David Trone for senate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s go back to the title of this thread.

Opinions as to why Trone lost by such a surprise blow out number?

Because Alsobrooks is a more compelling candidate.

For Democratic progressives stuck on identity politics, perhaps.

For Maryland swing voters, we'll see.

For voters in the Democratic primary. The question was why Alsobrooks beat Trone in the Democratic primary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trone lost in part because his constant repetitive ads and flyers annoyed people. I remember when he ran against Raskin and it annoyed people to no end. He did the same thing this time and it really annoyed people.

It also felt slimy, like he was trying to buy his way into an election. Whoever is advising him is pretty lousy, this is a repeated pattern for him.

I believe that this is key. Also, when asked about putting this much personal money into the race, his response was always something like “we will spend whatever it takes to win.” People REALLY don’t like that.

And finally I think there is the authenticity factor. Much of his campaign came across as very made up. “I grew up in a house without running water?” Please.

I lived in an apartment building during his first run and people made jokes about making bonfires out of the Trone flyers. It really turned people off in a big way, and this was a heavily progressive group of people. The way he campaigns is quite bad. It puts people off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s go back to the title of this thread.

Opinions as to why Trone lost by such a surprise blow out number?

Because the party rallied around Alsobrooks.

Trone was painted as a “rich conservative” and the party doesn’t like that.

Trone is more Progressive than 90% of DCUM posters and they is a FACT.

Not really, no. Trone is a fair-weather progressive, not a true progressive. He is progressive when it suits his personal journey and not otherwise. When he was a businessman, he regularly supported and lobbied conservative Republican legislators to get business favorable laws so that he could get poor people addicted to and spending money they didn't have on alcohol. He had no place in his world for progressive ideas because they didn't matter to him or his business. He regularly supported and encouraged legislators that were pro-life, that were anti-immigrant, and more. It wasn't until he wanted to become a politician himself that he adopted progressive attitudes. And, frankly, I have no faith that he would have stayed true to his progressive values if it didn't suit his personal platform, which is David Trone first always.

Try to find any support from David Tron for any liberal (not just progressive) values prior to about 2015. That was when he did the hard left turn for progressive values, when he planned to enter the Democratic primary in 2016 for Chris Van Hollen's seat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.marylandmatters.org/2024/05/13/a-qa-with-former-gov-larry-hogan/#:~:text=Larry%20Hogan%3A%20My%20position%20is,for%20a%20national%20abortion%20ban.

Here’s Hogan on abortion…he doesn’t support stripping rights from women.

Here's Hogan on abortion.

https://apnews.com/article/abortion-health-larry-hogan-maryland-environment-7fe7e2613ded7f6f15067100f098061d

He has a long record of opposing women's reproductive rights.

I have no problems with this at all.


“ Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan vetoed a measure Friday that would expand access to abortion in the state by ending a restriction that only physicians can provide them and requiring most insurance plans to cover abortion care without cost“

The question isn't whether or not you have problems with the bill about women's reproductive health care that Hogan vetoed. The question is whether Hogan has a long record of opposing women's reproductive rights. And the answer is: yes, he does.

And what we are saying is the article you linked doesn’t demonstrate an opposition to women’s reproductive rights. If my daughter needed/wanted an abortion I sure as eff wouldn’t want a midwife performing it.

Hogan's veto actually does demonstrate an opposition to women's reproductive rights. The law (vetoed by Hogan, overriden by the General Assembly) allows nurse practitioners, nurse midwives, and physician assistants to be abortion providers. It doesn't require or force anybody to use a nurse practitioner, nurse midwife, or physician assistant as their abortion provider.

And again I have no problem with only physicians being abortion providers. It does not prevent someone from getting an abortion to only allow physicians to be abortion providers.

It actually does.

And again, this is not about your personal opinions. You are not on the ballot. This is about Hogan's actions.

Lol as a voter my opinion actually matters greatly.

Eh. As a voter, your opinion matters exactly as much as any other voter, no more, no less.

I would argue that my opinion matters more because I flatly refuse to vote for Alsobrooks. I’m not one of the flock of sheep who will vote for what is essentially a Bush neocon LARPing as a Black woman.

No, it doesn't. You have one vote, just like everybody else.

