Flip Flopping is fun for everyone!!

[Flasch186]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&ncid=536&e=5&u=/ap/20040807/ap_on_go_co/louisiana_congress


so this guy "flip flops" and the republicans, including Bush, welcome him with open arms. Kind of hypocritical

HOWEVER, I think its fine, so the guy followed his convictions and changed his mind about something. Im all for it, good for him. Just wish the playing field was equal when people change their minds about stuff. I see the Dems are hammering the guy and they shouldnt, cuz that is hypocritical of them, crying foul when the admin. says Kerry "flip flopped" but screaming when one of their own does the same thing. On that crap I wish they both would "just shat up."

[CraigSca]

Doesn't the definition of politician include the word "hypocrite"?

[Dutch]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&ncid=536&e=5&u=/ap/20040807/ap_on_go_co/louisiana_congress


so this guy "flip flops" and the republicans, including Bush, welcome him with open arms. Kind of hypocritical

HOWEVER, I think its fine, so the guy followed his convictions and changed his mind about something. Im all for it, good for him. Just wish the playing field was equal when people change their minds about stuff. I see the Dems are hammering the guy and they shouldnt, cuz that is hypocritical of them, crying foul when the admin. says Kerry "flip flopped" but screaming when one of their own does the same thing. On that crap I wish they both would "just shat up."

Of course, the big difference is that Kerry's more of a flip-flop-flip-flop-flip-flop kind of guy!

[gstelmack]

Hypocrites on all sides:

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/05/23/switchers.list/index.html

Wasn't it Smith that handed the Senate over to the Democrats by switching to Independent but voting with the Democrats after the '98 elections gave the Republicans a slim majority? That was a HUGE defection.

[Daimyo]

On Wednesday, Alexander registered at the start of qualifying for the 5th District race as a Democrat. Friday afternoon, the last day of qualifying for the Nov. 2 ballot, he made his switch, leaving Democrats no time to enter a strong candidate in the race.
This is the part that bothers me.

[GrantDawg]

This is the part that bothers me.
Yeah, that is sort of scummy. All's fair in war and politics though.

[Flasch186]

yeah, that seems a bit planned while the rest of the article talks about his inner torture leading him to finally switch, but I applaud him for allowing himself to make the change. Takes a strong man, to change thoughts, feelings, labels, etc.

[cjtodd]

Wasn't it Smith that handed the Senate over to the Democrats by switching to Independent but voting with the Democrats after the '98 elections gave the Republicans a slim majority? That was a HUGE defection.

I thought Jim Jeffords did the same thing...but no mention of him in that article.

[IMetTrentGreen]

i like how bush has been portrayed as a guy with strong convinctions who never changes his mind blah blah blah

one, its wrong, and two, they make it seem like just standing for something is ok regardless of what it is

[Ryche]

Filing for one party and then switching at the close of filing is pretty damn low and most definitely calculated. If the Dems really want to get back at him, they should all vote for the Republican that had already filed in that district.

In general I don't have any problem with politicians switching parties. There is typically ample warning that they are close to such a switch. But to do so in such a way that you're essentially taking away choice from the voters is pretty poor.

[lcjjdnh]

I thought Jim Jeffords did the same thing...but no mention of him in that article.
Similar but I think he just become an independent not a democrat.

[Dutch]

This guy switching parties doesn't do a damned thing. The Republicans are firmly entrenched in the house.

The guy who switched to the Dems changed the whole state of the Senate.

Theresa Heinz switches party affiliation based on which senator she's currently married to.

And frankly, if Senator Kerry moved to Louisiana, he's switch to be a Republican too. Since he's so brave as to not stand by his convictions as Flasch points out!

[Flasch186]

And frankly, if Senator Kerry moved to Louisiana, he's switch to be a Republican too. Since he's so brave as to not stand by his convictions as Flasch points out!


