As some of you know, I live in the 4th district. My representative is David Price. Due to the new redistricting map drawn up by the GOTEA, Rep. Brad Miller may be forced to run against Rep. Price in 2012. This article talks about how Brad Miller has been a champion of liberal causes and it makes me wonder who I would vote for if it came down to these two fine reps running against each other.
I am curious to hear your views on this issue.
I've contributed to both
It breaks my heart to contemplate the possibility that this NCGOP gerrymandering will somehow pass muster by the courts. For all of Art Pope's whining about corrupt Democrats, he's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that his own party is nothing but a bunch of opportunistic sleaze balls.
For now, I'm betting on both horses. Both are solid Congressmen, though I personally prefer Miller's style and legislative aggressiveness.
From what I can see, the layout of the new district favors Price.
That said, I'm hoping North Carolina has a boatload of Democratic primaries. We need over-the-top turnout to beat back the Anti-Marriage Amendment in Raleigh, to keep the governor's mansion, and to take back either the house of the senate. Wake County Dems proved that could deliver in a local race ... now we need to scale that up for a statewide tsunami.
Thanks for posting this. It's been on my mind a lot.
Not at all sure what the
Not at all sure what the marriage amendment has to do with Price and Miller. I do not believe that Miller will take the steps to run against David Price it would do neither or the Democratic Party in NC any good short or long term. I hope the challenge to the gerrymandering redistricting will fall in Federal court but barring that I hope Miller elects to run against Holder(he moved into the 13th in order to run before and can again) who I would love to see eat the dirt of defeat in November of 2012. Miller is the likely only one who might have a shot to block Holders political ambitions who I think long term is jockeying to take the idiot Burrs seat or Hagans.
I believe James was referencing the fact that
the amendment vote was scheduled not with the general election, but during the primary election where they only big thing going on is the Republican Presidential primary. The thought being that enough regional races happen on the other side of the spectrum, it might balance out the turnout ratios and make it a fairer fight (not that there is anything fair about trying to win minority rights through majority vote - or in this case not even win, but prevent the loss of existing rights).
That's right, Jake.
It's frustrating when people see elections in isolation from one another and from underlying issues that are affected by turnout. I hope we see Democratic primaries at every level of government all across the state. Without that kind of "stake" on the line, we won't have the turnout we need to beat back Amendment One.
Yes I clearly understood the
Yes I clearly understood the point, but not at all sure what it has to do with Price and Miller conundrum.
Seems pretty clear to me...
I'd want to be anonymous too if I came across as thick as you do. (Not that putting my name on these posts *stops* me...)
The point is that contested Democratic primaries will drive turnout during an election when a homophobic ballot initiative will also be present.
While Miller and Price can't both win a primary for the same district, we can say with some confidence that practically every Democratic voter who shows up to cast a ballot for one or other will also vote against the GOP's LGBT-hostile ballot question.
I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson
Thick? Where do I begin. 1.
Thick? Where do I begin.
1. you do not know me and you certainly are in no position to evaluate my intellects "thickness". And, even if I did not post anonymously you still would not.
2. you assume, wrongly, that even if large Democratic voter turn out will somehow will somehow defeat the amendment. It will not and to think otherwise is folly. Will it enhance the possibility, hell yes. But as a southerner I have long since stop deluding myself.
3. As for a primary between David and Brad would somehow be a victory albeit sad one a vote against the LGBT hostile ballot question is simply , you will excuse the expression, thick. In no way losing one progressive voice in the US House of Representatives a blow against the GOP anti gay, anti woman, and minority agenda.
Finally, I am a life long Democrat..with a big D...I voted in my first Democratic primary for Eugene McCarthy. I am gay and have been in a successful monogamous relationship for 32 years(33 come May thank you very much) and I know what is at stake every time we go to the polls. So do not assume I am thick. If you want to lash out...I see its noted GARNER NC on your post....why not take aim at Elmers and Tedesco rather than me. Merry Christmas.
Tedesco and Ellmers
I'll address your points in reverse order.
Regarding your point 3, way ahead of you--I've already been in touch with Dan B. earlier this month, prior to our exchange, and he's trying to find a good use for me along these lines (not necessarily easy with my meager skill set).
Point 2. I give defeat of the amendment better odds with heavy Democratic turnout than with light. And that's the point that was earlier made by James, IIRC. Drip with contempt for disappointing Democrats all you like, but if you let it obscure basic statistical knowledge about voter demographics and polling trends, you abandon evidence-based reasoning.
Point 1. If it happens that you in fact don't care for evidence-based reasoning, there's a very hospitable major party for you, and the Democratic Party isn't it.
Democrats disappoint me every day. But I find that my own splenetic jeremiads are best leavened with peripatetic empiricism.
(And thus I bequeathe long-suffering BlueNC readers with some 25-cent words. Think of it as a Christmas gift!)
I wouldn't recommend drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. -- Hunter S. Thompson
I hope Brad will move into a different district and perhaps displace a Republican in some office.
