Alabama Primaries a week away. What do you think?

[CoffeeTiger 5,101]

So, AL primaries are a week away. The most obvious and important race is the Senate race between Mike Durant, Katie Britt, and Mo Brooks. Democrats have at the very best a 0.01% chance of winning the general election so their candidates and issues literally don't matter because whoever wins the Republican primary will be the next AL Senator. 

That said to me the choice comes down the Durant and Britt. Mo Brooks has proven himself crazy even before the whole Trump/Jan6 Fiasco. People I've talked to said they knew Mo Brooks for decades and they say he's a lot less stable and less intellectual than he used to be (i dont know if this is true). I think it's best for all of Alabama for Brooks to be retired from politics. 

Katie Britt is the "insider" backed by the business interests of AL and is the protégé of Richard Shelby, probably one of the most effective State Senators Alabama has had in it's recent history.  Biggest knows against Britt is that she IS experienced and has been in politics for awhile, which paradoxically is a big negative to a lot of people because apparently people believe that experience in government and public service is a negative, which is why our senor senator will be Tommy Tuberville who was a decent football coach and I assume is a good man, but isn't very educated on government or world/national events and is basically dead weight for our state and will likely accomplish nothing for us other then voting lock step with what the GOP leadership tells him to do. 

Katie Britt at least knows about drawing businesses and money into the state. Shell still vote a vast majority of the time with the GOP, but at the same time she should be trying to play the "game" and get additional money for businesses, infrastructure, and development funneled into Alabama for our citizens benefit. Her website also talks about her views on things that many Republicans never touch on like mental heath care. I disagree with a lot of her views socially, but I think economically she'd be the best choice for Alabama. 

 As for Mike Durant....the problem is that I don't know much about him or where he stand on the issues...and he doesn't to want to give any of that information away freely. 

Durant is primarily campaigning on the fact that he's a military veteran and was involved with the Black Hawk Down incident and that he loves Trump..and he feels that that is all anyone needs to know about him. 

Mike Durant has publicly declined to do any debates with Britt or Brooks multiple times and if you go to Mikes campaign website and click on what his "views" are the information he gives is as bare bones as you can get...and he doesn't even mention anything about Alabama or how he would help this state and everything he mentions all has to do with supporting former president Trump and stopping Democrats..along with the obligatory pro-life, pro2nd amendment lines.  

Dude has never been in politics, doesn't want to do public media appearances or debate his rivals. He doesn't want to talk about tough issues or the state of Alabama. He just wants to slide into the senate based on being a military dude and an outsider.  When we've already got someone like Tuberville we can't afford to have another dead weight senator in congress. 

 

[DKW 86 7,419]

The truly horrible thing is this:

All the Republicans are more or less the same.
Anyone that wins the REP primary is almost a dead lock to win the office.

Edited May 17, 2022 by DKW 86

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Roll Tide, Yea Alabama.

Crime, poverty, ignorance will be winners.   Status quo.

[DKW 86 7,419]

6 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Roll Tide, Yea Alabama.

Crime, poverty, ignorance will be winners.   Status quo.

By a landslide...

 

[autigeremt 6,599]

I’m voting Britt. 
 

Another one I’m voting for is Jay Hovey who is running for state senate against incumbent Tom Whatley. If I hear another add about how Tom freaking Whatley is going to fix inflation and stand against Washington DC I’m going to puke. He isn’t even trying to run on his responsibilities as AL State Senator. 

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

I'm voting for Mo Brooks in the Senate race.

He's anti-establishment. Both Katie Britt or Mike Durant will support Mitch McConnell and are basically running to be Richard Shelby 2.0.

Quote

Reports to be filed with the Federal Election Commission late Thursday will show Alabama’s Future, a super PAC that spent $3.6 million attacking Brooks, was almost entirely funded by Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) and the Senate Leadership Fund, the top super PAC dedicated to electing Republican candidates.

