ill at the anti-science, anti-intellectual turn this country has taken.
Please excuse me. I have to go lie down with a cold cloth on my forehead.
I knew McWherter was a political lightweight, but I didn't realize until now just how unintelligent his political designs are. As an Independent I don't make voting decisions along party lines. My vote is going to Haslam due to his management experience (ala Bredesen) and his more moderate political stances, unlike those of Wamp and Ramsey.
I've resigned myself to not voting for anyone for governor. The redneck twang from those damn commercials will still be ringing in my ears after election day. The Tennessee Democratic Party needs some kind of leadership that can see beyond next week. They don't have a political clue and can't find one. Sad really.
The problem with Neal's post is that he suggests that all of the state's Democrats (even broadly defined) getting behind McWherter will somehow keep the Republicans out of the Governor's Mansion.
It won't. Not this year and especially not with a me-too lightweight like McWherter. There aren't Democratic voters to make a difference. The winner of the Republican Primary will be our next governor, for better or worse. Why should these voters waste their time and energy in this race? Chalk it up as a loss and move on, the same way the Republicans did in 2006.
I think people are getting very tired of the extremists and ideologues on both sides. We're tired of the people, like on this blog, that tell us what we're supposed to think if we consider ourself of a specific party and we're tired of both sides acting like the other side can't even have a good idea.
We had some decent candidates such as Kim McMillan but the party bosses refused to support her.
I will vote for the Green party candidate in Nov. or any other candidate without a (faux)D or R by their name.
Stella, Stella, STELLA! You took my exact line. If McWherter were a yellow dog, I would be voting for him this (not any) year. He is much, much worse. I watched the debate and was ashamed he was labelled with a "D".
i would just as soon vote Haslam. I mean, he and his anti-immigrant tough guy stance are laughable, but he did have the least embarrassing answer to the evolution question. i guess that counts for something. in all reality i will likely write someone in, but i can garaun-damn-tee you one thing: i will not be voting for McWherter.
"He said he's a big fan of freedom of religion but not necessarily for Muslims looking for a place to worship."
And! If they want a place to worship, let em go back to Iran or Mecca!
"has been to make it as clear as possible that the progressives can go fuck ourselves."
Nuff said!
It's still not too late for the libtards to get through to McWherter and enlist Acorn along with an army of illegal brown people to intimidate good salt of the earth Tennesseans on election day!!!!! That's how Obama won the White House, according to Dr. Michael Savage, and it can happen right here in Tennessee!!!!! The elite liberal media, along with Acorn mailings to voters, is already keeping Wamp and Ramsey down! I'm getting enraged just thinking about it! I need to go lay down!
AWP has gotten complacent. His broad satire has become too obvious. Now I'm starting to wonder about Gilbert.
The irony is that for the people behind McWherter, winning the Governor's office has never been the issue. McWherter is on the top of the ticket to try and motivate moderate and conservative Democrats in 10 to 15 state house districts to come out and vote for him in the hope that they will vote down the ballot and save enough seats to prevent Republicans from controlling redistricting in 2011.
In 2008 the lack of support for President Obama among conservative and moderate Democrats resulted in enough of these voters either staying home or voting for McCain and then going home or staying on the Republican side to cost the Democrats control of the House. Certainly Kent Williams saved the day for the last session but the Democrats cannot count on another such break. For 2010 McWherter offers the only prospect of bringing those voters out.
Traditionally power in the Democratic Party has flowed out of the Legislature because that is the source of most political power. A Republican House and Senate would fundamentally reshape the nature of political power. Redistricting under Republican control of both houses would mean the Democrats would be out of power for at least a decade. That would mean less PAC money, less pork, less power and so on.
Where critics see McWherter as a disaster statewide, it may be that he is worth the 5% to 10% in extra votes in a few House seats that will keep the Democrats viable.
So McWherter's campaign is one big subterfuge, and he's really on the ballot just to help a few West Tennessee bumpkins win House seats, and the entire Democratic Party is conspiring with McWherter and the bumpkins to make this happen, clearing the way for his nomination? That's a silly comment, Mark.
Jeff,
Which is more important, the Governorship or the House and redistricting?
