Do Blue Dogs Do More Harm Or More Good To The Democratic Party? Meet Abigail Spanberger

Spanberger won her seat without Republican votes but now she caters almost exclusively to GOP voters

Virginia elected two freshmen from red districts, Elaine Luria, who replaced Scott Taylor in VA-02 (primarily Virginia Beach, York County and part of Norfolk plus Hampton) and Abigail Spanberger, who replaced Dave Brat in VA-07, a much redder district that includes 10 counties, the largest of them being Chesterfield, Henrico, Spotsylvania and Culpepper. Luria's district has a PVI of R+3 and Spanberger's is a much more challenging R+6. Obama lost both districts both times he ran. Trump won VA-02 48.8% to 45.4% and VA-07 50.5% to 44.0%. These were the congressional results:

In both cases, the Democrats outspent their GOP rivals-- in Spanberger's case by about double-- and both were tough, hard-fought races. Today, both districts are being heavily targeted by the NRCC for blue to red flips. They are trying to get Taylor to challenge Luria to a rematch and there are half a dozen Republican candidates lining up to challenge Spanberger, three of whom are very credible, a state senator and two state delegates, all military vets like Spanberger.

Although both freshmen have earned "F" ratings from ProgressivePunch, neither has a Democratic primary opponent, at least not so far. There are 5 very conservative Democrats tied for the 193rd among 235 Dems in the House. Each has a rotten score of 64.29%-- besides Luria and Spanberger, Angie Craig (New Dem-MN), Max Rose (Blue Dog-NY) and Mikie Sherrill (Blue Dog-NJ). Despite Cheri Bustos' bullshit about "protecting freshmen" with her ugly anti-primary rule, none of these particularly bad freshmen has a primary opponent.

Back to Luria and Spanberger, both seem to have made the decision that it's more important to protect their careers than to embrace Democratic values and ideals. Aside from their crappy voting records, neither has co-sponsored Pramila Jayapal's Medicare-For-All Act, AOC's Green New Deal Resolution, nor John Larson's Social Security 2100 Act (which is sponsored by 206 Democrats so far). Do Luria and Spanberger think their constituents don't want to see Social Security protected? Republicans aren't going to vote for either of them in 2020. Their paths to reelection are all about encouraging a big Democratic turnout and appealing to independent voters (not Republican voters). Their time in Congress so far will deflate Democratic base turnout, not inflate it.

Not everyone agrees. In a p.r.-agency-generated paean to Spanberger, Her Party Is Liberal. Her District Is Conservative. Moderate Democrat Fights To Survive In The Middle, the Washington Post's Jenna Portnoy, came up with every excuse in the book for protecting a faux-Democrat from the Republican-wing of the party, despite her atrocious record. Within her first week in Congress, Spanberger has already "informed the leadership that demonizing the border wall was not the way to keep control of the House. 'Listen, in my district I am hearing, Build a wall! In my district we are losing the messaging that Democrats can be strong on borders,' said the 39-year-old from the Richmond, Va. suburbs, according to the congresswoman and others who were there. It was a critical moment for Spanberger, one of dozens of new Democratic lawmakers from red districts who helped their party seize control of the House last year. These members will have to win reelection if the party is to hold the chamber in 2020."

"These members will have to win reelection if the party is to hold the chamber in 2020." Never These members will have to persuade voters in their districts that building a wall is bad policy and there's a better way to achieve what they want. That's always too difficult for the Democratic Party to articulate these days. Instead we get this canned, subversive drivel:

They face a double challenge: Not only do they have to strike a balance between loyalty to the Democratic Party and fidelity to their more conservative districts, but they also have to fight the leftward tug of progressives who want universal health care, impeachment of President Trump and a Green New Deal.

Spanberger and the other moderates must find ways to separate themselves from a freshman class defined by lawmakers such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY) and Rashida Tlaib (MI), proud members of the Democratic Socialists of America.

“It’s a tough tightrope act [Spanberger] has to perform,” said Mark Rozell, dean of the Schar School of Public Policy and Government at George Mason University. “She has to stay politically centered as much as possible, given the nature of her district, while at the same time work effectively with her party leadership who are pushing a more progressive agenda.”

Yes, "politically centered." Who defines that? Who determines which policy prescriptions are part of the "center?" Trump and McTurtle? The financiers who own and operate the GOP, the Blue Dogs, the New Dems and No Labels/Problem Solvers? Certainly, never the timid, self-loathing, geriatric Democratic Party leaders. Count on that. "As she fights the pull of the progressives," continued Portoy, "and learns her way around Congress, Spanberger already faces a Republican opponent -- Tina Ramirez, a Hispanic single mother and activist in the cause of religious freedom." There's another term a hack journalist is happy to throw around without thought in the world about what it means-- "religious freedom?" Freedom to what? Discriminate against gays? Is that what it comes down to today?

That puts Spanberger on an immediate campaign footing, just six months after she beat Rep. Dave Brat (R) in Virginia’s 7th Congressional District by emphasizing her national security background, independence and civility.

In her first weeks in office, she visited the White House with Democratic and Republican members of the Problem Solvers Caucus to discuss ending the government shutdown that had begun in December. She signed on to letters and legislation spearheaded by Republicans. She voted against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA), whom Brat and other Republicans frequently invoked during the 2018 campaign as embodying a liberal elite.

Still, some Republican voters remain wary.

Who the fuck cares about Republicans being wary? Her path to reelection is through independents not Republicans. Is that too hard a concept to grasp? No Democrat, no matter how far to the right ever satisfies Republicans. They will label her Spanberger a socialist no matter what she does. Needless to say, the idiot reporter interviewed hard core Republicans. Paul Johnson voted for Brat. Does someone expect him to switch to Spanberger now? He told Portnoy that Spanberger "portrayed herself as somewhat independent-- I don’t have the impression she is exactly what she has sold herself as. He was pissed off that she voted for H.R. 1, "legislation containing measures including restricting partisan gerrymandering, creating automatic voter registration, making Election Day a federal holiday and requiring super PACs to disclose donors." Johnson asserts that that means she was "siding with Nancy Pelosi, taking some of these extreme positions, taking rights away from the states." If Spanberger wants his votes, there's exactly one way to get it-- jump the fence like so many Blue Dogs have done in the past, and join the GOP. Another superfluous Brat supporter Portnoy dug up said "he would consider voting for Spanberger if she upheld 'Virginia conservative values.'" She has done exactly that, but Republicans will still spend immense amounts of money telling Republican voters that she's a socialist and in a lesbian/Muslim relationship with Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.

At times, she has supported Republican-led amendments, to the chagrin of Democrats, as when she and 26 other moderate [ah... that word hack DC journos love to use to describe the far right of the Democratic Party] Democrats helped Republicans amend a bill to expand federal background checks for gun purchases. They added a provision that says U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement must be notified when an undocumented immigrant seeks to purchase a firearm.

“It’s incumbent on all of us to give her the room she needs to do the art of the possible for her district,” Rep. Don Beyer (New Dem-VA) said.