Alabama’s Future also spent $357,000 on advertisements meant to bolster Katie Britt, Shelby’s former chief of staff and one of the leading contenders in the race to replace the longtime senator.

Shelby and the Senate Leadership Fund contributed about $2 million each to the super PAC that aired the anti-Brooks ads.

https://thehill.com/news/campaign/3486706-top-senate-gop-pac-spent-millions-against-mo-brooks/

Edited May 18, 2022 by Auburnfan91

[DKW 86 7,419]

I have honestly taken one for the team and started listening to WVNN to and from work. 

I really cant tell if any of these Reps are any better than the others. 

I know one thing: other than my inbox, I havent heard a word from a ADP candidate. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Britt is probably the most sane of the three.

[TexasTiger 12,831]

57 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Britt is probably the most sane of the three.

Low bar, but w/o a doubt.

[PUB78 1,358]

I am not crazy about any of these three.

[PUB78 1,358]

On 5/17/2022 at 4:18 PM, CoffeeTiger said:

So, AL primaries are a week away. The most obvious and important race is the Senate race between Mike Durant, Katie Britt, and Mo Brooks. Democrats have at the very best a 0.01% chance of winning the general election so their candidates and issues literally don't matter because whoever wins the Republican primary will be the next AL Senator. 

That said to me the choice comes down the Durant and Britt. Mo Brooks has proven himself crazy even before the whole Trump/Jan6 Fiasco. People I've talked to said they knew Mo Brooks for decades and they say he's a lot less stable and less intellectual than he used to be (i dont know if this is true). I think it's best for all of Alabama for Brooks to be retired from politics. 

Katie Britt is the "insider" backed by the business interests of AL and is the protégé of Richard Shelby, probably one of the most effective State Senators Alabama has had in it's recent history.  Biggest knows against Britt is that she IS experienced and has been in politics for awhile, which paradoxically is a big negative to a lot of people because apparently people believe that experience in government and public service is a negative, which is why our senor senator will be Tommy Tuberville who was a decent football coach and I assume is a good man, but isn't very educated on government or world/national events and is basically dead weight for our state and will likely accomplish nothing for us other then voting lock step with what the GOP leadership tells him to do. 

Katie Britt at least knows about drawing businesses and money into the state. Shell still vote a vast majority of the time with the GOP, but at the same time she should be trying to play the "game" and get additional money for businesses, infrastructure, and development funneled into Alabama for our citizens benefit. Her website also talks about her views on things that many Republicans never touch on like mental heath care. I disagree with a lot of her views socially, but I think economically she'd be the best choice for Alabama. 

 As for Mike Durant....the problem is that I don't know much about him or where he stand on the issues...and he doesn't to want to give any of that information away freely. 

Durant is primarily campaigning on the fact that he's a military veteran and was involved with the Black Hawk Down incident and that he loves Trump..and he feels that that is all anyone needs to know about him. 

Mike Durant has publicly declined to do any debates with Britt or Brooks multiple times and if you go to Mikes campaign website and click on what his "views" are the information he gives is as bare bones as you can get...and he doesn't even mention anything about Alabama or how he would help this state and everything he mentions all has to do with supporting former president Trump and stopping Democrats..along with the obligatory pro-life, pro2nd amendment lines.  

Dude has never been in politics, doesn't want to do public media appearances or debate his rivals. He doesn't want to talk about tough issues or the state of Alabama. He just wants to slide into the senate based on being a military dude and an outsider.  When we've already got someone like Tuberville we can't afford to have another dead weight senator in congress. 

 

The biggest knock against Mo and Britt is that they ARE seen by many as part of the problem. They are experienced, but what has that “ experience” done for America? People want change, new ideas and cooperation.

[DKW 86 7,419]

I used to like MO a lot, but he and Britt have been in DC so many years it is not funny. They are not part of a solution, they are the Problem. 

