Somebody convince me how to vote in the NY Senate primary.

[TheWraith]

Next Tuesday is the NY state primary, including the senate primary. I don't think that Tasini has a chance in hell, but I was contemplating throwing a vote in his direction as an incentive for Clinton to stay honest, a yank on the political leash so to speak. On the other hand, I'd rather not hear any of the crap that would be spewed about Democrats being divided, or the endless inane speculation on Clinton's "polarizing" and its effect on her apparently non-existant presidential bid, which would incline me towards a solidarity vote.

Being undecided, I suppose you'd say, I'd like to hear discussion on this point. And in all seriousness, I don't want to hear any of that crap about "warmonger this" and "Republican lite that." That kind of out-loud mental masturbation doesn't convince anybody, it's just preaching to the choir. I'd like to hear from some advocates on both sides why I should direct my primary vote one way or the other.

[Ignacio Upton]

1. Vote for Tasini

He has no chance in hell of winning, and I plan to vote for Hillary in the general. However, if Tasini gets roughly 15%-20% of the vote, I think that would send a message to her, and hopefully she'll take that message and decide not to run for President in 2008. In the Attornery General's race, I'm also voting for Maloney because I absolutely can't stand Cuomo or Green (I will abstain for voting in that race unless Jeanine "where's page 10?" Pirro catches up and Cuomo shots himself in the foot yet again.)

[Greyhound]

4. Don't live in NY, but I'll second this opinion. n/t

[hedgehog]

2. Whose views most closely match your own?

There's no harm to be done here; the two Republicans have such over-the-top personal records that they don't even seem real. You can vote your heart here without endangering the Senate seat.

If you like Clinton and want her to get the 2008 nomination,vote for Tasini. If you'd like people to take a look at other candidates, vote for Tasini. I'm a Tasini supporter, but I recognize his chances are poor. I'm just hoping that if enough people vote for him, we'll have a repeat of what happened in New Hampshire in 1968. Gene McCarthy lost to Lyndon Johnson, but he took enough votes that people re-considered the prevailing wisdom. If Clinton takes the nomination because everyone expects her too, that's bad for her and the party. If she has to fight for the nomination and wins it as herself and not because her husband is Bill Clinton, that's much better.

[WePurrsevere]

3. In the primary vote as YOU feel but here are reasons to vote for Hillary

since you asked, Hillary's side has not been represented yet and I like to see various sides before making choices myself. B-)

(Disclaimer: although I am a life long resident of NY as well as a Dem, due to a mix up when we recently moved to our new home in a different area, neither my husband nor I will not be able to vote in the Primaries since we are registered "no party" at this time. Basically my opinion is that in the main election I will vote for whomever is the Dem winner in the Primary although I must admit I will hold my nose when I pull the lever for Schumer... talk about a politician who needs a "yank on the leash" not to mention ego. ;))

Anyway... the first part is a post I have bookmarked (and journal entry) by DU's SaveElmer: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/SaveElmer/7

Hillary Clinton's ratings from the Best of the Liberal Groups...
Posted by SaveElmer in General Discussion: Politics
Wed Aug 02nd 2006, 02:29 PM
Her excellent ratings from most groups are usually poo-pooed, so now that we have found some people like, thought I would get it out there....show what a radical "right winger" she is...

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the The Humane Society of the United States 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Trust for Historic Preservation 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 95 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Education Association 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Wilderness Coalition 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 95 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Children's Defense Fund 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Association of University Women 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Organization for Women 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group 91 percent in 2006.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group 100 percent in 2005

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 100 percent from 1988-2003 (Senate) or 1991-2003 (House).

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Public Health Association 80 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 93 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 93 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers 84 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Worker 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 88 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Federation of Government Employees 83 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Committee for an Effective Congress 95 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 100 percent in 2005.

According to the National Journal - Composite Liberal Score's calculations, in 2005, Senator Clinton voted more liberal on economic, defense and foreign policy issues than 80 percent of the Senators.

According to the National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy's calculations, in 2005, Senator Clinton voted more liberal on social policy issues than 83 percent of the Senators.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Alliance for Retired Americans 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 92 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Bread for the World 100 percent in 2003-2004.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the The Partnership for the Homeless 100 percent in 2003-2004.

Source: http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=WNY99268

Actually if you can wade through the whole thread this was originally posted in there's some very good info there: http://tinyurl.com/e8sfq

I've always wondered why it is that some DUers are so much harsher on Hillary then someone who has a similar record like John Kerry or even the Senior Senator from NY, Schumer. For an easy comparison here are a few well known Dem senator's "scores" from...
Progressive Punch:
Hillary Rodham Cinton - average score on all issues: 91.54% Ranked 10/100 Senators
Chuck Schumer (Sen. Senator NY) - Avg score all issues: 90.36% Ranked 15/100 Senators
John Kerry - Senator MA - Avg score all issues: 86.37% Ranked 23/100 Senators
Russ Feingold - Senator Wis - Avg score all issues: 89.19% Ranked 19/100 Senators
Joe Lieberman - Senator CT - Avg score all issues: 76.41% Ranked 39/100 Senators

Here's a bit from the NYT's editorial endorsing her for Senator over others inclusing Tasini:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/03/opinion/03sun1.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

<snip>If Democrats turned on Senator Joseph Lieberman because of his support for the war in Iraq, why shouldn’t they do the same to Mrs. Clinton, who also has refused to express regret for her vote to authorize the invasion?