The Democrats have survived other Republican governorships. Let the Republicans draw the lines in 2011 and watch what happens.
Which do you think Democratic leaders in the state value more?
I'm sure they care about themselves and their own survival more than McWherter's campaign. But that doesn't mean McWherter is going to spend a couple years of his life campaigning and dump $1 million of his own cash into the race to help these guys hang on.
Mark Rogers' comment just proves what a cynical bunch of entrenched good ol' boys the D powers-that-be are in our fair state, and to what lengths they will go to ensure nothing changes in a state that hovers near the bottom of every measure that reflects quality of life. Excuse me. I have to go throw up.
Stella!! Stella!! Stella!!
(Apologies for the Brando moment.)
Please understand that I am not a Democrat or much of a 'good ol boy' but only a humble observer of politics.
Rather than throwing up, might I suggest that you get your friends to become involved in finding out more about what is going on in state government by reading different papers (tip, reading Jeff Woods does not help), talking to your legislators and even reading a variety of blogs including some conservative ones.
Mr. Woods,
It would shock me if Mike McWherter spent a million on this race. And where do you think his money comes from anyway? To a great extent from businesses that are regulated by the state legislature and overseen by appointees beholden to those same legislators.
As long as the Democrats hold the House they can check any efforts to dramatically overhaul Education or Health Care or to shrink government. That is not true of winning the governor's office. In fact, I would think that you might applaud such a strategy since you oppose many ideas for Education and Health Care reform.
What are you talking about? McWherter already did put a million of his own money into his campaign. Try to keep up.
Jeff,
I said 'spend.'
Let's see how his fundraising goes and how much is left over.
Fair,
Call it an educated guess.
I just love how you "progressives" say you're going to take your ball and go home because McW isn't "progressive" enough or "Democratic" enough for you. Do you guys have an clue about where you live? Hint: it ain't Minnesota, Massachusetts, New York or California. It's TENNESSEE. A liberal Democrat is not going to win here. Arguably, a liberal Democrat -- and that's liberal by Tennessee standards -- hasn't won an election in Tennessee since Al Gore SR. in 1964. (Don't point your fingers at me and say Gore JR in 84 and 90 or Sasser in 76, 82 and 88; at the time, they were portrayed, and portrayed themselves, as centrists.)
Sometimes I wonder if you guys ever leave your Hillsboro-Belmont and Midtown Memphis enclaves. Sheesh!
A liberal Democrat cannot win statewide in Tennessee, Prof., but I don't call an anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-muslim and anti-science fiscal conservative a "centrist", I call him a conservative (and a very ignorant one at that). He is easily to the right of Al Gore JR and Jim Sasser and narrowly to the right of Phil Bredesen (who at least hasn't been caught pining for intelligent design). In certain respects, you could say that McWherter is to the right of Bill Frist, Lamar Alexander, Bob Corker and Bill Haslam. When you combine this with the fact that McWherter has no political experience whatsoever and is only the nominee because of his last name, you can see why liberals want absolutely nothing to do with him.
"but I don't call an anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-muslim and anti-science"
i call him an anti-American, mouth-breathing buffoon.
I really don't think he's any of those things, and if you go back and watch a tape of where McW has allegedly said any of these things, it is -- as usual -- much more nuanced than has been reported, particularly here. He's not "anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-muslim or anti-science." But if you people believe that a Democrat has to campaign in Tennessee on a platform of same-sex marriage, open national borders, and denying the existence of a Supreme Being to meet your standards of ideological purity, then Democrats are doomed to holding only a handful state representative seats from Memphis and Nashville -- and I for one don't want the Republicans handed absolute power.
You've got three options:
1) Educate yourselves about how things work in politics and the real world and realize that just because a candidate gets asked something on the fly does not mean that he intends to carry out his answer as a full fledged public policy (ie, just because you say you believe in intelligent design doesn't mean you're going to try to require it be taught in the public schools.)
2) Try to persuade 51 percent of the voters to vote for a liberal Democrat who openly espouses your views as a governing programme.
3) Realize that you live in a border state that's a damned sight more tolerant than Alabama or South Carolina and just accept the fact it's going to be governed by either right-wing Rs or conservative to moderate Ds.
