PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Democrats Skip Town Halls to Avoid Voter Rage


petegz28
06-07-2010, 08:02 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/07/us/politics/07townhall.html?hp

petegz28
06-07-2010, 08:06 PM
So now, they are afraid to take the heat from their voters????

mikey23545
06-07-2010, 08:08 PM
There is a short distance between ignoring the electorate's discontent and stifling it, and the Dems will soon have to resort to the latter...

petegz28
06-07-2010, 08:11 PM
I'm sure this will play out good for the Dems running for re-election in tough races. "I care about my voters. I care so much I wouldn't meet with them cause I don't want to take the heat for the votes I made on their behalf."

SNR
06-07-2010, 09:00 PM
WTF does Skip Towne have to do with any of this?

BucEyedPea
06-07-2010, 09:01 PM
There is a short distance between ignoring the electorate's discontent and stifling it, and the Dems will soon have to resort to the latter...

Yup, as a matter of fact the Tea Partiers may just need the ACLU. With all that power Bush gave to the Federal govt and executive branch that suspended rights, that's stuff now is going to be used on us. Because Obama isn't turning back any of it but will expand on it to come after those who admire their Founders. Look at what Lieberman, Schumer and that war mongering tarpite Graham is trying pass.

Ebolapox
06-07-2010, 09:01 PM
WTF does Skip Towne have to do with any of this?

ROFL

I was considering that EXACT post.

notorious
06-07-2010, 10:54 PM
WTF does Skip Towne have to do with any of this?

ROFL



This.


It thought that Skip was going to run for office in Tulsa. ROFL

cannon1988
06-07-2010, 11:53 PM
So now, they are afraid to take the heat from their voters????

Quite comparable to the fact that America would be better if its government would control these situations.

banyon
06-08-2010, 11:56 AM
I think in the era of 24 hour Youtube that campaign managers are reticent to allow that type of exposure, lest their candidate have a George Allen-styled "Macacca" moment.

I don't think that makes it right, though. They should be able to meet face to face with constiuents, and not just the ones at the bank like this article, or those willing to sign "loyalty oaths" like for Bush in the last election cycle.

petegz28
06-08-2010, 11:59 AM
I think in the era of 24 hour Youtube that campaign managers are reticent to allow that type of exposure, lest their candidate have a George Allen-styled "Macacca" moment.

I don't think that makes it right, though. They should be able to meet face to face with constiuents, and not just the ones at the bank like this article, or those willing to sign "loyalty oaths" like for Bush in the last election cycle.

I agree with why they don't want to do this Town Halls. That being said, that is still no excuse. When you run for office you are obligated to represent all of your constituents. Not just the ones that like you. And if you can't take the heat of pissed off voters telling you they are pissed off then step the fuck down.

banyon
06-08-2010, 12:02 PM
I agree with why they don't want to do this Town Halls. That being said, that is still no excuse. When you run for office you are obligated to represent all of your constituents. Not just the ones that like you. And if you can't take the heat of pissed off voters telling you they are pissed off then step the **** down.

Isn't that what I said?

petegz28
06-08-2010, 12:14 PM
Isn't that what I said?

Sheesh, I was agreeing with you and elaborating. Is that ok?

chris
06-08-2010, 12:28 PM
I think in the era of 24 hour Youtube that campaign managers are reticent to allow that type of exposure, lest their candidate have a George Allen-styled "Macacca" moment.

I don't think that makes it right, though. They should be able to meet face to face with constiuents, and not just the ones at the bank like this article, or those willing to sign "loyalty oaths" like for Bush in the last election cycle.

Amazing.

you and I actually agree on something. :)

Well said.

InChiefsHell
06-08-2010, 12:36 PM
Sheesh, I was agreeing with you and elaborating. Is that ok?

FWIW, it WAS a bit of a confusing reply, since you re-iterated banyon's point...

...carry on...