Durant will likely win in a walk. I truly dont know if that is a good thing. I just know it is not as bad as other options.

Edited May 21, 2022 by DKW 86

[aubiefifty 16,761]

On 5/18/2022 at 7:34 PM, DKW 86 said:

I have honestly taken one for the team and started listening to WVNN to and from work. 

I really cant tell if any of these Reps are any better than the others. 

I know one thing: other than my inbox, I havent heard a word from a ADP candidate. 

i got three or four and they are all fetterman and he does not even live here.

[DKW 86 7,419]

On 5/21/2022 at 7:33 AM, DKW 86 said:

I used to like MO a lot, but he and Britt have been in DC so many years it is not funny. They are not part of a solution, they are the Problem. 

Durant will likely win in a walk. I truly dont know if that is a good thing. I just know it is not as bad as other options.

Truly Bad Stuff from radio. Durant lost badly. 

Alabama Primary Election Results 2022: Live Updates : NPR

AL Senate: Britt and Mo, two DC Insiders in a runoff. Britt is the lesser of two bad choices.

AL Governor: Memaw won by a mile.

US HOR AL-5 Strong and Wardynski in a runoff. I like CW, but Strong is more popular, well known.

Edited May 25, 2022 by DKW 86

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Glad MeMaw won without a runoff.  Lindy Blanchard is a nut.

[autigeremt 6,599]

On 5/21/2022 at 7:52 AM, aubiefifty said:

i got three or four and they are all fetterman and he does not even live here.

The Alabama Democratic Party is a mess but it's better than a few years ago (not saying much). Too much infighting amongst the internal leadership. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,101]

9 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

The Alabama Democratic Party is a mess but it's better than a few years ago (not saying much). Too much infighting amongst the internal leadership. 

Democrats in Alabama are completely dead in the water. 

Republicans in the governors race have spent $23 million on their campaigns, the 6 Democrats have spent a total of $15,000 

In the senate race the Republicans have spent $12 million, The Democrats? $35,000 

 

It's the old question of do the Democrats not have any funding because everyone knows they have no chance to win or do they have no chance to win because they have no funding? Probably a bit of both is true. 

The real election was Tuesday and will be in the Republican runoff in late June.

 

The Novembers "election" is just a sideshow in Alabama unless you live in a city and hope to get a few local democrats into city office. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

16 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Democrats in Alabama are completely dead in the water. 

Republicans in the governors race have spent $23 million on their campaigns, the 6 Democrats have spent a total of $15,000 

In the senate race the Republicans have spent $12 million, The Democrats? $35,000 

 

It's the old question of do the Democrats not have any funding because everyone knows they have no chance to win or do they have no chance to win because they have no funding? Probably a bit of both is true. 

The real election was Tuesday and will be in the Republican runoff in late June.

 

The Novembers "election" is just a sideshow in Alabama unless you live in a city and hope to get a few local democrats into city office. 

I don't think all the funding in the world would change the outcomes for the Alabama Democratic Party - so long as they insist on not adjusting to the state they are in, they will be on the outside looking in.  I know a lot of national Democrats and Democrats from blue states don't like it, but a Blue Dog (read: conservative) Democrat is the only one that has a prayer of winning in Alabama and states like it (outside of a carefully crafted House district) just like no hard core conservative Republican is going to win big state wide offices in California.  Doug Jones was an outlier and even with all of Roy Moore's troubles, Jones still barely pulled it off (49.8% to 48.4% of the vote).  Remove the scandals and Moore wins that special election in a laugher.

Right now, the ADP continues to offer up boilerplate Democrats that are basically in line with the national Democratic party on almost everything and its just pissing into the wind.

[autigeremt 6,599]

56 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Democrats in Alabama are completely dead in the water. 

Republicans in the governors race have spent $23 million on their campaigns, the 6 Democrats have spent a total of $15,000 

In the senate race the Republicans have spent $12 million, The Democrats? $35,000 

 

It's the old question of do the Democrats not have any funding because everyone knows they have no chance to win or do they have no chance to win because they have no funding? Probably a bit of both is true. 