Loosely quoting Pelosi, he said, “We didn’t take back the House winning blue seats.”

Spanberger wants to position herself as a pragmatist, compromising to effect change gradually.

“If we are just driven by ideology, we will achieve nothing for the people who actually need it,” she said during an interview interrupted by well-wishers at a coffee shop in her district.

She pointed to Brat, the Republican she defeated, noting his membership in the conservative House Freedom Caucus, which she said repeatedly sabotaged efforts at compromise when Republicans controlled the House.

Brat’s hard-line approach, combined with his cool relations with supporters of former House majority leader Eric Cantor, whom he defeated in a nasty 2014 GOP primary, made his last term rocky. His relationships with Democrats were toxic, especially after he complained that “the women are in my grill no matter where I go” in part because he refused to hold town halls after Trump’s election. When he finally relented, he faced angry crowds.

Spanberger, on the other hand, has held five subdued town halls in her first four months.

During the campaign, she bonded with other first-time candidates with similar national security backgrounds. The nine new lawmakers with security backgrounds coordinated their choices in the office lottery so that they work near one another.

The women in the group are particularly close and text one another often. They are Democratic Reps. Elissa Slotkin (Mich.), who worked at the CIA; Chrissy Houlahan (PA), an Air Force veteran; Elaine Luria (Va.), a retired Navy commander; and Mikie Sherrill (NJ), a former Navy helicopter pilot and federal prosecutor. They all flipped red seats to blue and understand the delicate politics of swing districts.

Call them what you like, they may have been war heroes (or not), to me they are political cowards unwilling to stand up for the progressive values that differentiate the Democratic Party from the Republican Party. "We come from places where different ideologies live side by side," Houlahan said, "and we have a real responsibility to legislate that way. I feel like the narrative is that the Democratic Party has been hijacked by the left." And, yes, yes, of course Houlahan has also earned an "F" from ProgressivePunch for her putrid voting record. The House Democratic Party leadership wanted exactly this when they went out and recruited women who were conservative-leaning military vets.

To Spanberger, the liberal goal of transforming the complicated health-care system into a single government-financed program simply is not realistic. She cited the Affordable Care Act, still the subject of GOP ire a decade after it became law, as evidence that muscling legislation through can backfire.

Instead, she thinks small steps can make health care more affordable: Allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices, insist on transparency from pharmacy benefit managers, and ease the passage of generic drugs into the market. She is one of nine co-sponsors of the House version of Medicare-X, a plan from Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine (VA) and Michael F. Bennet (CO) that would allow all Americans to buy into public health insurance.

Spanberger also opposes the Green New Deal, a broad set of goals to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. “What’s really challenging is it’s been presented to the American people as if it’s policy,” she said. “There are literally people who think if we were to vote on this tomorrow, we could save our planet.”

Spanberger, who leads the House agriculture subcommittee on conservation and forestry-- a rare honor for a freshman and in a field she said remains a mystery to her-- is studying how climate change affects farmers.

Environmental activists in her district seem unfazed by her opposition to the Green New Deal.

Lee Francis, deputy director at the Virginia League of Conservation Voters, said he appreciates her opposition to offshore drilling and her desire that the United States rejoin the Paris climate agreement. (Spanberger also announced that she recently had solar panels installed on her home.)

“Democracy is slow,” Francis said. “That’s just the nature of the beast.”

Spanberger had not seriously considered running for public office until a friend and former CIA colleague, Charlotte McWilliams, sent her a link to Emerge America, a program that trains female candidates.

The experts encouraged her to run for school board, but Spanberger followed her instinct to aim higher.

In a recommendation letter that McWilliams wrote to Emerge about Spanberger, she said their CIA training was “designed to be a pressure cooker” and that “Abby never lost her cool.”

Spanberger served undercover for her entire career in the CIA, where she worked on counterterrorism and nuclear proliferation. She and McWilliams each had three children in their CIA years.

...She said she’s also working to gain the trust of Republicans in Congress, using some of the skills that she honed at the CIA.

First, she looks for a connection. She’ll sometimes enter the House floor through the GOP section, which allows her to stop and chat with members of the other party. If they’re from rural communities, she tries to connect over common issues, such as the scarcity of broadband Internet service.

But for every Republican she wins over, more hope to unseat her.

In addition to Ramirez, GOP observers name state lawmakers Nicholas J. Freitas (Culpeper), John McGuire (Henrico) and Bryce E. Reeves (Spotsylvania) as potential challengers.

National Republican groups are painting Spanberger as no different from Ocasio-Cortez.

“She’ll find out the hard way that there are two teams,” Corry Bliss, a Republican strategist and former executive director of the Congressional Leadership Fund, said of Spanberger. “There aren’t three teams. Even voting with her team 90 percent of the time may not be good enough to get reelected.”

The Congressional Map Keeps Expanding For Democrats-- Take Dave Brat's Central Virginia District

On Sunday, DWT went out on a limb-- not just making a random prediction about how many seats would flip red to blue but doing what so few pundits ever do-- predicting which seats would flip. It's the most optimistic view you've ever seen, partially because we follow the races on a granular level and partially because we picked up earlier than most that the determining issue for voters when they cast their ballots in a month would be what George Mason University's School of Policy and Government poll found this week as their #1 issue: Trump.

The strength of Trump as a determinant-- at least in 69 seats the pollsters foresee as battleground districts-- isn't reflected in the poll, just that he's more important to a plurality of voters than the economy, the Supreme Court, health care, immigration, Putin-Gate, gun violence, tariffs or anything else. Why is this very bad for the GOP? Trump's job approval/disapproval among likely voters this weekend was a daunting 40/53%. And among Independents it is 38/53%. That's a GOP doomsday scenario.

First thing Monday, Reuters sent out a piece by James Oliphant, State Of Play: Republicans fear Democratic 'blue wave' spreading to once-safe districts. The district he focused in on is in central Virginia-- Dave Brat's sprawling 7th district. Most of the voters live in the Richmond area, which doesn't seem very swingy at all. The PVI is R+6 and Trump beat Hillary there 50.5% to 44.0%. (It's worth noting that Hillary did about the same as Obama but that Trump did significantly worse than both McCain and Romney.) This cycle, Brat is being challenged by conservative Democrat and an ex-CIA agent Abigail Spanberger. As you see, the 538 Forecaster gives her just a 1 in 3 shot (32.3% chance) of ousting Brat. That's a very, very conservative view of the unfolding race.

As of the June 30 FEC reporting deadline they had both raised about the same amount of money-- $1,347,694 for Spanberger and $1,319,825 for Brat. It barely matters in a wave election and in an election where most voters will have Trump on their minds when they cast their ballots.

Oliphant picked up on the Trumpiness of the election. He starts by talking about two local women, one a Republican and one brainless enough to have not bothered to even vote in 2016. This time they both agree on one thing: "Donald Trump. They don’t like the president, and they weren’t about to vote for anyone, like Brat, who supports him."

