HUH?

What’s with so many SC Dems also running as “Working Families” party on the ballot? I’m sure it’s not a blip on the radars of some of you that are politically well-versed but I don’t get it. Is it a matter of being embarrassed of your own party or just a way to get one more mention on the ballot (which seems shady to me)?

“You don’t always know where you stand till you know that you won’t run away.” ~Slipknot

quote:
Originally posted by bangstick

What’s with so many SC Dems also running as “Working Families” party on the ballot? I’m sure it’s not a blip on the radars of some of you that are politically well-versed but I don’t get it. Is it a matter of being embarrassed of your own party or just a way to get one more mention on the ballot (which seems shady to me)?

“You don’t always know where you stand till you know that you won’t run away.” ~Slipknot


All of it. Jim Smith tried that deceptive crap too. They truly are desparate.

Maybe I’m over-simplifying it but it seems disingenuous and non-committal to me.

“You don’t always know where you stand till you know that you won’t run away.” ~Slipknot

This is the face of that party. No shame at all.

https://www.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■-network-culture

The dems should just speak the truth and uncloud the water. “Vote for me, I’ll get you the free ice cream and free health care all provided by the working men and women of America. You want college? Just tell em you are an Indian and don’t worry about any debt you rack up, us dems will give you debt forgiveness at the hands of the working class “.

“Oh yea, forget that we dems wanted fences and border security, we changed our minds We know we can get unlimited power when we give amnesty to the 22 million living here now. Let em all in so they’ll vote for more free stuff “

quote:
Originally posted by Fred67

The dems should just speak the truth and uncloud the water. “Vote for me, I’ll get you the free ice cream and free health care all provided by the working men and women of America. You want college? Just tell em you are an Indian and don’t worry about any debt you rack up, us dems will give you debt forgiveness at the hands of the working class “.

“Oh yea, forget that we dems wanted fences and border security, we changed our minds We know we can get unlimited power when we give amnesty to the 22 million living here now. Let em all in so they’ll vote for more free stuff “


Great summation Fred.

They’re hoping “working families” camouflages the fact that they are really democrats.

“Apathy is the Glove into Which Evil Slips It’s Hand”, but really, who cares?

Democrats have been running, and winning, on the Republican ticket, here in South Carolina for years. Hence the term RINO. Just take a look at our State Legislature. Nothing new here imho.

quote:
Originally posted by bangstick

Maybe I’m over-simplifying it but it seems disingenuous and non-committal to me.

“You don’t always know where you stand till you know that you won’t run away.” ~Slipknot


Dude, that’s their gameplan. Keep the masses confused and misinformed.


“I’m not a hundred percent in love with your tone right now…”

I believe it is just smart politics… Reality is SC is a Repub stronghold, so what do they have to lose by removing the “optics” of party division? Nothing, and that’s why they do it. I live in York county, and many Repubs don’t list their party affiliation on their street signs either…

My guess is the Repubs do the same when they are campaigning in states that are traditionally Dem strongholds…

You folks over analyze things way too much when it is pretty straight forward…

RBF

Having one candidate listed with two parties is also a way for minor parties to gain some attention and traction in voting. And if you check into it a little deeper than what happens in just South Carolina, you’d find that its done in many states and also that the donald was listed as the presidential candidate for both the Republicans and the American Independent Party in California.

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Beer Froth

You folks over analyze things way too much when it is pretty straight forward…

RBF


Why would anyone want to hide their political affiliation when running for political office? The only thing “straight forward” about this practice is it’s “straight forward” disingenuous and dishonest. I get that certain affiliations aren’t popular in certain places but it’s not always popular being an American or a white in certain walks of life either. That doesn’t mean I try to pretend to be something I’m not or I refuse to identify myself as such. Again, that would be disingenuous.

It is what it is. My question was answered.

“You don’t always know where you stand till you know that you won’t run away.” ~Slipknot

quote:
Originally posted by sea tonic

Having one candidate listed with two parties is also a way for minor parties to gain some attention and traction in voting. And if you check into it a little deeper than what happens in just South Carolina, you’d find that its done in many states and also that the donald was listed as the presidential candidate for both the Republicans and the American Independent Party in California.


So because others do it, it’s ok? On today’s ballot, the only candidates I saw listing themselves under more than one part were Democrats. Last I checked, Democrats aren’t a “minor party.” If you can’t be honest about who you are and be proud of that, maybe the problem is who you are.

