Does Harold Ford take NYers to be idiots?

[FLAprogressive]

I don't know how you could so blatantly carpetbag and get away with it.....I mean how transparent (not a word you use often when discussing this sack of crap) can you get?

[Dennis Donovan]

1. They said the same thing about Hillary in 2000...

...and she won.;-)

[customerserviceguy]

6. And most NYers don't resent one bit

that she used that Senate seat as nothing but a stepping stone to try for the Presidency. As soon as she could work out a deal with Nominee Obama for a plum position in the Administration, she was outta there.

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. Hillary finished her first Senate term and was into a second one...

...before she joined Obama's administration. She did not run for President four years into her first term the way that Obama did, and my intent here is not to knock Obama, just to point out that NYers knew exactly what they were getting, and there were some preconditions. Hillary promised NYers the first time that she ran that she would serve her full term in the Senate and she did. She did not repeat that promise in her second run, and NYers had no problem with that, because she kept her end of the initial bargain.

[customerserviceguy]

12. And my point is, they'll believe the same

bullshit from Ford, too.

Yes, NYer's knew what they were getting. They'll settle for it again, I suspect.

[harun]

2. Only election Harold Ford is going to be winning is to take out the garbage in his own house.

[jgraz]

13. Even that might require a recount.

If New Yorkers vote for this fool, they deserve what they get.

[DJ13]

3. He's DLC isnt he?

Thats a yes.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

19. He's sort of like Mr. DLC Par Excellence

So the answer is yes.

[Warpy]

4. One thing conservatives in both parties have

in great abundance is arrogance. He probably feels his name recognition will blind folks to the fact that he's not from their part of the country and will have no clue how to represent them.

Sadly, it does work in some instances.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

5. Well, we are talking about the same lame ass who thought that Pelosi

was too radical to be majority leader.

[Me.]

7. It's A Con Job

“Many liberals are really bummed by the news that Harold Ford, a “conservaDem” and chief of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, is mulling a primary challenge to New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.

Not to worry: A Dem operative who personally discussed the race with Ford tells me he thinks Ford is unlikely to take the plunge. The operative says Ford seemed well aware of how tough the race would be and seemed more interested in “creating buzz” for himself.

“The sense I had was that he wants to get his name known in New York,” this operative says of Ford, who moved to the city three years ago after losing the 2006 Senate race in Tennessee. “That’s a long way from declaring. The odds aren’t strong that he’ll run.”

The operative said Ford made it clear in the discussion that he was well aware that the race is a steep climb. “He’s got to coalesce the black community and raise a huge amount of money in a very short time,” the operative said. Gilllibrand already has raised $5.5 million.” Cont…

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/senate-dems/harold-fo... /.

[CreekDog]

8. That's his base!

:rofl:

[EFerrari]

17. LOL

[virgogal]

9. Uuum,Hillary? RFK?

[Rhiannon12866]

16. They both had a national platform...

And they both won. ;)

[damntexdem]

10. Why shouldn't he -- the NY Senate has done that for years.

And generally gotten away with it, too.

;-)

But I will say a couple of other words about your carpetbagging claim: Hillary Clinton.

;-)

[SanchoPanza]

14. Yes.

The party establishment cleared the way for Clinton in 2000 because they wanted a high profile candidate to run against Rudy, and they didn't want to lose a seat they picked up when the influence of Rockefeller Republicans collapsed throughout the state. A slate of local Democrats were convinced not to run because they didn't have her name recognition. It's basically the same reason why the party establishment threw their support to RFK in 1964: To beat Ken Keating.

Ford is now attacking the very party establishment he'd need in order to get anywhere in the primary. He apparently thinks that cozying up to Bloomberg, who only won reelection by 5 points after outspending a virtual no name Democrat 20 to 1, and having ties to Wall Street is what he needs to pose a credible challenge to Gillibrand.

Being a carpetbagger doesn't matter. NY is still, by and large, a political machine state and that machine has chosen Gillibrand. The only way to win elections despite that machine is to appeal to the rank and file of the party, and Ford is more conservative than most NY Republicans. If this challenge means more to him other than getting some face time on Cable TV, he's a bigger fool than anyone realized.

[Rhiannon12866]

15. Even with the name recognition, he couldn't win in his home state...

:crazy:

[4_TN_TITANS]

18. That's because the Fords

are some corrupt sons o' bitches from the Memphis political machine. I had to hold my nose to back Ford for Senate in '06 and am kind of relieved he didn't pull it off. He'd be another traitorous blue-dog from hell, and his vote would go to the highest bidder.

[Rhiannon12866]

20. Yikes! Thanks for the information...

Let's hope that he doesn't bring his show to NY... The last thing that the Democrats need is a nasty primary. Kirsten Gillibrand was my congresswoman, so I was very pleased when she was appointed to replace Senator Clinton, and she definitely has my support... :-)

[blm]

21. He takes the LEFT bloggers for idiots. He only floated this story so left will accept Gillibrand

as the more supportable candidate. And so far, the DLC has calculated correctly. Gillibrand is part of the Clinton wing of the party and Ford is committed to protecting that wing for the DLC agenda.