The real election was Tuesday and will be in the Republican runoff in late June.

 

The Novembers "election" is just a sideshow in Alabama unless you live in a city and hope to get a few local democrats into city office. 

I agree. I’ve supported candidates from both sides over the years….learned a lot during that time for sure. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,101]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

I don't think all the funding in the world would change the outcomes for the Alabama Democratic Party - so long as they insist on not adjusting to the state they are in, they will be on the outside looking in.  I know a lot of national Democrats and Democrats from blue states don't like it, but a Blue Dog (read: conservative) Democrat is the only one that has a prayer of winning in Alabama and states like it (outside of a carefully crafted House district) just like no hard core conservative Republican is going to win big state wide offices in California.  Doug Jones was an outlier and even with all of Roy Moore's troubles, Jones still barely pulled it off (49.8% to 48.4% of the vote).  Remove the scandals and Moore wins that special election in a laugher.

Right now, the ADP continues to offer up boilerplate Democrats that are basically in line with the national Democratic party on almost everything and its just pissing into the wind.

 

 Outside of Sinema and Manchin, Doug Jones was the most conservative Democrat in congress. in 2018 he voted in line with Trump and Republicans 52% of the time.  

That never stopped Alabamians from classifying him as a radical, communist who opposed Trump at every turn and him getting blasted in 2020.  

 

 

Edited May 26, 2022 by CoffeeTiger

[TitanTiger 20,472]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Outside of Sinema and Manchin, Doug Jones was the most conservative Democrat in congress. in 2018 he voted in line with Trump and Republicans 52% of the time.  

That never stopped Alabamians from classifying him as a radical, communist who opposed Trump at every turn and him getting blasted in 2020. 

That may be true, but how that stat is figured matters - in other words, how much of that 52% is made up of stuff that had widespread support anyway?  And how much of it was on issues of relative minor importance when it comes to how a typical voter views how liberal or conservative a candidate is?

For instance, Doug Jones voted in favor of federal funding of abortions.  That's going to be a big red flag for most Alabama conservatives.  Same with his vote against a late-term abortion ban and opposing parental notification laws for minors seeking an abortion.  I believe he also expressed a view in favor of transgender people being allowed to use the bathroom of their chosen gender identity

My point isn't to argue with you about whether you like or dislike his stances on such issues.  It's simply to point out that there are issues like this where Jones was clearly out of step with his constituents.  I imagine if you dig deeper into some of those social views, you'd find that other dominoes fall as well.  The fact that he's not as liberal on some fiscal issues as say, a senator from Illinois or New York isn't relevant when the flashpoints right now heavily lean into social issues no matter what state you're in.  An admittedly oversimplified profile is that he's a fiscal moderate to conservative and a social moderate to liberal in a state where that's just a non-starter.  And he's probably the only candidate in recent memory the ADP has offered up that was even in the realm of possibility.

I'd be interested to see what a Democrat in Alabama who was solidly pro-life, solidly for religious freedom and conscience rights, but in favor of things like Medicaid expansion, paid parental leave, expanded social safety nets for children and pregnant women, and affordable/subsidized childcare would do.  Maybe he or she would still lose in most cases.  But it feels like they'd have a puncher's chance.  The candidates the ADP mostly chooses now are like they aren't even trying.

[TexasTiger 12,831]

4 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

That may be true, but how that stat is figured matters - in other words, how much of that 52% is made up of stuff that had widespread support anyway?  And how much of it was on issues of relative minor importance when it comes to how a typical voter views how liberal or conservative a candidate is?