Voters such as Sneed and Lesser are a significant reason why Democrats now believe that in the Nov. 6 congressional midterm elections, the party can win more than the 23 seats they need to seize control of the U.S. House of Representatives. Some predict Democrats could take as many as 40 seats by flipping districts like Brat’s in Virginia.

Earlier this year, Brat’s seat was considered safe. But if a so-called “blue wave” materializes, it would roll through a district like his, which includes pockets of suburban voters who increasingly have been turning away from Republicans.

“Republicans are playing defense in more and more places,” said Doug Heye, a former official at the Republican National Committee. “The Democrats’ map continues to get bigger. The Republicans’ map continues to get smaller. That’s a real problem.”

Democrats have poured resources not only into Brat’s district, but others that have come onto their battleground list, in places such as Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Southern California and other parts of Virginia such as the district currently represented by Republican Scott Taylor.

...The firestorm over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, who was accused of sexual assault while in high school, came at a perilous moment for Brat, given his already difficult reputation with some women voters.

Trump has played a part. Both Sneed and Lesser were angry that he chose to attack Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, at a rally last week.

“It was disgusting,” Lesser said.

...A 39-year-old former officer for the Central Intelligence Agency, Spanberger looks like she could be the face of the Resistance, the woman-driven protest movement against Trump.

But she has been careful to not alienate the independent and moderate voters she needs to win the district. At the Spotsylvania event, she didn’t mention Trump, Brat or Kavanaugh, focusing on domestic-policy issues such as healthcare and education.

Asked for her position on Kavanaugh’s nomination, her campaign declined to comment.

Instead, Spanberger touched on the thing that attracted voters such as Meg Sneed to her: turning down the volume in the civic discourse.

“We’ve reached a place where we need to restore a level of civility to our conversations,” she told the crowd.

Tom Davis, a former Republican congressman from Virginia, said it remains Brat’s race to win, and that Kavanaugh may be the issue that pulls him over the finish line.

“It’s still a southern district,” Davis said. “There’s nothing like a good fight to keep your base in line.”

Spanberger is counting on her base to stick with her because they hate Trump and Trump rubber-stamps like Brat. She's offering them nothing much at all and couldn't even come out against Kavanaugh. If the ant-red wave is big enough, garbage like Brat will be swept out and garbage like Spanberger will be swept in. If she wins she'll be a waste of a congressional seat-- something you'd expect from some idiot campaigning on "turning down the volume"-- and will be defeated in the anti-blue wave of 2022. Thanks for nothing, DCCC. And forget any of this stuff... The Dems will be the Scrooge Party of PAYGO.

UPDATE: More Democrats Running

Over the weekend, Ballot Access News reported that Democrats have a candidate in 87.9% of the legislative contests. This is a big increase for the Democratic Party. In 2016, it had candidates in 79.4% of the races... The Republican Party also has more candidates up for legislative seats this year than in 2016. This year, Republican are in 79.2%. In 2016, 78.8%... Only four state units of the major parties have candidates in fewer than half the districts: the Republican Parties of Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island; and the Democratic Party of Wyoming. If you don't show up, you can't win, no matter what happens.

Yesterday's Polls Today

Not sure what it refers to, but it looks good

The NY Times/Siena poll showed good news for one of the Blue America candidates. They had Katie Porter with a substantial lead over Trump rubber stamp Mimi Walters, 48% to 43%. Unfortunately, the Times/Siena poll is the least credible polling operation I've seen since Rasumussen and their data is virtually worthless. Still... the good news is that Porter is gaining ground on Walters. In fact, the FiveThirtyEight forecaster shows her with a 69.7% chance to win as opposed to Walters' 30.3% chance. You can support Katie Porter's grassroots efforts here-- as Ryan's toxic SuperPAC continues to smear her with tons of Adelson money.

PPP polled a couple of Texas congressional districts (TX-07, where Trump's net approval is minus 3, and TX-32, where Trump's net approval is down a stupendous minus 10) and found Colin Allred (D) leading Rep. Peter Sessions in the North Dallas area 47-42%, and Lizzie Fletcher (D) leading Rep. John Culberson in the west Houston area 47-45%.

Yesterday's most important and biggest polling dump came from Ipsos via Reuters. Michigan, for example, looks so good at the top of the ticket (governor and Senate) that the Democrats are talking about seriously putting more congressional seats into play. Democratic incumbent Senato Debbie Stabenow is leading Republican challenger John James by 20 points (which is not unexpected), while the open gubernatorial chair was expected to be closer than how its turning out. Gretchen Whitmer (D) is rolling over Trumpist state Attorney General Bill Schuette by 13 points.

Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have similar situations, while Ohio, which is more Republican-oriented, still shows Sherrod Brown way ahead (11 points) of self-funding multimillionaire Jim Renacci and the gubernatorial race a dead heat between Richard Cordray (D) and Mike DeWine (R). Brown has raised $23,165,903 while Renacci has struggled raising anything. He wrote himself a check for $4,000,000 to bring his total to just $6,190,352. The Republican Party has pretty much given up on him and there is no outside IE money coming in on his behalf. McConnell's SuperPAC, for example, spent $14,400 and the NRSC spent zero.

In Pennsylvania, incumbent Governor Tom Wolf (D) has a 17 point lead over Republican Scott Wagner and incumbent Democratic Senator Bob Casey is leading GOP Rep. Lou Barletta (another Trumpist) by a hefty 16 points. Again, the finances are very bad for the GOP. Casey has raised $18,280,829 to Barletta's $4,044,469 and there is no significant outside money in the race, indicating, again, that the GOP has given up on Barletta. The NRSC and McConnell's SuperPAC combined have spent a grand total of ZERO in Pennsylvania. This is going to be very good down-ticket of course and, in fact, another poll released yesterday (just NYTimes/Siena, unfortunately) shows Democrat Susan Wild leading Marty Nothstein (R) 50-42% in the open 7th district.

Wisconsin looks good too. Governor Scott Walker trails Democratic state schools superintendent Tony Evers by 7 points and Senate incumbent Tammy Baldwin (D) leads Republican Leah Vukmir by a healthy 52% to 39%. Baldwin has raised $22,616,357 to Vukmir's $2,002,657. So far Republican PACs have ignored Vukmir's plight and are not spending in the state. The other day Baldwin was down in WI-01 campaigning with Randy Bryce in Paul Ryan's old congressional district, where the Republicans have already poured in $1.8 million-- in a vicious personal smear campaign against Bryce, totally unanswered by the DCCC, which has never liked his independence or the fact that he's a working class guy who doesn't wear suits and had the temerity to show up at the DCCC building in work boots, frightening Dan Sena and Ben Ray Lujan, and has a grassroots following suspicious of the DCCC. (Please consider helping Randy keep up here.)