Well, my vote will not be going to Angela Alsobrooks.

I have ethics and principles. You clearly don’t.

I have no idea if you have ethics or principles, but your candidate, David Trone, does not. He has a long history of breaking alcohol laws in multiple states, and if it were not for the fact that the ATF massively bungled their case in Pennsylvania, he would be a convicted felon. They had to drop the case because they mishandled his records and released them to the wrong people, otherwise they would have had a open and shut case against him. Instead he got lucky, they had to drop their case and he closed all business operations in the state of Pennsylvania.

He is, first and foremost, a businessman who will do whatever is beneficial to his business. He has only adopted progressive values when they don't interfere with his personal business and source of wealth. Not very principled at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s go back to the title of this thread.

Opinions as to why Trone lost by such a surprise blow out number?

Because the party rallied around Alsobrooks.

Trone was painted as a “rich conservative” and the party doesn’t like that.

This is pretty much it. But I would characterize it a little differently.

The MD Democratic establishment want to be kingmakers and therefore don’t want upstarts operating outside of their power. That’s a big reason for rallying around Alsobrooks. Because what this election has proven is that they are more valuable than $60 million dollars and if you want to get ahead in MD politics you’ve got to kiss the ring.

It’s pretty clear that no amount of ads can outweigh the value of who Wes Moore, Raskin, etc telling Democrats who to vote for in a primary (same thing happened with MCPS BOE Apple Ballot).

The question that needs to be answered is whether it’s enough for the general election. In the past, the answer has been no. Which is why we’ve gotten Ehrlich and Hogan as governors in the first place. Because the Democratic Party propped up awful candidates.

I personally don’t think Alsobrooks is a good candidate at all. The only thing she has in her favor is being a woman with Trump on the ballot. That’s a huge advantage but not sure it will be enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s go back to the title of this thread.

Opinions as to why Trone lost by such a surprise blow out number?

Because the party rallied around Alsobrooks.

Trone was painted as a “rich conservative” and the party doesn’t like that.

This is pretty much it. But I would characterize it a little differently.

The MD Democratic establishment want to be kingmakers and therefore don’t want upstarts operating outside of their power. That’s a big reason for rallying around Alsobrooks. Because what this election has proven is that they are more valuable than $60 million dollars and if you want to get ahead in MD politics you’ve got to kiss the ring.

It’s pretty clear that no amount of ads can outweigh the value of who Wes Moore, Raskin, etc telling Democrats who to vote for in a primary (same thing happened with MCPS BOE Apple Ballot).

The question that needs to be answered is whether it’s enough for the general election. In the past, the answer has been no. Which is why we’ve gotten Ehrlich and Hogan as governors in the first place. Because the Democratic Party propped up awful candidates.

I personally don’t think Alsobrooks is a good candidate at all. The only thing she has in her favor is being a woman with Trump on the ballot. That’s a huge advantage but not sure it will be enough.

Again, this was Trone’s problem. He thought the only thing he needed was ads, way way overdid it and alienated people. Trone’s bad campaigning was a huge factor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alsobrooks had more votes than the GOP combined. The excitement for her is really understated in the media.

She had the weight of Raskin and the party behind her.

Interestingly, she doesn’t speak in her own commercial with Raskin. She’s not that impressive.

I recognized a beloved mcps teacher/admin in Trone’s commercial—a black woman. Interesting that a black female educator didn’t support Alsobrooks.

I bet Hogan will win. Long history of black candidates from PG County who simply can’t carry the state. Plus: he has name recognition.

I'm starting to think that "she's not that impressive" is code for "she's a black woman from Prince George's County".

Feeling that life is unfair, even if you're right, doesn't win elections.

You're making this comment about a someone who just won the primary by 54% to 42% against a candidate who spent $63 million of his own money.

Wow, How much is he worth to throw that kind of money away?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alsobrooks had more votes than the GOP combined. The excitement for her is really understated in the media.

She had the weight of Raskin and the party behind her.

Interestingly, she doesn’t speak in her own commercial with Raskin. She’s not that impressive.

I recognized a beloved mcps teacher/admin in Trone’s commercial—a black woman. Interesting that a black female educator didn’t support Alsobrooks.

