Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ttd_76 t1_ja6wbvw wrote

Reply to comment by Charlesinrichmond in Del. Lamont Bagby receives Democratic nomination in SD-09 by Mad-Lad-of-RVA

Rodgers never had a chance. She does has Sonjia Smith behind her, so with a full campaign she can be dangerous.

But that's why I question if what she is doing. This is twice now she has entered into campaigns with low name recognition, not much time to campaign and where she cannot win.

There are plenty of elections she can win, but she won't run in them. I could see how maybe she's just trying to get her name out there, but I don't know if It's working.

7

Mad-Lad-of-RVA OP t1_ja740tv wrote

I still think that Rodgers gets way too much credit for far too little substance. Everyone (at least in this subreddit) talks about how progressive she supposedly is, but her actual policy positions are far and few between, and the ones that do exist have little depth to them.

She just seems to be Progressive Vibes ™ : The Candidate. At best, she seems incompetent for entering races at a significant disadvantage, as you mention, and for not listing policy positions on her website, like any other damn candidate does.

For the record, I don't think that there was a good candidate in this race. Bagby takes far too much corporate money for my liking. Rodgers was a 'no' from me for the reasons I just described, and Adams is, well, Adams. She had the staffer scandal and, while she's no Bagby, she's taken a few corporate bucks here and there. Ultimately, I was one of the 464 to vote for Adams, but I wasn't particularly happy about it. She also comes across as incompetent, but at least she has tangible policy positions.

I'm really glad that this election is about as low-stakes as it gets since the districts will be redrawn in November, because hoo boy, I think we can do better.

14

ttd_76 t1_ja85zos wrote

Basically, yeah.

I actually got to meet her. I definitely wouldn't call her a policy wonk. But she's not just a flaming radical shit-stirring idiot, either.

But she hasn't been able to translate this into her campaigns or public image. I think it is quite possible she could be good. But as you said, she appears to run largely on vibes alone.

That's why I wonder why she doesn't run for city council where it looks like she can win at least two districts. Or take a job in state or local government instead of just being a lobbyist. Show people that there's more to her than just slogans and memes.

3

Charlesinrichmond t1_ja800z2 wrote

not going to happen - which is why all 3 ran now. You add incumbency and Bagby is a sure fire win, even with a changed district.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see someone run against Bagby, as long as it isn't Adams or Rogers. I think he's the best of that lot

2

Mad-Lad-of-RVA OP t1_ja8gb02 wrote

Huh? I know Bagby's a shoe-in. Where did I ever say otherwise?

2

Charlesinrichmond t1_ja7zu4x wrote

I thought she had a pretty good chance. In fact, I wouldn't have bet on her, but I would have said it was 50/50 between her and Bagby. So I was shocked she was blown out of the water so epically

0