Among other Ipsos findings, polling in Indiana shows Senator Joe Donnelly (D) slightly ahead of Trumpist Mike Braun, 48% to 43% in a very red state. Donnelly has raised $11,495,629 to Braun's $8,258,437, most of which was used up in a vicious, expensive primary. As of the June 30 FEC reporting deadline, Donnelly had $6,391,931 on hand to Braun's $1,071,454. It's worth noting that Braun wrote himself several checks amounting to $6,241,377, but it is unclear if he will continue spending his own money, on a campaign that has not caught fire, at that rate now. Outside spending is intense. The DSCC has already spent $1,508,227, Schumer's PAC kicked in $9,057,627 and two other Democratic Party PACs have spent $1,937,089 and $1,913,433. McConnell's PAC has thrown in $3,937,662 but the NRSC has only put in $801,863 so far.

Ipsos also polled Arizona, where Blue Dog congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema leads Republican congresswoman Martha McSally 47-44% in a pure lesser-of-two-evils race. As of the August 8th FEC reporting deadline, Sinema had $2,468,252 on hand to McSally's $1,906,974. Outside spending dwarfs candidate spending. The Republicans have already spent $5,090,954 attacking Sinema (calling her a liberal, despite a voting record that shows she's nearly as conservative as McSally) and the DSCC has spent $418,499 while 3 other Democratic PACs have come after McSally with $2,397,413, $1,727,286 and $1,090,947 (Planned Parenthood).

The Ipsos polling shows Beto O'Rourke (D) leading Ted Cruz (R) in Texas within the margin of error-- 47% to 45% and Nevada's Republican Senate incumbent Dean Heller holding on against mulltimillionaire conservative Democrat Jack Rosen with 46% to her 43% (also within the margin of error. Rosen has refused to put any of her own substantial fortune into the race and Heller has outraised her $10,677,374 to $9,238,490. He has $5,874,814 left and she still has $3,828,593. Outside spending is gargantuan-- $10,093,116 attacking Heller and $5,423,033 attacking Rosen. The open seat Nevada gubernatorial race is also within the margin of error, Laxalt 43% and Sisolak 40%.

Other polls from yesterday includes one the L.A. Times released by USC that shows Democrats leading Republicans in a generic ballot test, 55% to 41%-- with likely voters disapproving of Trump’s overall performance in office by 57% to 39%. And then there was a late afternoon Quinnipiac poll of Florida, with really good news: as neo-fascist Ron DeSantis continues to fall apart, Andrew Gillum now leads him 54% to 45% among likely voters. How's that for some good tidings from the Sunshine State? Gillum continues to blanket the TV airwaves with ads but the more people see them, the more they dislike him.

And just for the fun of it, let me end today with a brief look at VA-07, the district where Tea Party extremist Dave Brat beat Eric Cantor. It looks like a former spy and current Blue Dog, Abigail Spanberger, could beat him. It's a district with a PVI of R+6, where Obama lost both times and where Trump beat Hillary 50.5% to 44.0%. Monmouth's poll shows Spanberger beating Brat 47-42% among registered voters who have voted at least once since 2010. Deep dive:

Spanberger holds a sizable advantage in the Richmond suburbs of Henrico County (58% to 30% for Brat) and Chesterfield County (50% to 35%)-- areas that supported Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 after voting for Mitt Romney in 2012. Brat holds a 57% to 35% lead over Spanberger in the remaining part of the district. This area, which runs from Culpeper to Nottoway County, actually gave Donald Trump a bigger margin of support in 2016 than it did for Romney four years earlier. Overall, voters in Virginia’s 7th district supported Romney for president by 11 points in 2012 and Trump by just over 6 points in 2016. Brat won re-election to his House seat by 15 points two years ago.

“This is a tale of two districts. The Richmond suburbs that backed Clinton in 2016 support Spanberger while the Trump strongholds are firmly behind Brat. The reason this race is so close right now is because there are more voters in the suburban areas,” said Murray.

Brat holds a very large lead over Spanberger among white voters without a college degree (61% to 31%). This is offset by Spanberger’s advantage among college educated white voters (52% to 42%) and non-white voters regardless of education (68% to 9%). Just over half of all voters (56%) have a lot of interest in the election, which includes 63% of Spanberger supporters and 62% of Brat supporters.

The district is currently divided on which party they want in charge of Congress, with 39% of VA-07 voters saying they prefer to see GOP control and 37% saying they want the Democrats to take over. Another 20% say that party control of Congress does not matter to them. Spanberger does better than Brat in winning over partisan converts.  The poll finds that 83% of self-identified Republicans support Brat, but 13% say they will cross party lines to vote for Spanberger. The Democratic candidate, on the other hand, holds onto 91% of her fellow partisans while losing none to Brat.  Independent voters are divided at 45% for Spanberger and 36% for Brat.

“Some Republican voters who are lukewarm on Brat feel comfortable enough with Spanberger to give her their support, at least for now,” said Murray.

Spanberger, a former CIA officer, gets a positive rating of 43% favorable and 19% unfavorable from VA-07 voters, with 39% having no opinion. Views of Brat are more mixed at 35% favorable and 27% unfavorable, with 37% having no opinion. The incumbent entered Congress after upsetting former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the 2014 Republican primary.

Overall, 47% of VA-07 voters approve of the job Trump is doing as president while a similar 46% disapprove, although those who strongly disapprove (40%) slightly outnumber those who strongly approve (33%). The poll finds that 61% of potential voters say it is very important for them to cast a vote for Congress that shows how they feel about the president-- with Trump opponents (70%) being somewhat more likely than Trump supporters (64%) to feel this way.

Currently, 27% of voters say Brat has been too supportive of the president, while 39% say he has offered the right amount of support and 8% say he has not been supportive enough. Another 26% have no opinion. As a point of comparison, a similar number of voters (25%) worry that Spanberger will be too supportive of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi if she is elected to Congress, while 40% say she will offer the right amount of support and 9% say she will offer too little support. Another 26% have no opinion.

When asked to choose the top issue in their vote for Congress from a list of six policy areas, 30% of VA-07 voters pick health care. This is followed by immigration (17%), gun control (13%), tax policy (13%), job creation (12%), and abortion (7%).  Voters are divided on whether they approve (42%) or disapprove (39%) of the tax reform plan passed by Congress last year.

Spanberger has a slight advantage on handling voters’ top concern of health care, with 37% saying they trust the Democrat more to keep health care affordable compared to 32% who say they trust Brat more on this issue. Another 18% say they trust both candidates equally. On handling the issue of illegal immigration, 36% say they trust Brat more, 34% say they trust Spanberger more, and 18% say they trust both candidates equally.

Going Down by Nancy Ohanian

The End Of The Road For Dave Brat?

The Democratic establishment was happy, happy in far right extremist Dave Brat's 7th congressional district in Virginia. There was a fairly evenly matched race between two moderates-- at DWT, when we use the word "moderate," we mean moderate, not conservative the way the Beltway media uses it. Both Democrats, ex-CIA agent Abigail Spanberger and marine Daniel Ward, raised around $900,000, just as Brat had. Not counting very small policy nuances most voters would never pick up on, the main difference between Spanberger and Ward was gender. Both had worked in the Obama administration. And the woman CIA officer beat the male marine. Neither looked like a Randy Bryce or Alexandria Ocasio to me. On the other hand, neither is a Jeff Van Drew or Kyrsten Sinema either. Like I said, both are moderates. Spanberger knocked Ward out solidly-- 33,198 (72.65%) to 12,495 (27.35%).