Of course, you could find yourself so unhappy that you should just catch the next bus to Xanadu or Shangra-La -- if you can find them.
" He's not "anti-gay,..."
No, just opposed to equality, one of the most basic values of our country. Republicans have already proven they oppose liberty---that doesn't make it right when a Democrat does.
Oh, lord, I can't decide which I like better. Is it the idea that McWherter is saying nuanced things that most of us are just too stupid to get instead of him saying incredibly bone-headed things we all get very clearly? Or the argument that we should just accept that he's lying about some things so we don't have to actually worry about them? Or, perhaps best of all, that progressives should just accept that we have to vote for whatever fool the Dems put in front of us or we will be punished with something worse, though the people promising punishment cannot even articulate exactly how it will be worse?
No, no, I think my favorite is this meme they've been floating for a couple of weeks now that people who don't like how Dems do it here should either shut the fuck up or leave the state.
Why should we leave? We like it here. If moving is such a solution for Democrats' problems, maybe Democrats who wish their base were more compliant and conservative should move to Alabama or South Carolina.
Otherwise, some folks just need to get used to the fact that demographics change and they now have a bunch of unhappy, loudmouthed progressives they can't continue to ignore without having to hear about it.
"I really don't think he's any of those things..."
But you think I'm asking him to deny the existence of the almighty? I don't expect any such thing, I believe in the almighty myself, I even believe in Jesus. I just don't think biblical verses belong in our science classrooms, and I have a problem with anyone who can't take that stand. Liberals tend to believe that as a society we can use our reason to make the world a better place. Putting non-scientific verses and conjectures into a science curriculum degrades our ability to reason and contributes to the already rampant anti-intellectualism in this country.
Liberals also tend to believe in equality under the law. I don't expect McWherter to support gay marriage (although I would like it if he did), but I don't like it when he goes out of his way to express his views that gays shouldn't be able to adopt. A statement by him supporting equal rights for gays in employment, or rights for survivorship and to make medical decisions would go a long way to satisfying liberals, but he'll never say any of those things.
Of course, I don't expect him to be for open borders, but I do expect him to take a stand against a law that allows enforcement to stop people and ask them for citizenship papers just because they look different. Finally, I find it appalling that he suggested that muslims should not be able to worship within neighborhoods when we have hundreds of thousands of christians in this state who do just that.
By taking the positions he has, McWherter is letting it be known that people can treat others differently based on the religion, ethnic background and sexual preference, and the Tennessee Democratic party won't even bother to speak out against it, let alone take any action to prevent it. It's this kind of cowardice that caused us to get guns in bars, even though the majority of people in this state opposed it.
Mike McWherter is going to get creamed in this election, whether liberals support him or not. As a liberal, I would rather use my vote to express support for the kind of politicians I want rather than falling in line behind someone who's proven he's not interested in having my support.
Actually, I believe McWherter misspoke on the evolution question, and you are misquoting him.
I can't find a transcript, but here's the quote as recorded by Michael Cass at the In Session live blog: "McWherter: There’s a place for talking about evolution in our public schools. We can blend science and religion, and the two do not have to contradict each other."
When I saw it live, I thought he misspoke and meant to say "intelligent design" instead of "evolution." Indeed, here's his response to this topic in the Tennessee Newspaper Network questionnaire: "I believe that evolution is founded in science and should be taught in science classes at school. That does not preclude my belief and faith in God. I believe in God, and what I have learned in church has not only helped strengthen my faith, but my children’s faith as well."
But misspeaking during a critical debate is not exactly smartgood politics. And yes, the stuff about the mosque was pretty plain, and yes, indefensible.
But yeah, y'all do carry on but be careful what you wish for with Haslam. Don't say you weren't warned.
Today, I wrote in Mabel for Governor. After reading these comments, I have never been prouder of my vote.
You dumbasses are the ilk who voted for one of the great American heroes, Ralph Nader, in 2000, because Al Gore wasn't "progressive" enough for you. You wanted to deliver a message to the Democratic establishment that you'd had enough. You knew Nader couldn't and wouldn't win, but what the hell -- you delivered a message!!
