SD-3: Contrary To Previous Reports, Young Still Backs Dahroug

And I have no less than five Islip Town Committee memmbers who have (0.00 / 0)

confirmed exactly what I have posted.  I will share the names privately with you but they are also appointed Islip Town and Suffolk County officials.  They all confirmed that at a meeting of the Islip Town Democratic Committee, they were told by Ivan Young that he "is mow wide open to support either Dahroug or Foley"  An added point, if Ivan is so strongly behind Jimmy, why were his and his committees signature support so lacking to where Foley got more Islip signatures than Jimmy???  Ivan has often stated that he does not read the blogs.  Jimmy obviously read my post and called Ivan to have him call you.  Ivan, got caught off guard by my informants who reported the facts to me.  After all Town Committee meeting was a closed door affair!  I stand by my report and time will tell the rest.  Hope you enjoyed some burnt ends and other BQ at Austin!

---

by: politics64 @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 12:53:30 PM UTC

I don't care what those five people said... (0.00 / 0)

You posted something about Ivan Young, not the Islip Town Democratic Committee. So if you are going to post something about Ivan Young, you might want to ask him. He could tell you a totally different story than he told me, but at least you could straight to the horse's mouth.

Come on politics64. You are in the district. You could have contacted Ivan Young yourself. In fact, you should have. If you are going to write about Ivan Young pulling his support, don't you think you should have checked with Ivan Young?

He is the source that matters here, not the five committee people who might have heard something.  

---

by: robert.harding @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 13:06:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Please stop being Jimmy's tool, Robert, He is not community, I am! (0.00 / 0)

I was proved accurate on my February conversations with Eric Schneiderman in Oswego that the DSCC and WFP did not want Jimmy after he polled 6% voter recognition after two bites at the apple.  I was again accurate on the fact that Jimmy as no ground game as evidenced by his dismal petition numbers.  A call to Ivan to confirm what he said at a closed door meeting would have gotten the same denial you got.  I just posted one of my contacts emails on this issue.  He has never been wrong in the 35 years we go back together in local politics.  The readers can take it as they wish.  Believe those who are there for you Robert, not those who want to use you!

---

by: politics64 @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 17:15:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Listen politics64... (0.00 / 0)

What Socrates and your friend told you happens a lot in local politics. You have a chair who supports a candidate but understands that an endorsement could make for a close vote and a tense situation. This is partially what happened in SD-61. I don't know if Chairman Lenihan has a preference (Iannello, Mesi or Ward) but the committee ended up not endorsing anyone.

That is different when you come here and tell us that a person has withdrawn support or withdrew their endorsement. You know that.

As for your idiotic claim that I am "Jimmy's tool," I am not the one that was willing to sell out the Democratic Party for Chris Bodkin. I get it - you don't like Dahroug. But Dahroug is a better choice than a person who was a Democrat for a few months.

Now, is Dahroug a better option than Brian Foley, a Democrat with a proven record AS A DEMOCRAT and as a leader? No. Foley is clearly the better option. I have implied and stated as much in the past.

So calling me "Jimmy's tool" is ridiculous. I keep in contact with at least a dozen Senate candidates and their campaigns. Am I all their tools too? Am I Joe Mesi's tool? Dave Nachbar's tool? Rick Dollinger's tool? Paloma Capanna's tool? Roy Simon's tool? Michele Iannello's tool? Dan Ward's tool? Ken Dow's tool? How about we talk congressional campaigns too? Am I Jon Powers' tool? Tracey Brooks' tool? Phil Steck's tool? Eric Massa's tool? Dan Maffei's tool? Darius Shahinfar's tool? Paul Tonko's tool?

Because if I am indeed Jimmy's tool, then I guess I am all of those candidates' tool as well. At least, based on your idiotic and insane label.  

---

by: robert.harding @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 17:41:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Your a tool when you jump and print what they tell you and fail to ask (0.00 / 0)

the critical follow up questions. If you did you would have found that Ivan was parsing words.  His public endorsement is and always was meaningless.  His behind the scenes endorsement on his Town Committee was always the issue.  I reported and have been supported on this thread that Ivan indeed has retreated on his endorsement by informing his committee that he "is now open to both candidates".  Perhaps with more experience you will learn to do that instead of regurgitating what your friends tell you as if that is the entire story with no  nuance and the nuance is VERY SIGNIFICANT here!

---

by: politics64 @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 16:27:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Robert said that.... (0.00 / 0)

Dahroug should drop out, hardly his tool......