I bet Hogan will win. Long history of black candidates from PG County who simply can’t carry the state. Plus: he has name recognition.

Hogan never had to run in a presidential election year. Plus, senators and governors are very different. People will be thinking about the Supreme Court. These two factors should get Alsobrooks to 51%.

It’s obvious there are several DCUM posters focused on the Supreme Court, but I think you are overestimating how much the average moderate in say Howard or Anne Arundel or Frederick counties is focused on it. I think it’s obvious Alsobrooks will do well in MoCo and PG, but it’s the other large counties that aren’t as deep Blue as MoCo and PG that will really decide this race.

I think you're underestimating how many people believe women should have reproductive rights, and vote accordingly.

I wish you were right, but I think you underestimate how many women don't care about reproductive rights until it impacts them personally. They other people that topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s go back to the title of this thread.

Opinions as to why Trone lost by such a surprise blow out number?

Because the party rallied around Alsobrooks.

Trone was painted as a “rich conservative” and the party doesn’t like that.

This is pretty much it. But I would characterize it a little differently.

The MD Democratic establishment want to be kingmakers and therefore don’t want upstarts operating outside of their power. That’s a big reason for rallying around Alsobrooks. Because what this election has proven is that they are more valuable than $60 million dollars and if you want to get ahead in MD politics you’ve got to kiss the ring.

It’s pretty clear that no amount of ads can outweigh the value of who Wes Moore, Raskin, etc telling Democrats who to vote for in a primary (same thing happened with MCPS BOE Apple Ballot).

The question that needs to be answered is whether it’s enough for the general election. In the past, the answer has been no. Which is why we’ve gotten Ehrlich and Hogan as governors in the first place. Because the Democratic Party propped up awful candidates.

I personally don’t think Alsobrooks is a good candidate at all. The only thing she has in her favor is being a woman with Trump on the ballot. That’s a huge advantage but not sure it will be enough.

She just walloped someone who spend $63 million of his own money, but go off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s go back to the title of this thread.

Opinions as to why Trone lost by such a surprise blow out number?

Because the party rallied around Alsobrooks.

Trone was painted as a “rich conservative” and the party doesn’t like that.

This is pretty much it. But I would characterize it a little differently.

The MD Democratic establishment want to be kingmakers and therefore don’t want upstarts operating outside of their power. That’s a big reason for rallying around Alsobrooks. Because what this election has proven is that they are more valuable than $60 million dollars and if you want to get ahead in MD politics you’ve got to kiss the ring.

It’s pretty clear that no amount of ads can outweigh the value of who Wes Moore, Raskin, etc telling Democrats who to vote for in a primary (same thing happened with MCPS BOE Apple Ballot).

The question that needs to be answered is whether it’s enough for the general election. In the past, the answer has been no. Which is why we’ve gotten Ehrlich and Hogan as governors in the first place. Because the Democratic Party propped up awful candidates.

I personally don’t think Alsobrooks is a good candidate at all. The only thing she has in her favor is being a woman with Trump on the ballot. That’s a huge advantage but not sure it will be enough.

She just walloped someone who spend $63 million of his own money, but go off.

I almost wonder if one of the posters here was a paid campaign staffer from Trone and is in denial about just how bad his campaign was. There's no big conspiracy here, Trone ran a bad campaign and got destroyed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still voting for Hogan/Biden

Hogan adds a vote to the GOP in the senate which means abortion bans and crappy judges.

He won’t vote to ban abortion. We need more senators who are sensible and willing to cross the aisle to work with the other side. He could be the new Manchin.

I would not be so sure about that. I still remember Kavanaugh and ABC's position on not changing abortion rights when given the opportunity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s go back to the title of this thread.

Opinions as to why Trone lost by such a surprise blow out number?

Because the party rallied around Alsobrooks.

Trone was painted as a “rich conservative” and the party doesn’t like that.

This is pretty much it. But I would characterize it a little differently.

The MD Democratic establishment want to be kingmakers and therefore don’t want upstarts operating outside of their power. That’s a big reason for rallying around Alsobrooks. Because what this election has proven is that they are more valuable than $60 million dollars and if you want to get ahead in MD politics you’ve got to kiss the ring.

