Pointgod wrote: Which races and states were this? Correlation does not equal causation. And there’s a huge difference between a safe Dem seat in a swing state or red state and a competitive race in a Republican district. Can you list out the races for us?
stuporman wrote: Now all of a sudden you want context? ...and after you tell someone else to not even bother with me?
So you either can provide context or you’re just repeating a stupid talking point that you saw off twitter. It should be hard to point it the districts who backed Medicare for all and won re-election and tell me if they D+ or R+
stuporman wrote: You have no problem accepting the centrists assertion even defending it here in this thread but want some sort of proof from me? How about you provide some proof the premise progressives hurt centrists first because that is the assertion that is without evidence at this point. Oh and negative political ads isn't proof of anything but....
If you actually bothered reading what I’ve written or anything other posters that agree with you have written is that both things can be true. I’m sure that there were candidates that would have lost because they ran awful campaigns. And I’m sure there were candidates that ran good campaigns and still lost. You can’t blame Progressives for every loss, just like you can’t blame who you call Centrists for the legitimate concerns of having their races nationalized over bs. Here’s a clip of what Spanberger was saying. She explained that if you don’t literally mean defunding the police, then explain your ideas in a way that means putting more money into social services or improving community engagement. I believe AOC is right too that some members just ran poor campaigns but the party is a big tent and they need to learn to work together as a team because nothing anyone wants will get passed if they lose Congress.
stuporman wrote: Mark Kelly won in a traditionally red state even though it barely went blue for the Presidential race this cycle it even picked up a couple of republicans in down ticket races. They ran all those same attack ads there about him, you would have thought he was the CEO of antifa the way they painted him yet he won the senate seat.
Well there’s a big difference between winning statewide in a states that trending Dem +1 and winning in a R+ district. And Mark Kelly’s opponent being total dog **** helped him and also this example actually goes against your point. Mark Kelly distanced himself from the Progressive wing of the party pretty sharply. Mark Kelly was insulted because he had heavy Democratic counties propping him up, something other candidates in house races don’t have.
https://www.azfamily.com/news/politics/arizona_politics/kelly-distances-himself-from-progressive-wing-of-the-democratic-party/article_04daf238-9499-11e9-9f22-3f5e78fd9451.html
He took a strong stand against policies pushed by some the key left-wing figures in Congress.
stuporman wrote: So how about you search for your proof because I don't owe you anything, the claim is progressives hurt centrists and it was made and defended by centrists, the burden of proof is on them.
And btw. Nice edit after telling me to eat a bag of dicks. Don’t worry, you’re not going to hurt my feelings but it’s not going to stop me from asking you to back up your claims. Show me the districts where the candidates that signed onto M4A won on.
