I view it as more of a coaching change and she's not a good fit. The Ds changed their MO and it doesn't fit her. She's a Pocket Passer and the Ds hired Rich Rodriguez. So to speak.
It goes something like this: "The voters weren't sold on her anyway. Good riddance! She's Dem Bait now! Enjoy being a 3rd string politician in Alabama! "
Ironic to say the Dems are led by three words. Rich Rod. He is a dinosaur in coaching terms. So your analogy checks out.
No, that is not what the constituent means. They are supposed to represent the people that live in their district/state, regardless of their political affiliation.
Certainly I don’t think anyone should espouse hate for people of different sexual orientations, and this would seem uncontroversial grounds for dismissal from a national political party. However, there are certainly other more gray area issues, likely including educational issues, where I think disagreement shouldn’t be absolutely barred.
It's actually a parody feed, mocking the sentiment as inappropriate. I assumed that was obvious. They attribution to Chris Cilizza should have been a dead giveaway. Another example mocking "Both siderism"
There are numerous issues on this point, without even getting into where Republicans want to roll back rights (like gay marriage and trying to create a religious belief opt out of discrimination laws that protect members of the LGBTQ community). Transgender children being able to access evidence-based medical care recommended by their doctors is the most obvious of them.
No. There’s many people who voted for another candidate, that’s part of their constituency. When you’re elected, you represent the entire constituency, not just the people who voted for you. Once in office, your vote should be based upon what you feel is best for your constituency and the country (or state), not what’s best for party.
Anybody who thinks Don't Say Gay doesn't go far enough can leave the Democratic Party, as far as I am concerned.