It’s pretty clear that no amount of ads can outweigh the value of who Wes Moore, Raskin, etc telling Democrats who to vote for in a primary (same thing happened with MCPS BOE Apple Ballot).

The question that needs to be answered is whether it’s enough for the general election. In the past, the answer has been no. Which is why we’ve gotten Ehrlich and Hogan as governors in the first place. Because the Democratic Party propped up awful candidates.

I personally don’t think Alsobrooks is a good candidate at all. The only thing she has in her favor is being a woman with Trump on the ballot. That’s a huge advantage but not sure it will be enough.

She just walloped someone who spend $63 million of his own money, but go off.

And because she’s never made anything of herself her whole life and made her own fortune, she’ll be beholden to the people who fund her campaigns - big pharma, defense contractors, trial lawyers, big insurance, big medical, big corporate America. She’s going to be bought and paid for before sue even gets the key to her office.

Trone couldn’t be bought. Alsobrooks has absolutely no choice but to sell herself to anyone who will stroke a check.

I will NEVER vote for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s go back to the title of this thread.

Opinions as to why Trone lost by such a surprise blow out number?

Because the party rallied around Alsobrooks.

Trone was painted as a “rich conservative” and the party doesn’t like that.

This is pretty much it. But I would characterize it a little differently.

The MD Democratic establishment want to be kingmakers and therefore don’t want upstarts operating outside of their power. That’s a big reason for rallying around Alsobrooks. Because what this election has proven is that they are more valuable than $60 million dollars and if you want to get ahead in MD politics you’ve got to kiss the ring.

It’s pretty clear that no amount of ads can outweigh the value of who Wes Moore, Raskin, etc telling Democrats who to vote for in a primary (same thing happened with MCPS BOE Apple Ballot).

The question that needs to be answered is whether it’s enough for the general election. In the past, the answer has been no. Which is why we’ve gotten Ehrlich and Hogan as governors in the first place. Because the Democratic Party propped up awful candidates.

I personally don’t think Alsobrooks is a good candidate at all. The only thing she has in her favor is being a woman with Trump on the ballot. That’s a huge advantage but not sure it will be enough.

She just walloped someone who spend $63 million of his own money, but go off.

And because she’s never made anything of herself her whole life and made her own fortune, she’ll be beholden to the people who fund her campaigns - big pharma, defense contractors, trial lawyers, big insurance, big medical, big corporate America. She’s going to be bought and paid for before sue even gets the key to her office.

Trone couldn’t be bought. Alsobrooks has absolutely no choice but to sell herself to anyone who will stroke a check.

I will NEVER vote for her.

People said Trump couldn't be bought under the same logic.

Your rabid hatred here is super weird. Is Trone your uncle or something? This seems bizarrely personal to you.

[Anonymous]

She will not beat Hogan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s go back to the title of this thread.

Opinions as to why Trone lost by such a surprise blow out number?

Because the party rallied around Alsobrooks.

Trone was painted as a “rich conservative” and the party doesn’t like that.

Trone is more Progressive than 90% of DCUM posters and they is a FACT.

Not really, no. Trone is a fair-weather progressive, not a true progressive. He is progressive when it suits his personal journey and not otherwise. When he was a businessman, he regularly supported and lobbied conservative Republican legislators to get business favorable laws so that he could get poor people addicted to and spending money they didn't have on alcohol. He had no place in his world for progressive ideas because they didn't matter to him or his business. He regularly supported and encouraged legislators that were pro-life, that were anti-immigrant, and more. It wasn't until he wanted to become a politician himself that he adopted progressive attitudes. And, frankly, I have no faith that he would have stayed true to his progressive values if it didn't suit his personal platform, which is David Trone first always.

Try to find any support from David Tron for any liberal (not just progressive) values prior to about 2015. That was when he did the hard left turn for progressive values, when he planned to enter the Democratic primary in 2016 for Chris Van Hollen's seat.

I’m not a liberal. I’m a Progressive. I couldn’t give a sh!t less about so-called “liberal values”. And neither does Trone. That’s why he was such a better choice than Alsobrooks, who is really just a neocon when it comes down to her values. She’d be at home in a Trump administration as an appointee in the DoJ based on her history of defending abusive cops and overseeing a court system that seems to exist to terrify Black families.