He just repeated what the Chariman said from an official statement, you know, what the chairman has said in public.  Maybe all of your "experience" hasn't taught you what an official statement means.

---

by: daniel.jones @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 21:05:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Maybe your practical political background has not taught you (0.00 / 0)

the entire purpose of the original endorsement announcement and the following retraction to the Town Committee.  That is a withdrawal!

---

by: politics64 @ Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:11:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Politics64... (0.00 / 0)

You can call me a tool all you want. You printed false and misleading information. I'd rather be a tool than a liar.

I went to the horse's mouth. The horse told me he didn't pull his support. Other people have come here and said that all Ivan Young did was tell the committee that he was not going to make a recommendation for an endorsement - hardly a withdrawing of his support. One chairman cannot tell a committee (a committee that elects him) what to do. At least, that should not be the case.

Quit playing the experience card with me. I know you get the jollies over me being 22, but let's cut this BS. If you can't debate me without mentioning my age, you cannot win. I know that this is your district, but you have been trying to undermine Jimmy the whole time. I can remember asking you if you would support Jimmy if he won the primary. I never got an answer.

As Daniel Jones mentioned, I have said Dahroug should drop out. In fact, I received a call from Dahroug saying that someone had told him I had "endorsed" Foley. That couldn't be further from the truth. I like Jimmy, but I hardly have made it known that I have endorsed him either. I don't endorse candidates. I'm a blogger, not an egotistical politician who feels that they want to make themselves more powerful than they really are.

Being open to both candidates isn't pulling his support. Consider this: Many people supported Hillary Clinton when she was still running. Even so, most of those people said in polls that they would vote for Obama if he was the nominee. I don't see how what Ivan Young said is any different. He backs Dahroug, but would be receptive to a Brian Foley candidacy.

This shouldn't be rocket science. This isn't an earth shattering move. But you are making it out to be one because he merely said that he could back either/or.  

---

by: robert.harding @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 23:16:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

OK Robert, have it your way, its your thread but you failed to answer my (0.00 / 0)

most important question to you in this entire post!  Did you have the BQ in Austin and how was it?

---

by: politics64 @ Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:13:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I didn't have BBQ (0.00 / 0)

I didn't have time. Didn't have time to write either. Every time I sat down to write up a post, upload a video or upload pictures I looked down at my cellphone and it was time for another panel or another event. It was a non-stop weekend. I'm still uploading pictures and video as we speak.

---

by: robert.harding @ Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 03:12:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

sorry you did not get a shot at the burnt ends, my favorite (0.00 / 0)

but good that it was a successful conference, I followed along on some of it on line and my wife and i will drive out to Pittsburgh for next years event.

---

by: politics64 @ Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 15:13:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ivan's Support (0.00 / 0)

It was clear at the meeting exactling what Ivan meant. He expected the committee people to support Ramos who he mentioned by name. He also made clear that he was not asking them to support any particular candidate for state senate. If he is still supporting poor Jimmy it is only personal support and he is not using post as party chairman to promote his candidacy. The petitions tell the story.

Also Jimmy surrogate D. Jacoby struck out big time at the Jeffersonian Democratic Club meeting when he was confronted with some of his past writing, which called for the purging from the Democratic Party of "Yellow bellied wimps" like Harry Reid and another article entitled "Nader was Right" about the 2000 election.
He maintained in one of his writings that Thomas Jefferson was the founder of the modern REPUBLICAN party, which of course did not go over big at the Jeffersonian Democratic Club

---

by: Socrates @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 14:41:55 PM UTC

Thankyou Socrates! (0.00 / 0)

and welcome to the TAP community!

---

by: politics64 @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 17:17:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I will add that Jacoby posts at the Daily Gotham! (0.00 / 0)

another regular there named Bouldin, gave him a little lesson straightening on one of his recent posts. I have read Jacoby stuff, he is very liberal guy which would go well in making blue disticts bluer but his views are not a good fit for a place like SD3.  Jimmy should choose a better spekesperson than that to come to a Patchogue club meeting filled with oldtime regular Democrats but he will take any live body he can get his hands on.  Hey, is it true , Socrates, that Jimmy shaved his head on a drinking bet with his brother that Jimmy lost?  and this guy wants to be a State Senator?  Maybe he should run for student polity instead!

---

by: politics64 @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 17:23:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey... (0.00 / 0)

...while I'm very reluctant to step into this particular flamewar, I will say this: Dan Jacoby is a friend of mine whom I've known for years and broadly think very well of. So while I may not agree with Dan on every position he sees fit to take, I do not consider it my place to give Dan "a little lesson", nor can I recall having done so publicly.