For instance, Doug Jones voted in favor of federal funding of abortions.  That's going to be a big red flag for most Alabama conservatives.  Same with his vote against a late-term abortion ban and opposing parental notification laws for minors seeking an abortion.  I believe he also expressed a view in favor of transgender people being allowed to use the bathroom of their chosen gender identity

My point isn't to argue with you about whether you like or dislike his stances on such issues.  It's simply to point out that there are issues like this where Jones was clearly out of step with his constituents.  I imagine if you dig deeper into some of those social views, you'd find that other dominoes fall as well.  The fact that he's not as liberal on some fiscal issues as say, a senator from Illinois or New York isn't relevant when the flashpoints right now heavily lean into social issues no matter what state you're in.  An admittedly oversimplified profile is that he's a fiscal moderate to conservative and a social moderate to liberal in a state where that's just a non-starter.  And he's probably the only candidate in recent memory the ADP has offered up that was even in the realm of possibility.

I'd be interested to see what a Democrat in Alabama who was solidly pro-life, solidly for religious freedom and conscience rights, but in favor of things like Medicaid expansion, paid parental leave, expanded social safety nets for children and pregnant women, and affordable/subsidized childcare would do.  Maybe he or she would still lose in most cases.  But it feels like they'd have a puncher's chance.  The candidates the ADP mostly chooses now are like they aren't even trying.

How do you define “solidly pro-life” because I’m seeing more Republicans taking a no exceptions approach?

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Also of note, Jones over his entire time in the Senate actually voted with Trump/GOP far less than many Democrats besides Sinema and Manchin.  He voted with Trump 35.3% of the time.  That's far less than Heitkamp (ND) at 54.8%, Donnelly (IN) 54.2%, Sinema and Manchin (50.4%) or McCaskill (45.8%).  And he was within spitting distance of multiple Democrats who hail from solidly blue states like Carper (DE) 29.5%, Coons (DE) 28.9% and Klobuchar (MN) 26.7%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/

Again, I'm not saying he was always wrong to oppose Trump.  God knows I have on many things.  But if you're going to run as a Democrat in a state as red as Alabama is, you'd think it would be closer to even.

[TexasTiger 12,831]

6 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Also of note, Jones over his entire time in the Senate actually voted with Trump/GOP far less than many Democrats besides Sinema and Manchin.  He voted with Trump 35.3% of the time.  That's far less than Heitkamp (ND) at 54.8%, Donnelly (IN) 54.2%, Sinema and Manchin (50.4%) or McCaskill (45.8%).  And he was within spitting distance of multiple Democrats who hail from solidly blue states like Carper (DE) 29.5%, Coons (DE) 28.9% and Klobuchar (MN) 26.7%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/

Again, I'm not saying he was always wrong to oppose Trump.  God knows I have on many things.  But if you're going to run as a Democrat in a state as red as Alabama is, you'd think it would be closer to even.

He was obviously more comfortable being a one-termer on his own terms, but he didn’t even really try to persuade the Unpersuaded .

[TitanTiger 20,472]

20 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

How do you define “solidly pro-life” because I’m seeing more Republicans taking a no exceptions approach?

Not that.

I would say in general that most pro-life voters are would say that you oppose abortion in that you believe Roe should be overturned, oppose federal funding of abortions and keeping the Hyde Amendment, and that your exceptions would be limited to things like the life of the mother and perhaps rape and incest and that you would vote to confirm ostensibly pro-life judges.  You would also be in favor of parental notification laws and against transporting minors across state lines to procure abortions.  That would convey to most voters for whom abortion is a critical issue that you are in line with mainstream pro-life views. 

Now, these do not adequately cover my views and the views of a small but increasing number of pro-life people as I think that there's more to being pro-life than the things you oppose or want to make illegal.  I think if your main goal is to save as many unborn lives as possible and for them and their families to thrive, you'll advocate for some of the things I mentioned earlier as well.  All our concern can't end once the child is born.  But I'm just putting out there the kinds of markers the majority of pro-life voters are looking at to get a read on what a candidates real views and likely voting record will be.