Gawker’s Alex Pareene on Harold Ford‘s plan to (maybe) run against Kirsten Gillibrand for US Senate in New York:
The problem most people had with Kirsten Gillibrand was that she was a moderate from upstate whose career wasn’t particularly distinguished and who held some beliefs (mostly gun control) that wouldn’t fly with New York City Democrats.
So, of course, these brilliant minds decided that she would best be challenged by a conservative from Tennessee whose career is a joke and who holds no beliefs. Honestly, Democrats? Field conservative and moderate Democrats in conservative and moderate districts and states. In New York, field a fucking liberal New Yorker. There is not a Republican Senator from Mississippi who happens to be an anti-war atheist. There should not be a pro-gun anti-choice Senator from New York. [Emphasis added.]
The rest is here. The man who works for Nick Denton is right. There’s a pretty good liberal argument to be made for Harold Ford as a senator from Tennessee. But you’d have to think that Sen. Ford (D-N.Y.) would make Nate Silver’s next list of “least valuable Democrats.” This doesn’t make much sense.