Coincidentally, if I write a diary that's been proven to be substantially incorrect, I tend to update it.  

---

by: Michael Bouldin @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 18:10:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Allow me to refresh your memory Michael, from the Gotham! (0.00 / 0)

First from Dan Jacoby, Why is Foley Running for State Senate:

An editorial (available here) in a recent edition of the Times Beacon Record, a group of Long Island newspapers, lays it out beautifully. Brian Foley isn't a bad guy, but he isn't the kind of tenacious fighter that the district -- and all New Yorkers -- need in the state Senate.

In addition, it should be noted once again that Foley's last-minute entry into the race caused a three-way primary, whereas if he had either gotten in last year or stayed out completely, we'd have a nominee right now. It seems that Doug Forand and the other powermongers in Albany haven't been paying attention to the situation on the ground in Islip/Brookhaven.

and now Michael Bauldin's smack down (that I supported)

I keep on saying this to people: whether you agree or disagree with Doug, at a minimum, he is someone very well worth listening to. Calling him a "powermonger" is as far off in terms of a description as I can think of. My personal practice, if I disagree with Doug on something, is to ask myself if I may be wrong, and I'm not the only blogger who thinks that way.

I understand that Jimmy and his folks are probably pissed about this development. I would cordially suggest to everyone involved, though, that messaging such as

he isn't the kind of tenacious fighter that the district -- and all New Yorkers -- need in the state Senate.

liable to undercut Foley's candidacy if he becomes the nominee is going to go over in blogdom like a lead balloon. I'm all for Dahroug and Foley making their respective and positive cases, and letting the better man win.

---

by: politics64 @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 13:23:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ivan's support (0.00 / 0)

I think we should let Ivan Young say who Ivan Young. Just a thought. I have played these games with party chairs and how they will say one candidate has their but then another candidate gets the committee's support. Does the party chair's support matter much? No. The voters' support is the only thing that really matters.

However, Ivan was very clear with me about where he stands. While it might be his personal support, it is still his support. It is contrary to what was written here yesterday by politics64. If committee members are saying one thing and Ivan Young is saying another, there is a discrepancy there.

---

by: robert.harding @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 17:23:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I am Dan Jacoby, setting the record straight (0.00 / 0)

I never wrote Jefferson "was the founder" of anything.  I wrote that Jefferson is "the ideological grandfather of the modern Republican party."  The two are vastly different; what Socrates claimed I wrote would have been wrong, what I wrote was correct.

In a separate column, I wrote that Jefferson lived "in a philosophical fantasy," rather than the real world.  So, too, does George W. Bush and Republican leaders.  I wrote that Jefferson "was raised in a wealthy, old-money ... family," that "because he had wealth he was entitled to it," and that "He never learned fiscal management, and never lived within his means."  All of this is not only true of Jefferson, but also true of the modern Republican party.

During the 19th century, the Democratic party was racist, warmongering, fiscally irresponsible, and in many ways foolish -- just like today's Republican party.  Calling Jefferson "he ideological grandfather of the modern Republican party" is accurate.

"Socrates" -- if you're going to quote me, get it right.  My columns are available to anyone on my eponymous website.  The two columns referenced here are #74, "Jefferson Lives" and #165, "Betrayed Again."

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 22:58:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Somebody, somewhere.... (0.00 / 0)

...must be feeling a stinging sensation.

  Ouch, baby.

  Don't judge other people by your own limitations.

---

by: RussElba @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 23:58:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Carthage must be destroyed (0.00 / 0)

The reference to Jefferson is from your Article Betrayed Again. You know the one in which you state, "The time has come to rid the Democratic Party of wimps, fools and idiots- and Harry Reid is among the worst of them." You also take a rap at Obama and Biden. Isn't anyone good enough for you except Jimmy?
Your final line is "Harry Reid must be replaced. He has betrayed us too many times."  One is reminded of the old Roman Senator, who at the close of every speach no matter what the subject finished with the words "Carthage must be destroyed"
PS As for the Democratic Party of the 19th century being fiscally irresponsible, I would remind you that Andrew Jackson a Democrat was the only president to pay off the national debt. I know, I know now you will say that he was a racist too. Well guess what, they all were back then even Lincoln who freed the slaves did not consider them to be his equal. Jefferson set the lofty goals of american democracy. Even if he did not live up to his ideals in all respects he still gets credit for them in an age that was still dominated by kings and emperors. By the way we still have a way to go so we should not be pointing fingers at Jefferson but looking in the mirror and seeing how well we are living up to those ideals.