“You don’t always know where you stand till you know that you won’t run away.” ~Slipknot

quote:
Originally posted by bangstick
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Beer Froth

You folks over analyze things way too much when it is pretty straight forward…

RBF


Why would anyone want to hide their political affiliation when running for political office? The only thing “straight forward” about this practice is it’s “straight forward” disingenuous and dishonest. I get that certain affiliations aren’t popular in certain places but it’s not always popular being an American or a white in certain walks of life either. That doesn’t mean I try to pretend to be something I’m not or I refuse to identify myself as such. Again, that would be disingenuous.

It is what it is. My question was answered.

“You don’t always know where you stand till you know that you won’t run away.” ~Slipknot


I disagree. There is nothing wrong with not listing your party. Do you vote party, or candidate? When in the center, the party doesn’t mean as much. The majority of Americans will vote for a candidate of either party based on what they like about the candidate, not what they like about the party. In many instances it is disingenuous to list yourself as a Repub and really be left of center and vice versa.

To be dishonest would be to list yourself as a Repub in a Repub stronghold just to garner votes… David Beasley is a great example of just that type of candidate…

RBF

I believe it is dishonest to NOT list ones party afflation when it is a clear cut fact that one is a DEM or a Republican, just to garner votes. example : Cunningham avoids using the word “Democrat” in his advertising and signs, yet when we get in the voting booth he will be listed as a Dem.

quote:
Originally posted by natureboy

I believe it is dishonest to NOT list ones party afflation when it is a clear cut fact that one is a DEM or a Republican, just to garner votes. example : Cunningham avoids using the word “Democrat” in his advertising and signs, yet when we get in the voting booth he will be listed as a Dem.


Being a Repub or a Dem doesn’t define a candidate. The spectrum of what a candidate believes can be wide and crossover to either conservative or liberal values.

Would you vote for a Repub that was pro-choice vs. a Dem that was pro-life? And yes, there are Dems that are pro-life, and Repubs that are pro-choice…

RBF

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Beer Froth
quote:
Originally posted by natureboy

I believe it is dishonest to NOT list ones party afflation when it is a clear cut fact that one is a DEM or a Republican, just to garner votes. example : Cunningham avoids using the word “Democrat” in his advertising and signs, yet when we get in the voting booth he will be listed as a Dem.


Being a Repub or a Dem doesn’t define a candidate. The spectrum of what a candidate believes can be wide and crossover to either conservative or liberal values.

Would you vote for a Repub that was pro-choice vs. a Dem that was pro-life? And yes, there are Dems that are pro-life, and Repubs that are pro-choice…

RBF


Disagree.

In national office races, the party is dominant. Huge amounts of money come into the races from the national level, both from the parties themselves, and from the associated PACs. Add to that the fact that if a new member wants to have any effect in office, they MUST obey the party leadership in order to get on committees and such. Without seniority, they have no pull. So, the parties are the dominant driving dynamic.

It is basically dishonest to know full well that you are beholden to a party and must obey that party if you win election and, at the same time, claim to moderate/independent. Worse when you realize that and design all of your glossy marketing to confuse. Genuinely and fundamentally dishonest.


17’ Henry O Hornet w/ Johnson 88 spl
26’ Palmer Scott project hull
14’ Bentz-Craft w/ Yamaha 25

You nailed it Palmer. I’m sure the DEM ATM has helped finance Cunningham. He is beholding to the party, and his campaign advertisements are dishonest.

quote:
Originally posted by PalmerScott
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Beer Froth
quote:
Originally posted by natureboy

I believe it is dishonest to NOT list ones party afflation when it is a clear cut fact that one is a DEM or a Republican, just to garner votes. example : Cunningham avoids using the word “Democrat” in his advertising and signs, yet when we get in the voting booth he will be listed as a Dem.


Being a Repub or a Dem doesn’t define a candidate. The spectrum of what a candidate believes can be wide and crossover to either conservative or liberal values.

Would you vote for a Repub that was pro-choice vs. a Dem that was pro-life? And yes, there are Dems that are pro-life, and Repubs that are pro-choice…

RBF


Disagree.

In national office races, the party is dominant. Huge amounts of money come into the races from the national level, both from the parties themselves, and from the associated PACs. Add to that the fact that if a new member wants to have any effect in office, they MUST obey the party leadership in order to get on committees and such. Without seniority, they have no pull. So, the parties are the dominant driving dynamic.

It is basically dishonest to know full well that you are beholden to a party and must obey that party if you win election and, at the same time, claim to moderate/independent. Worse when you realize that and design all of your glossy marketing to confuse. Genuinely and fundamentally dishonest.


Did ya’ vote yet RBF?