The district, which has an R+6 PVI, stretches from the Culpeper area through Orange County and most of Spotsylvania County down to Nottoway County, with big populations of voters in Chesterfield and Henrico counties in the Richmond suburbs. Trump beat Hillary there 50.5% to 44.0%. McCain and Romney both did better than Trump and Obama did about the same as Hillary.

In the 2014 Republican primary, Brat came out of nowhere-- actually came out of a cohesive, well-organized grassroots effort that shocked the establishment-- to beat Eric Cantor 36,110 (55.5%) to 28,898 (44.5%). Democrat Jack Trammell took Brat on in the general-- and was destroyed-- 60.8% to 36.9%. Democrat Eileen Bedell did better in 2016-- taking 42.2% to Brat's 57.5%. November, though, may be the time for the Democrats to flip the seat. Though Brat, reported the Chesterfield Observer 2 weeks ago, "still stands a good chance of winning the Republican leaning 7th, political analysts say the district is in play like never before. And as national politics continue to dominate the headlines, Democrats hope to pin some of President Donald Trump’s more unpopular policies to the congressman’s back."

Democrats aren’t alone in their belief that Brat can be toppled in November. Geoffrey Skelley, a political analyst with the University of Virginia, says that while the 7th still leans Republican, it’s lost its deep red tint over the years. The GOP’s shrinking margin of victory in recent elections seems to reflect this.

In 2012, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney won the district by a comfortable 16 points; in 2016, Brat defeated Democratic challenger Eileen Bedell by 15 points, and Trump won by 8 points. In last year’s gubernatorial race, Republican Ed Gillespie beat Democrat Ralph Northam by 4 points in the 7th District.

With so many of the Trump administration’s actions dominating the headlines – such as the recent revelation that the Department of Homeland Security is separating immigrant children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border and holding them in mass detention centers-- Skelley says the race may be a referendum on the president and his party.

“The 7th District could be a very competitive district in the fall,” he says.

...Skelley says Brat may no longer be a good fit for the district. While portions of the 7th remain rural and heavily red, the voter-rich suburbs of Chesterfield and Henrico are more moderate, and Brat simply may be too conservative for them. On the issues, Skelley says the economy ranks No. 1 with most voters. The economy is currently strong, but Skelley says there’s mixed information about how much a good economy helps an incumbent candidate like Brat. The next biggest issue is health care, on which Brat and Spanberger are starkly opposed: Spanberger wants to strengthen the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare; Brat wants it repealed. Immigration-- another issue Brat has been vocal about-- could also play into the election.

Corey Stewart’s nomination as the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate could also have a big impact on the 7th. Stewart, chair of Prince William County’s Board of Supervisors, has already come out swinging, saying he wants to “kick Tim Kaine’s teeth in.” Kaine has criticized Stewart for having both praised and been endorsed by individuals who espouse white nationalism. Skelley says the Republican leadership isn’t happy about the choice of Stewart, and that he may pull voters away from other GOP candidates.

“If Tim Kaine wins handily, that will influence turnout to some degree,” Skelley says. “If it’s looking really bad for Stewart, that could have ramifications for Brat as well.”

Recently, the 7th didn’t seem too keen on Stewart. His primary opponent, Del. Nick Freitas, beat Stewart by 27 points in the district.

...Spanberger, she believes that Stewart’s campaign for Senate will help her at the polls.

“I think that the voters of the 7th will overwhelmingly … reject a lot of his really divisive, angry rhetoric,” Spanberger says.

Brat has nothing to say except that Spanberger "is a radical progressive." She isn't, although Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan could be called radical progressives compared to Brat, part of the neo-fascist wing of the GOP. He's trying to claim she's Nancy Pelosi. She isn't that either... and not nearly as much as Brat is indistinguishable from Trump and his toxic agenda. Yesterday, Cook Report's David Wasserman moved Brat's district from lean Republican to toss up. Wasserman is so overly cautious that "toss up" practically means Spanberger has it in the bag and can go on vacation if she wants. She doesn't want; what she wants is to win with as big a margin as possible, wave or no wave. Wasserman noted that KKK and neo-Nazi-sympathizer Corey Stewart on the top of the ticket will hurt down-ticket Republicans like Brat. Between Stewart-- who not even the RNSC will back-- and Trump (who is strongly backing Stewart), the toxicity is tangible. "Brat," he wrote, "who has shied away from questions about Stewart, has never had to run in a competitive general election before. He's mended fences with GOP leadership and is running with the NRCC's active help... Ironically, the white collar Republicans in the West End Richmond suburbs who long supported Cantor could be the swing voters in this race."

Meanwhile, if you're looking for an Alexandria Ocasio, look elsewhere. Spanberger would rather talk about civility in Congress than what she's going to do for people in VA-07. Watch how skillfully she creates a big fat nothing burger when she has a chance to say something substantive. Presumably her consultants tell her that's how she can get those "white collar Republicans in the West End Richmond suburbs" to swing her way-- while Trump's toxicity keeps the Democratic base voters interested in getting out and voting for anyone who's not a Trump enabler.

Can David Brat Be Ousted In November?

Ali on the left is running as a Whig. Spanberger has the mic and Ward is on the right

VA-07 is mostly famous because a nutty tea-party character, Dave Brat, defeated Eric Cantor, House Republican’s #2 leader in 2014, Canter had spent $2,940,932 in the primary alone and Brat spent $1,469,113 in both the primary and the general election. The district runs from north of Culpeper down to the suburbs west and northwest of Richmond and along the 360 in the west and as far as the Fort Pickett Military Reservation in the south. Most of the voters live in small towns around Richmond, like Glen Allen, Short Pump, Tuckahoe, Midlothian and Bon Air. Of the 10 counties, just 4 have the big voting populations: Henrico, Chesterfield, Hanover and Spotsylvania.

Trump did worse than McCain (54.3%) and worse than Romney (54.6%) but Hillary didn’t benefit. Trump beat her 50.5% to 44.0%, worse than Obama both times he ran. The PVI is R+6, which isn’t impossible for a Democrat in a wave election. Brat beat Eileen Bedell 217,968 (57.%) to 158,692 (42.1%). By the end of the 2017 FEC reporting deadline there were 7 Democrats competing to take on Brat, two of whom, Dan Ward, a Marine veteran and Abigail Spanberger, an EMILY’s List thing and former CIA agent, had raised enough money to run competitive races. (One, Helen Ali, has just decided to quit the Democratic primary and run as a Whig.)

The DCCC isn’t targeting it but if the wave is big enough, the district could flip. Gillespie’s margin of victory in the gubernatorial race was just 3.7 points. Local Democrats are optimist and say the district has the right blend of Democratic energy and Republican lethargy to become competitive in November.