---

by: Socrates @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 01:32:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Back up your views (0.00 / 0)

I've also read plenty of Jacoby's blog postings... and if anyone has any problems with his ideas I'd like to see someone provide evidence that contradicts his arguments. Just using his arguments to criticize him as a supporter of Jimmy is something that seems right out of the Republican playbook. Please provide us with some inside into how Harry Reid might have been justified in allowing the Senate to vote to condemn MoveOn for using its first amendment rights, and/or specify how General David Petraeus did not sell out by being a tool of the Bush administration. You would also need to argue that Reid has been an efficient enough Leader to merit another term as Majority Leader, so please argue why he was justified in allowing the Republicans to kill various legislation such as the Democratic version of the FISA bill without  having to actually filibuster it?  Please explain why Reid deserves another term after allowing the Bush administration to continue its current Iraq strategy, contrary to the will of the American people (see polls on the current war strategy).

BTW nice way of ignoring Jacoby's main argument of how Jefferson did not understand how American economics really worked since he lived a privileged lifestyle like GWB and they both felt like they deserved to be in their economic situation. I also LOVE how you rebutted his argument that the Democratic Party of the 19th century as a whole was  fiscally irresponsible just by showing one example of one single Democrat who happened to do something that was fiscally responsible. Under this logic, since Rudolph Giuliani has a pro-choice record, then the entire Republican Party of the 20th and 21st century does not have an anti-choice record since Giuliani, who lived and served as Mayor and presidential candidate in the 20th and 21st century, has a pro-choice record. **rolls eyes**

" You also take a rap at Obama and Biden. Isn't anyone good enough for you except Jimmy?" - Also nice, since Jacoby is supporting Jimmy in his run to be a legislator, and has criticized other Democrats who are not Jimmy, he MUST think Jimmy has a perfect stance on every issue since he has not held Jimmy to the same standards as a State Senate candidate than the standards he holds to Presidential candidates who have voting records in the U.S. Senate. It must be impossible to support anyone who has voted yes on bills you disagree with. Jacoby must be a traitor since he has criticized Democrats with voting records (Obama and Biden) while not criticizing someone who is running to eventually have a public voting record (Dahroug). *** rolls eyes again***

---

by: stevenman5000 @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 04:03:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

FDR (0.00 / 0)

Just because someone comes from a priviledged background it does not mean that they cannot understand the plight of others who are not as fortunate. Franklin Roosevelt came from an protected priviledged class and he and Elinor, who also came from the same background certainly cared about people.
Your comments smack of elitism.  

---

by: Socrates @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 13:28:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Amen to that (0.00 / 0)

But we are dealing I think with guys a good 20 plus younger than we are.  Plus, I suspect living in a one party Dem NYC District with little understanding for the 35 years of political two party system building that you and I have done out here!

---

by: politics64 @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 16:20:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Jackson was also fiscally irresponsible (0.00 / 0)

Have you ever heard of the "Panic of 1837"?  Check it out sometime; it makes fascinating reading.

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 08:43:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I emailed one of my contacts regarding the Young announcement! (0.00 / 0)

This was his reply as an attendee:

At the meeting Ivan stated that he was remaining neutral in terms of asking the committee people to support a candidate (Jimmy) and that they could support whoever they wanted. He was still emphatic that they should support Ramos for Assembly, but made it clear that he did not expect the same on the state senate race.
Ivan is trying to have it two ways. It was clear to everyone in the room that he was only asking them to support Ramos for Assembly, but was not asking them to support a particular senate candidate. His endorsement would only be a personal one and he is not putting any weight behind it.

I think this about says it all, including the irrelevence of Young in this race.  I only posted about it because jimmy was so full of piss and vinegar to get his press release out announcing Young and Montano (Ricky no longer belongs to the Democratic Caucus in the Suffolk Legislature) endorsements!

---

by: politics64 @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 17:09:06 PM UTC

committee chair an odd position (0.00 / 0)

I'm a Town Committee chair.

I frequently (not always, but often) have preferences in primary races, and if you ask me about them, I'm happy to share.  

It's actually a gigantic pain in the neck to be a committee chair in some ways, because it's just plain difficult to speak personally in public without people blasting you for saying non-cheerleading things about fellow Democrats when you're a committee chair.

I don't, however, enforce my preferences on my committee - I hand out petitions for every candidate I can, and let committee members do what they want.