I was trying to point out that if Kerry switches all of a sudden its horrible, that he could "see the light" on a subject and change his mind, you (the admin) view as Horrible. If someone else does it, you (they) welcome him with open arms....that is hypocrisy. Both should be fine IMO, since their change of heart we have to assume comes from the heart and isnt a "sell out", which some are saying about this new guy's switch. It IS a GOOD GOOD GOOD thing that someone, a leader can see empirical evidence and change his/her stance....Bush's inability to do so, is a WEAKNESS. This whole thread Ive said, the ability to flip flop is a strength.

[Dutch]

And I was pointing out that Kerry is weak and spineless. Bush is standing by the convictions of his philosophy and many American's philosophies. To each our own. :)

[ISiddiqui]

In general I don't have any problem with politicians switching parties. There is typically ample warning that they are close to such a switch. But to do so in such a way that you're essentially taking away choice from the voters is pretty poor.

Yep, that is the problem here. Switching parties is ok but to do it so the Dems are denied a candidate in the election? That's just low.

[Flasch186]

And I was pointing out that Kerry is weak and spineless. Bush is standing by the convictions of his philosophy and many American's philosophies. To each our own. :)

At least Im able to admit when the admin does something right, but im not also so cloudy visioned as to not be able to see when the pres. makes a poor decision. Even the pres. cant figure out if he's ever made a mistake, yet over half of the US think he is doing a poor job. So me and you will see what AMerica thinks come Nov. Im confident that most americans will say no to Bush, regardless of whether or not they want Kerry. bush has turned off most americans on his own, without any help at all. If you add up the Kerry and Nader votes they would trample Bush, unfortunately we dont have run offs like in the other countries.

[Dutch]

Bush this, Bush that.....it's all blathering. What about Kerry? I am happy with Bush, more than happy. He's done what needed to be done. And Kerry? Who knows, he's for this and against this and for that and against that. He just doesn't add up, he's a political party robot without a spine or an actual opinion. Hell, he's been quoting Michael Moore lately. "If I were reading to kids and 9/11 just happened, why...I would have done better than Bush in that situation." It's just pathetic really.

We all know the far left is going to be against anything President Bush does. But they only wish they had a leader willing to stand up for what's right.

[SackAttack]

Yep, that is the problem here. Switching parties is ok but to do it so the Dems are denied a candidate in the election? That's just low.

I think the key here is the guy knew the Democrats would be pretty pissed off at the change, and if I remember, the article specifically mentioned a "big-name Democrat."

In other words, the guy would be painting a big ol' bullseye on his chest by switching. I don't think it was calculated so much to deny the Democrats a candidate as to avoid torching his political future in the state by switching parties and then getting steamrollered by a rent-a-candidate.

[JonInMiddleGA]

... so the Dems are denied a candidate in the election? That's just low.

That's also just ... incorrect.

There is a Democrat running, along with another Republican.

The only thing that was "denied" was a chance for the Dems to go out & try to find somebody else to run in this race. If another Dem was interested (i.e. a candidate perceived as stronger), they had ample opportunity to declare their intention to run. They didn't.

[Ryche]

The only thing that was "denied" was a chance for the Dems to go out & try to find somebody else to run in this race. If another Dem was interested (i.e. a candidate perceived as stronger), they had ample opportunity to declare their intention to run. They didn't.

That is a problem in the primary system in that it is very much discouraged to run against an incumbent within your own party. Knowing the difficulties they were having with Alexander, they should have put a decent candidate up against him to better match the party philosophy.

That doesn't change the fact that he switched at the filing deadline deliberately to prevent having a serious competitor from the Democratic side. That's political games at its worse, whether done by the Republicans or Democrats. Even if he had just waited until the last day and filed as a Republican it wouldn't be so bad. But to file as a Democrat, then switch two days later? I really hope the other Republican can defeat him.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I really hope the other Republican can defeat him.

That's actually what I expect will happen in this case.

Once you add in the unusual (at least to me) "open primary" used in Louisiana, where all the candidates from either party run all against each other and then if there's no majority winner, there's a run-off that follows.

What I'd guess will happen is that the original Republican finishes first, with the newly minted Rep. & the suddenly only Dem. battle it out to finish 2nd & force a run-off.