“The district has suburban voters who are rejecting Trump, Democratic voters who are newly energized, and disaffected Republicans fleeing Dave Brat’s Tea Party-ism,” said Jesse Ferguson, a veteran Democratic operative who got his start in Virginia politics.

“It is an uphill race. But it’s not pushing a boulder up the hill.”

Republican officials concede the district may be competitive, and some are increasingly worried about the status of Brat’s campaign and the challenge he may face.  Former Rep. Tom Davis, a Virginia Republican who previously ran his party’s campaign committee, said he doesn’t consider it a top-tier race, but noted that Brat could be vulnerable to a wave election.

“I think David’s got to run through the tape,” Davis said. “This is the kind of year where the Republicans see a big storm coming. They just don’t know, if it’s a strong windstorm, if it’s a category one or a category five.”

…[Ward and Spanberger] concede there are few policy differences between them, particularly on the major issues: Both support an assault-weapons ban and universal gun background checks, and both back Medicare X, a public option proposal from Sen. Tim Kaine, though neither opposes single-payer health care. In interviews, both emphasized the need for broadband Internet access in the rural parts of their district. The difference between them is mainly one of approach and style.

In a candidate forum Monday hosted by the Richmond University College Democrats, Ward consistently turned his attention to the Trump administration, criticizing the president and framing the race through the lens of what he argued are Republican abuses of power.

“Our institutions are what protect our democracy and our institutions are under assault from the inside out,” Ward said in an interview prior to the forum. “These folks are like termites, they’re doing it from the inside out. We need to take the House of Representatives.”

Spanberger, meanwhile, said in an interview that while there are very few issues she agrees with Trump on, she aims to be more muted in her criticisms of the current administration, instead focusing more on the ins and outs of policy and her positive vision for the district.

“He talks a lot about Trump, and a lot about standing up to Trump, and I talk a lot about putting us back on the right path. They’re very different pivots,” Spanberger said.

To win this district requires surging Democratic turnout and crossover support from Republicans, and both candidates are developing strategies for support from across the parties. Ward argued his background as a farmer would help him win votes from rural Republicans.

“I’ve always thought in order to win in this district it was going to take a rural veteran,” he said.

Spanberger argued she also has strong crossover appeal given her background, though her base of support could hail from the heavily Republican suburban area where she lives.

“We have across the board been able to attract a lot of those people,” Spanberger said. “People will say, ‘Even though you’re a Democrat…’

“It’s about bringing civility to the conversation and being a Democrat who’s willing to talk to Republicans, being a Democrat who’s willing to talk to independents,” she added.

For Republicans, there are major signs of concern in the district that, historically, has not been competitive. Last fall, Democrats knocked off three GOP incumbents in the House of Delegates whose seats overlap the district, and both Spanberger and Ward outraised Brat in the fourth quarter of 2017, though he led them in cash on hand. A Brat spokesman declined to comment or make the congressman available for an interview to discuss the race. The two-term lawmaker recently told Politico: “All I talk is policy.”

To avoid a competitive race, Davis said Brat would have to mend fences with establishment Republicans in his district four years after defeating Cantor.

“Has he built bridges or has he just gone back to his base? He can’t win this with base voters,” Davis said. “He’s going to need some more moderate Republicans that he’s not traditionally catered to.”

Nationally, Brat has built bridges-- Speaker Paul Ryan’s PAC maxed out a $5,000 donation to his campaign last year, along with those of more than a hundred other incumbents, and Rep. Steve Scalise, the Republican whip, is headlining an annual breakfast fundraiser for Brat next month.

Still, Republican operatives are prepared for the race to become competitive and believe an injection of outside money could prevent a damaging loss.

“Do I think that Brat is vulnerable? Yes. But Brat will be saved from electoral defeat because national Republicans will save the seat,” said the national strategist familiar with Virginia, who requested anonymity to speak frankly. “It won’t be anything that he’s done or will do because he’s not really putting himself in a position to win.”

Both Democrats are themselves potentially vulnerable to outside attacks. Republicans have made two things central to their campaigns this year: talking up their tax cuts, and linking Democrats to Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

On the tax bill, Spanberger criticized it as “wholly irresponsible” because it added to the national debt, and said she doesn’t support making the individual tax cuts, which are currently set to expire in a decade, permanent. Ward said he supports repealing the entire tax law outright. Though Republicans are likely to run ads saying Ward would back tax hikes if he becomes the nominee, he said he welcomes that debate.

The “tax break these folks have received has been nominal,” he said of middle-class cuts compared to those for the wealthy and corporations. “It’s been pennies compared to where most of the money is going.”

On the other issue, Pelosi, the candidates diverge. Spanberger praised the former speaker, but said she would “very much like to vote for someone else,” and said the party needs new leadership. She acknowledged, however, that Republicans were “100 percent” likely to still run ads linking her to Pelosi if she becomes the nominee, and admitted they might be somewhat effective regardless of her position.

Ward, on the other hand, said he’d have no problem backing Pelosi as leader-- though he said he could also vote for a challenger depending on who emerged. When asked about ads linking him to Pelosi and the potential to damage his campaign, he responded: “Let them run the ads.”

“Why do we Democrats allow Republicans to demonize our people?” he said. “If we acquiesce to that pressure to replace Nancy Pelosi as speaker, whoever follows her is going to be Demon No. 2, and we have to stop giving them that space.”

Steve Bannon, Breitbart, Lenin, the Alt-right, White Supremacy, Donald Trump & Dave Brat: The Mainstreaming of Hate. VA-07

-by James Newton

By now you’ve heard the story, but a quick recap — two years ago, a little known college professor named Dave Brat pulled off a stunning upset in Virginia, defeating then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the Republican Congressional primary in the Virginia 7th District — a defeat of a high-ranking party leader the kind of which hadn’t often been seen before in the history of American politics. Brat went on to win the general election, and now is up for re-election against a Richmond Attorney, Eileen Bedell. Brat is also closely linked to Donald Trump, having received campaign money from Trump, endorsed him, and is serving on the leadership of Donald Trump’s campaign in Virginia.

If you had to boil it down to one issue, Brat won in 2014 by pushing anti-immigrant sentiments, a strategy that Trump has co-opted in the Presidential campaign. For Brat in 2014, other factors played a roll as well, as he was largely ignored by the political press prior to the primary, Eric Cantor didn’t take him seriously until too late, and Tea Party support Brat received helped push him to victory. His win shook the Republican establishment, moving them further right, and toward the hatefulness that has permeated this presidential campaign.

Helping Dave Brat then and now, and now Chief Executive of the Trump campaign, is Steve Bannon. Immediately prior to joining the Trump campaign, Bannon was the Chief Executive at Breitbart News, the best known mouthpiece of the so-called “alt-right,” the Republican party and conservative movement’s far right, if not extremist, wing. As is the modus operandi of extremists in the internet era, the alt-right sows seeds of racism without using traditional and obvious racist language or tactics, and instead it motivates its support and provides places to discuss via the web.