From that perspective, it sounds to me like Young has separated his personal opinions from his role as committee chair, and is wisely not dictating what his committee members should do.

Talking about "the irrelevence of Young in this race" in that context seems way way overboard to me, especially given your original posting.  

---

by: simonstl @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 17:32:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't see the problem with what Young did (0.00 / 0)

He did what any sensible chair would do in a primary like this one. He left up to his committee. If they endorse, so be it. But he isn't going to pressure them into endorsing a candidate. The same thing happened in SD-61 with the Erie County Democrats. One candidate couldn't get endorsed without making almost half the rest of the committee angry. It was too close to call.

But saying he withdrew his support is, at the very least, misleading. He didn't pull his support. He just didn't force his committee into endorsing a candidate.  

---

by: robert.harding @ Sat Jul 19, 2008 at 17:47:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thats because you did not get the context of the original post (0.00 / 0)

On these very community pages, Jimmy Dahrougs press release boasting of Ivan Young and Ricardo Montano endorsements appeared as sent without any insight offered as to the irrelevance of Young on the primary.  When Young originally announced his endorsement he let it be known that he expected the Islip committee to endorse Jimmy by working for him i/e. petitions!  They did not, then the State Chair and County Chair meetings followed by Ivan meeting with his Town Committee to state that he was open to both candidates but did expect his committee to support Ramos!  Now, if that is not a retreat on the earlier endorsement, I do not know what is!

---

by: politics64 @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 13:16:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think at this point it's more (0.00 / 0)

that I'm less and less excited about the context you set.

It's painfully obvious that you've disliked Dahroug from the outset.  You seem willing to tell any story in this election so it benefits your side, and I'm deeply unconvinced that this one is nearly as exciting as you'd like it to be.

If I lived in the district your postings would be making me take a more and more sympathetic eye toward Dahroug. (Heck, he collected 300 signatures himself, right?)  

Since I don't live there, they just make me wonder about how seriously to take your reporting here.

---

by: simonstl @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 13:46:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In 30 days he should have doubled that, 20 a day common (0.00 / 0)

I do not understand the intellectual lazy and dishonest approach of team jimmy restating that old meme about disliking Dahroug.  I always liked him on a personal level.  I do not like his camaign capabilities. I take my reporting every bit as serious as you or anyone.  Lets you and I stop the bickering here between us and calmly listen to one last fact I will share with you.

At the Town Committee meeting, ivan Young announced to his people that he "is now neutral in the State Senate Race but expects the committe to support Ramos in the Assembly primary"

Those were his words to the committee.  As socrates said, Ivan wants it both ways, to publicly appease Jimmy and maintain a useless public endorsement while no longer being partisan in the primary among his Town Commitee.  I am sorry if Dahroug supporters do not like the message, but this is a withdrawal of Ivans prior support on any practical political level.  If you want to learn about our area you can continue to read my posts, if you want to go along with the Dahrougian take on things, that is fine as well. i only ask you not to personalize my motives by telling me who I like or do not like.  The issue is and always will remain, a Democratic State Senate, A progressive netroots combined with a great grassroots that will result in electing Democrats and acheiving reform.  All else is commentary, now go learn it!

---

by: politics64 @ Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 15:26:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Trail of tears anyone? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: daniel.jones @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 10:54:32 AM UTC

Trail of tears (0.00 / 0)

Jackson was an old indian fighter and he hated them with a passion. He was not a man that you would want to get on the wrong side of.
Unfortunately I don't think you can name any President who gave the indians a fair shake. As I said we can still admire the accomplishments of our country's founders without forgetting their shortcomings- and maybe our own.

---

by: Socrates @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 17:27:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Listen buddy.... (4.00 / 1)

I'm Indian and I know Indian history, its true that other Presidents in the 1800s committed acts of violence against Indians, however, Jackson committed an open Genocide against them, you can't tell me that the point of forcibly marching thousands of Cherokees halfway through what is today the US was anything less than a sick twisted way to remove Indians for slave-plantations and massively (by no means trickled) way wipe out the population.

The other President's during that time period we're not good to my people, I totally agree, but Jackson has shameful blood  spattered across his legacy more than Jefferson, Van-Bueren, Washington or Adams combined.

Andrew Jackson: A 2-cent President on a 20 dollar bill.

---

by: daniel.jones @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 21:01:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey Socrates, Jimmy spent alot of phone time on this one! (0.00 / 0)

I wonder how many doors did not get knocked on while Jimmy fixated on my post?  I gaurentee, Brian Foley did not waste a second of campaign time on this.  That 75-25 prediction of mine is looking more and more realistic each day!