Pangloss was wrong.
Price is the more progressive choice
If it comes to a primary between these two, Price would be my choice.
I'm not sure how the article misses it, but Rep. Price's voting record is more progressive than Rep. Miller's when taken as a whole. Miller voted seven times to reauthorize the PATRIOT Act, and he voted for the defense authorization bill that allowed the government to imprison American citizens on a whim. I cannot forgive those votes as someone who cares about civil liberties.
Rep. Price has also been out front on what I view as moral issues, like opposition to the war in iraq, the repeal of DADT, and he was the first NC dem to support of the Respect for Marriage Act. Miller has sometimes followed Price's lead on progressive issues but not always (see Patriot Act, defense above). Price voted against the Patriot Act extensions Miller supported, and against the defense bill. The list goes on, but Price is the more progressive candidate and he's been a leader.
Both are good progressives--with Price being more progressive. We need more good dems in Congress, but not at the expense of leaders like Price.
David Price is a great guy
David Price is a great guy and a great Congressman.....I am from Davids hometown, I should know...but David is a progressive but so is Brad Miller. I dare say that to infer that somehow that David is a better or "good" Democrat and superior to Miller certainly indicates that maybe you are not. The reason Brad was jammed into Davids district by the GOP was just to see good Democrats take sides against the other. Suppose that can mark at least one down for that scenario.
I remember looking up the representatives stances
on some LGBT equality issues last year. Perhaps they've added more to their records since then, but both of the representatives in question were near the top of the list:
good to know
I think it was just a timing issue. My post from last year was just a snapshot in time, so not the fullest picture. As far as NC goes, they're the top progressives around on lgbt equality issues.
Too New to Be Counted
This one is too new to be counted in any of the report cards. Nobody is going to vote the way you want them to all of the time. Give them a break.
Yes, Brad has voted for the Patriot Act, and you can't forgive him. Can you forgive David? He has voted for it too. Look it up.
I don't know if this is of much value
"Somewhat Liberal. The following Representatives have earned a Net Congressional Score between 40 and 69:"
"Weakly Liberal. The following Representatives have earned a Net Congressional Score between 20 and 39:"
I tried to use this site to look them up on the patriot act, because there have been many votes connected to it, to making it better or worse, to making it last longer or not. Unfortunately the site didn't have a lot of information, but one difference was:
HRC, a nation LGBT equal right group, does ratings too, they give Price 100% rating, and Miller 84% rating.
It's all shades of gray when you're comparing two progressive candidates, with similar stances, and who both have experience in congress. I mean you can look at who got to the right position first, or with any position how ardently they hold it, and the websites that I've used in the past give a slight edge to Rep Price, but I'm sure there equally sites out there that would give the edge the other way. Living in the 4th, for me, a lot of it will come down to what the campaigns look like, and the issues they are willing to take public stands on in a strong way, that will determine my vote since they are pretty close overall.
I agree, Miller should run in the 13th
It's misleading to say Miller will be "forced to run against Price." You don't have to live in the Congressional district you run in. When these awful maps first came out putting Miller house in Price's fourth district, I remember Miller joking he could hit a pitching wedge from his house into the 13th, and saying that he would not primary Price. As a longtime supporter of both, I am disappointed to see him change his mind.
If the maps stand, and hope they won't, I think Miller should run in his current 13th district instead of choosing to run against Price. We shouldn't abandon tough seats like the 13th to the Tea Party. To their credit, Reps. Kissell and McIntyre realized this and decided to run in their current seats even though this sham of a map put Rep. McIntryre's house in Rep. Kissell's district.
I like this thinking
Brad could become the poster person for pushing back against rightwing over-reaching. With his following in the blogosphere, he could nationalize the election. He could thumb his nose at Tall Tale Tillis and do so on the world stage. Good vs. evil. 99% against the 1%.
A headline I'd like to see:
Miller trumps Republican gerrymandering scheme, wins over independents
best opportunity for the 13th
Yeah, I'm not an expert on the numbers in the new 13th if the GOP "plan" goes through, but with Obama running hard in the state and the GOP stepping in it both in Raleigh and in Washington, it seems like this is the best chance to actually retain that seat. And I imagine Miller is the guy to do it. I had the same frustration with the huffpo story. Why does it test the mettle of progressive fundraising when you're talking about a race between two progressives? Seems like what would really test that fundraising mettle would be to what extent progressives fight to keep Art Pope from buying Miller out of his seat in the 13th.
Brad has the mixed blessing of being a darling of the blogosphere, which leads to popular buzz that he's the more progressive. I don't think that's accurate.
The two men mostly differ in style, with each style having great value. We need them both.
Jeff Frank is right. Brad
Jeff Frank is right. Brad Miller has followed David Price's lead on many, many progressive issues and if it does come down to a choice between the two of them, the choice should be David Price.