That Donald Trump is full of hate is a statement beyond reproach. But what isn’t as well known is Mr. Bannon’s hatefulness, as he prefers to let other people speak for him. Nonetheless, as time passes, a more complete picture begins to come into focus: that the mission of at least segments of the alt-right and Breibart news, and Steve Bannon, himself, is to further and make mainstream racism, and do so through stooges such as Donald Trump and Dave Brat. That Donald Trump is going to lose to Hillary Clinton seems likely. The same fate should befall Dave Brat. Hate, fear, and racism must be repudiated.

Recently released court documents discuss charges and the investigation of domestic violence and battery and witness intimidation filed against Bannon in 1996. The allegations related to altercations with his now-ex-wife, Mary-Louise Piccard, charges that were later dismissed when, according to the court documents:

[Ms. Piccard] skipped the trial after Bannon and his lawyer arranged for her to leave town. She said Bannon had told her the lawyer would make her look like the guilty party if she testified and the attorney told her she'd be broke if Bannon went to jail.

Next, in those same court documents, Ms. Piccard describes examples of Mr. Bannon’s anti-semitism, saying that Bannon did not want his children going to school with Jews, because they are “whiny.” Other Examples of anti-semitism follow Bannon, through those close to him. For example, one of Breibart News and the alt-right’s most public faces, Milo Yiannopoulos, has said that most anti-semitism is just for show-- trolls on the internet, if you will, having fun-- so it’s nothing to worry about; it’s just free speech.

That Mr. Bannon’s first foray into political campaigns was to prop up his friend, Dave Brat, against the highest-ranking Jewish member, ever, of Congress seems like too convenient a coincidence. Moreover, it’s not just persons of Jewish faith that seem to bother Bannon, as he is on record speaking poorly of Catholics and lesbians as well.

These examples, alone, perhaps don’t make the case, but there is ample other evidence to choose from. For example, the Southern Poverty Law Center has reported that Bannon and Kelley-Ann Conway, another member of the Trump campaign’s leadership, are members of the Council for National Policy, an influential conservative group whose membership includes numerous persons reported to be racial extremists.

As for Bannon’s media arm, Breitbart.com, he calls it the mouthpiece for the so-called “alt-right.” Inoccous sounding, the term “alt-right” was coined by Richard Spencer, a white nationalist leader. His organization, the National Policy Institute, is an organization that publishes articles with statements such as:

Much of the debate on the decline of Whites in their traditional homelands centers on “immigration,” and specifically the continuing arrival in the West of large numbers of colored “immigrants” from the poorest regions of the world

which is an obvious corrollary to Trump’s, and Brat’s, rhetoric on immigration.



Milo Yiannopoulos, when describing the alt-right, has said:

“’White identity’ and ‘white nationalism’ is a little misleading [in decrbing the alt-right]. I think it’s more accurate to say that the alt-right cares about ‘western supremacy’ rather than ‘white supremacy’.”

Such word parsing, while not without some validity, stills shows that underlying whatever is used as the title is nonetheless still riven with racism. Moreover, as recent article from the Washington Post has explained, white supremacists have adjusted their language and tactics to be less obvious, but they are still no less hateful. And Bannon has proudly provided them a microphone.

And now he is providing them with candidates for high office.

By way of review, there is evidence that Steve Bannon, who helped elect Dave Brat to Congress, and now runs Donald Trump’s campaign, has been accused of beating his wife and keeping her from testifying against him, doesn’t think well of Jews and other minorities, and has assisted persons who publicly-stated mission is to further divisions among the races, i.e. what is called racism, by providing them a media outlet, and at least two candidates for national office.

While those things paint a difficult picture to reconcile, perhaps even more fundamentally frightening, is Bannon, himself. He has said that he wants nothing less than to destroy America. How? By channeling the spirit of a person he admires, the Russian revolutionary, Vladimir Ilich Lenin, founder of the Russian communist movement, first leader of the Soviet Union, and creator of a revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat that murdered and oppressed millions during the 20th century.

“Lenin,” [Bannon] answered, “wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.” 

Moreover, Bannon subscribes to using fear as a tactic. Quite simply, he seeks to employ the same chief tactic of terrorists. 

“Fear is a good thing,” he said in a 2010 interview, “Fear is going to lead you to take action.”

To further these ideas, Bannon found a willing stooge in Dave Brat two years ago, a friend he convinced to run on a platform that is summed up by recognizing the simple fact that Brat, during that campaign, sought the endorsement and money of the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, an anti-immigrant hate group.

That Steve Bannon succeeded with Dave Brat two years ago was a confluence of good fortune-- the swelling of the Tea Party movement as well as an incumbent and press corps that missed the story. It provided him an important step toward moving racism, by whatever name, into the mainstream of not just American politics but American culture.

That Bannon’s message is now failing in the guise of Donald Trump is, one the hand, a testament to the American people, that we cannot be so easily swayed by manipulation and fear. On the other hand, Donald Trump is clearly a flawed candidate by all definitions, and there is no reason to believe that Bannon will not try again, perhaps next time with someone more savvy.

It is incumbent upon us all, however, to ensure that Bannon’s politics of fear-mongering is not only rejected in the person of Donald Trump, but also repudiated with the defeat of Dave Brat. Who knows, it could be that Brat is merely a stooge who was excited to tapped by Bannon, as hate doesn’t seem to flow through Brat like it does Trump. Nonetheless, his allegiances are clear and they must be rejected. It is no less than a battle over what it means to be American.

Thankfully the Virginia 7th District has a choice, a good one. Eileen Bedell is a lawyer, a small-business owner, a mother, and a spouse. In other words, she is real and understands how things work in the real world, not an ivory-tower, out of touch, academic propped up by Steve Bannon. Please support her if you can.

Dear Dave Brat: Warning: Being Trump's Boy Is Bad For Your Health-- Guest Post By James Newton

Dave Brat and the Donald. "I'll tell ya, this guy."

"Noooo... this guy." Thick as thieves, those two

It seems that standing too close to Donald Trump can have an adverse effect on one's brains. To wit, our man Dave Brat.

Dave Brat was recently interviewed by the Chesterfield (VA) Observer (“Your community newspaper since 1995” ), and a couple things stand out, and they kind of make me worry about him. Seriously.

First, this quote from the incumbent representative of the VA-07th:

It’s one of the extreme ironies of politics-- if you look at my opponent’s website, it’s full of totally ideological attacks against me, none of which are factual. There is no rational discussion of policy issues.

Seriously, Congressman? Here is Eileen Bedell, your opponent, on the issues. You may not like her stances, and that’s ok-- disagreement bears solutions, after all-- but to call what is on her website “irrational” is a real head-scratcher. It’s insulting, in fact, and shows instead, by your reaction, that you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about it. Out of touch, much?

Here, I’ll make this easy for you. Below is a section from Ms. Bedell’s issues page. You think this is irrational? That this is an ideological attack on you? That there aren’t facts here? You sir, are, quite honestly, wrong. And if anyone is making attacks, it’s your clearly ad hominen smear of Ms. Bedell.