And you got 8 years of Bush/Cheney and heaven knows how many years of the aftermath. (Oops, I probably offended you there with a reference to faith.)
Republicans don't care what their candidates think; Democrats insist on ideological purity. Wonder why the former has grown in Tennessee so much more than the latter?
"Republicans don't care what their candidates think..."
Really? That will come as news to a lot of Republicans. If Republicans don't care what their candidates think, why is Bill Haslam, who is more or less Phil Bredesen with an "R" next to his name, taking such great pains to make it look like he thinks like Rush Limbaugh?
Anyway, the "Prof" is right in the essentials: electorally speaking, Tennessee is a conservative state. Some folks may not like that, but that doesn't make it any less true and the fact of the matter is Bredesen is about as "left" a governor as this state is going to see for the foreseeable future. So, yeah, with apologies to Aunt B., whom I like very much, if this is something that just doesn't sit very well with someone to the point that they just can't stand it (not saying this necessarily applies to her, but she picked up the flag), then move somewhere else. It's a big country and I'm sure you'll find somewhere more politically suitable. I hear northern California is delightful this time of year. So is Oregon. Or Vermont.
This however, doesn't mean that the Democratic candidate has to basically turn his back on everything that folks in his party's base holds dear. There is an art to that sort of tightrope-walking, and McWherter doesn't seem to have mastered it. Maybe he will. Not--I suppose--that it will ultimately matter.
Tennessee the Backward, love it or leave it. You people have got to be kidding. So Auntie (and I, and everyone other progressive on this thread and everyone in Tennessee who had an Obama sign in their yard in '08) should just shut the fuck up, fall in line, and vote for the tool--or move?? A new trail of tears?
"Trail of Tears"? Really? Come on: no one's making anyone leave by force. But if it's means so much to you that you just can't stand it, then, well, make yourself happy and go somewhere that is, by your lights anyway, better. People do it all the time.
Or, just do what you can to change things here and be satisfied with being in the minority for a long time to come. People (including Republicans) do that all the time too.
That last is a great point, Roger. Republicans nationwide have been suffering horribly with paved roads, basically competent industrial regulation, and other socialistic* infrastucture for decades now. After eight years of Reagan, eight years of Bush II, and another decade-plus of neoliberal, pro-corporate bipartisan governance, Republicans need no longer suffer the indignity of watching undesirable 'people' enjoy those socialistic benefits. Conservatives are in the effective majority (no matter what those pesky elections say), and they can now sit satisfied and watch all that socialistic b.s. fall to pieces**. Let those idiotic liberal Democrats whine and moan about the collapse of the country all they want. If they don't like it, they can just pick up and move to Canada like their draft-dodging hippie forbears.
*socialistic here means anything that all the public-- including those that your average Republican considers undesirable-- has equal access to.
**of course, when the socialistic stuff collapses, the whole country collapses, but that's okay. The glorious Second Amendment (what self-respecting Republican needs any other?) has given all right-thinking citizens all the civilization they need.
Wow, those were some very deep thoughts there, Sam. I can almost feel the steam coming out of your ears as the two hamsters you have running on that wheel inside your skull churned that highly incisive comment out. None of it had anything to do with what I wrote, but I'm glad you didn't let that stop you from wasting ten minutes of your life that you'll never get back.
It only took five minutes, and that's counting the time it took to think it up. I was at work waiting for something important to happen, so it wasn't a waste at all. That said, your creatively cartoonish argument by dismissal is still an argument by dismissal. Let's have an ort of fun:
You said:
"...just do what you can to change things here and be satisfied with being in the minority for a long time to come. People (including Republicans) do that all the time too."
I said:
What I said.
Your argument is basically that disaffected people like B. should be content to either spin their wheels and eat shit, or move to some imagined liberal progressive utopia. My argument, satirically spun (because I was bored, okay?), is that Republicans have been pining and begging for the very shitty situation that our nation is in now. High unemployment, crumbling infrastructure, ballooning deficits, etc. Either they were getting this in progressively larger increments (from Democrats or Republicans), or they were suffering from the unbearable remnants of good government surviving from the New Deal. It isn't that deep, unless you prefer to wade in shallow waters.