James mentioned that the district as drawn favors Price, and it should. Although the article notes that the new 4th is about 1/3 Miller voters from the old 13th, it fails to mention that the new 4th is also about 1/3 Price voters from the old 4th - and that Price has represented about 75% of the new 4th during his career.
I too hate the idea of a matchup between these two congressmen, but if forced to choose I will choose David Price every day.
Care to register?
One of the hazards of anonymousness, is the risk of a sock puppet echo chamber. I'm not saying that's the case here, just thinking out loud.
Also, right now someone (me) has to physically approve anonymous comments (otherwise, we suffer too much spam). By registering ... even anonymously ... you get instant gratification!
How's that for a Christmas presink?
James, self gratification?
James, self gratification? Really? Thats why people comment here?
No, it would not be. A user
No, it would not be. A user name on a post neither instantly gratifies or gives any self gratification. Simple, straightforward, factual, yes, opinionated, discourse I enjoy and think is the foundation of any democracy. Snark and name calling of others who post whether anonymously or with a user name lessens the discourse and reflects badly on this or any other blog. Seems to me that good progressives no matter what cause is closest to the heart would rather direct the crap comments toward those who pass stupid hateful amendments or discuss plans and options to save a House seat for a good Congressman rather than discussing who is the better of the two ...which is exactly what the Republicans want progressives to do. But, gosh, one of your non anonymous posters thinks I am thick.
I have no idea what you're saying, anonymous or not. Indeed, it seems that all the practices you appear to be lamenting are evidenced in your own writing.
When people post anonomously...
indicates they are ashamed of their opinions. They don't want their friends and family knowing how they really feel. Anonomous posters say things on line that they would never say in person. It promotes rude behavior.
There are a number of people here who post anonymously because their jobs forbid them making public commentary under their own name. Fake's earlier comment about the value of anonymity (Benjamin Franklin, etc.) throughout history is a comment worth reading.
James you negatively raised
James you negatively raised the issue of posting anonymously. BlueNC like many blogs has its share of blog bullies. Readership and participation declines because of personal attacks by blog bullies. Not looking for a response, just sharing an opinion.
Preaching to the choir
If you had any idea the level that some will go to pursue their own personal agenda here on this site it would make your hair stand on end.
James has been cyber-stalked by more than one former blog bully (as have I), and this is after we gave these folks months (and sometimes years) to correct their behavior and deal with this community in an honest and forthright manner.
The fact that he's still patient with newcomers who exhibit many of the same tendencies as those nightmarish trolls is a testament to James' dedication to communication.
Why did I feel the need to say that? Because I know he won't say it of himself.
Wow, it really can be a
Wow, it really can be a difficult choice when you really like both candidates. It sometimes seems as if there needs to be two position so that they can just share the responsibilities.
Having a hard time deciding which candidate to vote for can really be tough if you want to know how you could avoid them or if you like both of them and want to see them both win.
Price vs Miller
Both Miller and Price are excellent candidates and one could only hope they do not have to face each other in the upcoming election. However, David Price is clearly the correct choice, as he has not only displayed a healthy evolution on certain key issues but he has amassed decades of legislative accomplishments as a progressive. It is much easier to point out a few mistakes by a candidate who has served for twenty-two years (Price) than one who has only served eight (Miller); while one may not agree with some of Price’s stances, he has proved himself a true progressive with the capability to adapt to a changing electorate. Unfortunately, Miller has not gone through decades of governing over a changing electorate and we have simply not seen how easily or if he is capable of adapting.
David and Brad
What about Brad being the younger and more energetic guy? David is a bit long in the tooth -looking old and tired nowadays. David has had a good run.
But the new NC-4 (evil Republicans!), if it stands, is so heavily favored that any progressive can win it in November. Why should we accept this inevitable conflict between these two men? Why don't we focus on getting the best progressive we can? How often do we get the chance to not worry about losing to the Republicans?
I think we need to think outside the box the Republicans have put us in and look for a third alternative -- the best possible progressive candidate we can send to Congress to fight for the 99% of us.
Who do you have in mind?
For a third Democratic candidate?
Since a Congressmen don't
Since Congessmen don't have to live in the district ,why doesn't Rep Miller just defend the 13th? I have had many dealings with both of them over the last 15years and NC needs both of them in DC.
Hold off Holding
I am new to North Carolina politics, but it sure seems obvious to me that the legislature is radically right wing in this state--and I've lived in eight states. McCrory is a nightmare--he wants to "resurrect" all the vetoes from Perdue and make sure "they become law." There's a good reason they were vetoed in the first place--they were a radical right wing "to do" list from the get go--and they need to go period.
I was just reading up on George Holding--another law and order Rudy Guiliani type who wants to "cut cut cut"--look out Washington. How many times have we heard that one--a right wing conservative comes riding into town to save society? Only--gee, he's cutting my meagre social security, he's cutting my medicare, he's cutting taxes for Wall Street bankers, etc., etc. "It was not political" when he went after Edwards and Easley, etc.