[By the way, since hanging with the Donald has clearly made you ... less sharp (and studies show it can because I know these people are smarter than what they show here … and then they started following Donald. Ipso facto, Q.E.D., proximity to Trump makes you dumber.)-- an ad hominem attack is when you attack the person and not their policies, which is what you just did in that quote. If that’s still too hard for you to understand, just look to your buddy in the picture, he’s really good at those kinds of things.

Anyway, back to Ms. Bedell’s website]

Make Congress Work Again

Congress exists to ensure that United States citizens are represented fairly and responsibly in government affairs. For citizens to enjoy the vast benefits of this great nation, Congress must pass laws and approve budgets.

Making government work doesn’t mean always voting “NO” or shutting down the entire government by blocking critical funding bills. For 7th district citizens it is imperative that their representative responds to their concerns and vote in the best interest of the nation. Often, important issues have many sides and Congressional representatives must be prepared to at least understand and listen to well reasoned arguments from opposing parties. For example, economic expansion is demonstrably and intrinsically linked with job creation, job training, and improved education.

Eileen has the proven ability to bring parties with different goals to a mutually agreeable resolution. Eileen is committed to voting in the best interest of all Americans and not allowing her personal interests or the interests of small fringe groups to derail progress.

Eileen is committed to making Congress work for everyone.

Yah, real irrational that.

Wait a second. Are you actually making some veiled reference, some signaling codeword, appealing to sexists in the world, to people who still think women are irrational? Are you seriously that sexist? I mean, hate-mongers are really careful about what language they put in the press these days so maybe you know something we don’t.

Oh, and by the way, in case you didn’t notice, she doesn’t even mention you. Anywhere. So it’s nice that you think everything is about you, but yah, what she is doing is, quite honestly, discussing some things that actually happened (those are called “facts”), and yes, you happened to be there and saying “No,” (as usual) but it’s not just about you, buddy. As Eileen says, she is committed to making Congress work for everyone.

Ah wait, you go on:

It’s like I have to live up to the Sermon on the Mount, but the other side can yell and scream and then say we need to have civility in our politics. It makes you scratch your head.

Let’s let that marinate for a second, because this one needs to be appreciated. You said, and I’m paraphrasing here-- we can go right back to the quote if need be but I’m pretty sure this is fair. Ready?

You said that the OTHER SIDE is yelling and screaming.

THE OTHER SIDE? I am incredulous. I am aghast and agog. I am stupefied. I am stunned.

Are you outside your mind?

Do do you realize who you are supporting, working for, and taking contributions from in terms of the Presidential race? Here let me help you:

Donald Trump.

Donald Trump, who, with your help, has humiliated Americans is a way not seen from a politician ever?

Donald Trump, who, with your help, raised the level of hatefulness in this country?

Donald Trump, who, with your help, has made every single American look like idiots to the world?

Donald Trump, a man who, with your help, has done nothing but yell and scream and lie and belittle and mock and bully us all for over a year now.

Yah, that Trump.

And then you have the temerity to accuse the other side of yelling and screaming?

Oh, sweet irony, thy name is Dave Brat.

Wait a second, it’s not-- it can’t be, can it? Again? Nooo, say it ain’t, Dave-o.

Are you once again implying that women only discuss through yelling and screaming? I ask again: Are you seriously that sexist? Is that an appeal to your base or something? Do you and the Donald sit around and swap locker room stories? Do you really have so little respect for women that everything you hear them say is a yell or a scream? Do you think they are incapable of controlling themselves? Hey-- lookit that, you kind of do think that and you want to make choices for them. How chivalrous.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, why don’t you actually take a look at what Ms. Bedell has said, supra (that means, “above,” in case you get lost), or elsewhere on her website. You call that yelling and screaming? Good grief, as a fellow professor, I feel sorry for your students. What can they even write or talk about without offending your obviously thin-skinned sensibilities? Do you force them all to just regurgitate some loopy Ayn Rand?

Yelling and screaming. Right.

For your information, since you seem to be completely clueless, Ms. Bedell happens to be a member of Phi Beta Kappa and of the Virginia State Bar, not to mention a small-business owner, mother and spouse. What did you do today, Congressman?

Oh, wait, you’re not done yet! I can’t believe it.

Brat, however, said he’s open to having a debate or candidate forum “if we can talk constructively about issues."

So, what is it about Ms. Bedell that says that she doesn’t want to talk constructively on the issues? What evidence do you have? Where do you get that from? Oh, right, we figured this out already-- it’s because you don’t think women can think constructively, period.

Oh wait, we can’t find out, because you won’t show up to talk about issues and policy with Ms. Bedell. Why? Because you are doing things like going to New York to promote and sell your book. Which you wrote during your first two years of Congress. Instead of, y’know, doing that congressional stuff that you were elected to do. You’re a real pip, you know that?

In the meantime, your opponent (and please, say her name with me. She’s not he-who-must-not-be-named, for goodness sake. It’ll make you feel better, I promise:), Eileen Bedell, was at this candidate forum, answering questions. See that empty chair there? That’s where you were supposed to sit. See who was there? Ms. Bedell. And ask anyone there, I guarantee no one will say there was yelling and screaming, and probably constructive talk about the issues, too. But no, you're too busy for your constituents.

It gets better:

I haven’t seen a lot of energy from the other side,” he said. “I’m all over the district, and I haven’t seen her anywhere. There’s a question of whether she’s running a campaign to win or it’s just a ‘Hit Dave’ thing.”

One, sir, maybe you haven’t seen her anywhere because, oh, I don’t know, you’re the one not showing up? Or two, sir, it could be that your memory is going (more of the Trump effect?) because here you and Ms. Bedell are together, at a picnic it would seem.

For the record, that forum you missed was held at Diversity Richmond. Apparently the University of Richmond is holding a forum as well, next week. Oh, right, you can’t go. Again. Seriously, what do you do all day? Oh, right, we covered that, too-- you write books. [For the record, all but one or two other districts in VA have held or will hold forums/debates, and no one yelled or screamed there, either.]

I hope you don’t miss the irony of this, Congressman-- the fact that you are dodging debates during this campaign? Or did you forget what you said two years ago? Here, again, I’ll help you out:

“The people of Virginia have a right to hear from both candidates on the issues,” Brat said in a statement Friday. “Expensive television ads and slick mail pieces are not enough. The people want to hear from the candidates themselves, and a debate is the perfect format to assess the ideas and candidates face to face."

For once, Congressman, we agree. Too bad you're a hypocrite. But at least you'll have Donnie.



On November 8th, Vote for Eileen Bedell, Democrat for VA-7th District.

Vote for Sanity. Vote for progress. Vote for principles.

Lawyer, Small-business owner, mother, spouse.

Let's elect some people who live in the real world for a change.

Eileen Bedell for the Virginia 7th District.

For more information or to contribute to Eileen’s campaign AND to help vote out Dave Brat, just click below:

WEBSITE

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

CONTRIBUTE