---

by: politics64 @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 13:27:50 PM UTC

I know that you have a grudge against Dahroug.... (0.00 / 0)

And honestly, I agree that he should step out of the race, but to constantly and obsessively try to discredit him is not productive.

---

by: daniel.jones @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 21:04:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nobody has a grudge against Dahroug and to accuse people who oppose (0.00 / 0)

his nomination of one is intellectually lazy and dishonest. I am also not obsessively discrediting him or anyone, I am reporting the facts on the ground for the readers here who are overwhelmingly not from SD3 and unfortunately for Jimmy suporters the realities just feel like he is being discredited!

---

by: politics64 @ Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:18:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It shouldn't be about predictions and self-promotion (0.00 / 0)

Quite frankly politics64, you can make all the predictions you want. My counter to your 75-25 was more of a sarcastic move than anything. I can remember you boasting about correctly predicting Aubertine would win.

In the end, I don't care who wins the SD-3 primary. I have said in the past that if Foley wins, he presents a strong challenge to Trunzo. If Dahroug can beat Foley, it will make Dahroug a better candidate. That's how I have felt about that race. I know that you disagree and that it should be anyone but Dahroug. That's fine, but there are more important races than SD-3.

We can win SD-11, SD-15 and SD-56. The numbers there are to our advantage and we have three strong candidates for all three seats. We also have SD-55 and SD-61, plus SD-51 with one of the strongest candidates of this cycle, Don Barber.

I cannot formulate an opinion of Brian Foley because I know nothing of his platform or what he will stand for as a senator. Here it is, almost a month before the primary and a Brian Foley for Senate website cannot be found. If I knew something about him, I would be pushing him like the rest of our candidates. But I know nothing about him, so I'm not ready to anoint him the Democratic candidate in SD-3.

---

by: robert.harding @ Sun Jul 20, 2008 at 23:29:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Trust your friends Robert, that is the best lesson I can impart to a (0.00 / 0)

young man like you.  Myself (the boastful one! LOL), Eric Schneiderman, Doug Forand, The WFP all participated in the recruitment and support.  Is his positions going to please you and I as much as Jimmy's Hell NO! Is he more to our views than Trunzo, Hell Yes!  and as I, Sen. Schneiderman, Doug Forand and the WFP among many many other of our friends have concluded, Foley can win and Jimmy cannot!  PS Foley will likely be far more progressive than Powers, Mesi and some others you have shared good words about! I hope that helps.

---

by: politics64 @ Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:26:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

How can you say Foley will be progressive? (0.00 / 0)

Another reference to my age. Really, are you that addicted to that point? I grew up with a father who is 46 years older than I am. He has given me advice, allowed me to debate with him and has instilled in me great values. Yet, people your age and slightly younger than you are insecure about debating with someone who is younger. You shouldn't be so afraid of losing a debate. I'm not looking to beat you on points or opinions. I'm just looking for debate. Get over your fear... and yourself.

Lumping yourself in with Sen. Schneiderman, Doug Forand and the WFP is so laughable.

As for Foley, what are his views? Foley has done nothing to show his progressive values. A website would be a great starting point but there is nothing out there about this guy. A website would also provide important contact information so that bloggers like me could reach out to this guy and find out what he's all about.

So saying "will likely be far more progressive than Powers, Mesi and some others" I have mentioned here. I have never touted Mesi as a progressive. Hell, I haven't touted Mesi. I have said that he's a strong and smart candidate, but I have never pushed him as THE candidate in SD-61. There is a primary there (a REAL one) and there are three intelligent candidates to pick from. I believe Iannello is the most progressive. I believe I have said that in the past.

As for Powers, three were three New Yorkers at the Netroots Candidates event in Austin. Eric Massa couldn't make it, but he would have made it four. Powers was there. Kevin Powell (NY-10) was there. And Steve Behar (NYC Council) was there. No Dan Maffei. No candidates from NY-13 or NY-21 (at least at that event). No other local or state candidates. I am not saying its mandated to go to Netroots Nation, but it shows how dedicated to this movement you are. Powers is more progressive than people will give him credit for.  

---

by: robert.harding @ Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 03:30:54 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You are a very sad and ungrateful young man and are a very small person (0.00 / 0)

I have no more to share with you, you canman up and email an apology later, otherwise, my opinion of you remains soiled!

---

by: politics64 @ Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 15:30:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]