<snip>
Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Lieberman have behaved very differently on the Iraq issue from the beginning. In 2002, Mr. Lieberman stood next to President Bush in the Rose Garden when he announced an agreement on a resolution to authorize use of force. Mrs. Clinton, on the other hand, urged that the resolution be regarded not as a go-ahead to invade, but as leverage in negotiations with the United Nations. She argued in the Senate debate that the president should work to get strong United Nations backing for a demand that Saddam Hussein allow weapons inspectors back into Iraq. If that failed, she said, the United States’ effort would still win it international support for an invasion later.

She was certainly not a dove. Her husband’s administration was convinced that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and Mrs. Clinton clearly believed Iraq was a grave threat to international peace. But as the conflict went on, she became increasingly critical of the way it was being conducted. Mr. Lieberman not only defended it, he also chastised other Democrats for criticizing the president during a time of war. A few months ago, Mrs. Clinton joined most Senate Democrats in supporting a resolution that called for American forces to begin leaving Iraq this year, without setting a specific deadline for withdrawal. Mr. Lieberman opposed the resolution and spoke out against it in the Senate.

<snip>

Mrs. Clinton has been a happy surprise for many doubters since she first won office in 2000. Everyone expected her to be intelligent and hard-working. But despite her obvious ambition for higher office, she has been focused on issues that are important to the state, as well as accessible and aggressive in fighting for New York’s interests. She works well with both her Democratic colleagues and with Republicans, who found her far more collegial than they expected. Given the relatively powerless position of Senate Democrats, she has scored a few real wins — most recently in pressuring the Bush administration to allow the “morning-after pill” to be sold over the counter. She has found the right balance between bipartisanship and the responsibility of the minority party to be both watchdog and whistle-blower on behalf of the public. She has also reflected, at least in a general way, the opinions of the majority of her constituents on the war issue. We urge Democrats to vote for her in the primary on Sept. 12.

Although I do not agree with Hillary on a few issues and I agree with Tasini on social issues more, over all IMO, she's done a pretty good job for the majority of her constituents. From what I've been hearing she has earned the respect of many up here in northern NY because she has actually come up here a few times, listened to folks concerns and even helped a few people get help when needed.

As for your vote in the primary... vote for the person whom you feel will represent you and all of NY the best... IMO that is the most important factor in deciding who to vote for... "This above all... to thine own self be true." B-)

(edited to fix a link)

[theanarch]

5. i can only echo the advice of Eugene Debs...

...who wrote: "It is better to vote for what you want and lose, than to vote for what you don't want and win."

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. I'll vote for Clinton in November, assuming she wins now of course

I'm voting for Tasini now. I prefer his position regarding single payer health insurance for one thing, I prefer his position against the corporate excesses of prior "Free Trade Agreements" for another. I prefer his position around the recent Israel Lebanon conflict for yet another. It's not even only about the war in Iraq. It is about having a New York Democratic Senator taking some leadership stands on key progressive issues that I care about.

I am not among those who really dislike Hillary. I think her having to acknowledge some opposition inside her supposed NY State base on the issues that I mentioned would be constructive; constructive for her, constructive for us. Hillary is a very intelligent women, she knows how to read a message if it is sent to her, so I want one sent. Jonathan Tasini, a previous relative unknown with very little funding, winning over 20% of the vote against Hillary in a primary wouldn't end her political career, but hopefully it will tune it up so she will run better for all of us in November and beyond .

In my opinion Hillary has been so careful about keeping her options open for 2008, when I sincerely hope she does NOT run for President, that her voice of potential leadership on important issues within our Party has stayed muted so as not to alienate moderates who she hopes to win over from being opposed to her. That's not serving my interests as a New Yorker and I want Hillary to know that. There is no organized opposition to Hillary Clinton emerging from the Republican Party in November. If Clinton is seen as being to the Right of Tasini and she defeats him in the Democratic primary, that won't hurt Hillary against the Republicans. This is one Democratic seat that is safe regardless.

I see a lot of potential advantages to me and no down side in voting for Tasini in the New York State Primary. The only downside for Clinton in having Tasini get a respectful showing is a small dent in her Presidential ambitions if she wakes up to realize that a key element of the Democratic constituency isn't all of that keen on her representing the Party as our Presidential candidate. Clinton will still remain a major national figure and powerful Senator. I say vote for Tasini assuming you like him.