Dan Lipinski loses primary - one of the last pro-life Democrats is finished

[chevyontheriver]

The Democratic Party finally killed off Dan Lipinski, long term Democratic member of the US House of Representatives from Illinois. They have been trying to do that for years. This year they pulled it off, in the primary yesterday. Rep. Dan Lipinski falls in Democratic primary

He was one of the very last pro-life Democrats in Congress. The Democrats hated him. But when he managed to squeeze through the primaries every two years he was a shoe-in in the general election. He would have been a shoe-in this time too, but he's been defeated. By his own party. So he is now a lame duck, to be retired in January. And his opponent in the Primary is a likely shoe-in for the general election.

I suspect part of why he lost is that there was a campaign by some Catholics that said a real Catholic COULD NEVER VOTE FOR ANY DEMOCRAT EVER OR ANYWHERE. Not even a real pro-life Democrat, which Dan Lipinski definitely was. That it would be a mortal sin to vote for any Democrat, even a pro-life one. I challenged that kind of thinking directly but got no traction. I fear that kind of thinking got just enough traction that it cost him the votes he needed to win the primary. Vote Democrat, Mortal Sin

And then there were the Sisters of Mercy who endorsed a Democrat, the winner in the primary, the pro-abortion Democrat running against Lipinski, Marie Newman. US House: Sisters of Mercy nuns endorse the NARAL-backed abortion activist Marie Newman, who is running against the Democrat Dan Lipinski, a Roman Catholic and one of Washington's few pro-life Democrats. : TrueCatholicPolitics

So one less pro-life Democrat in Congress. Lipinski was the real deal. Who is left? The following Democrats in Congress are considered at least partially pro-life. YMMV.

Sen. Joe Donnelly (Indiana) defeated in 2018 and gone from the Senate
Sen. Bob Casey (Pennsylvania)
Sen. Joe Manchin III (West Virginia)
Rep. Collin Peterson (Minnesota)
Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas)

So my question is this: is Lipinski's defeat a victory for Catholics, a victory for the pro-life cause, or a tragic loss? I think we lost a very good man, a rare principled Catholic pro-life politician.

 

[Albion]

Senator Joe Donnelly was defeated by a Republican in 2018.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Senator Joe Donnelly was defeated by a Republican in 2018.

Woops. Well one less then.

Lipinski was a good old fashioned Democrat, solidly for the little guy no matter who or how small, a species practically extinct. Or maybe actually extinct now.

 

[chevyontheriver]

The Democratic Party finally killed off Dan Lapinski, long term Democratic member of the US House of Representatives from Illinois. They have been trying to do that for years. This year they pulled it off, in the primary yesterday. Rep. Dan Lipinski falls in Democratic primary

He was one of the very last pro-life Democrats in Congress. The Democrats hated him. But when he managed to squeeze through the primaries every two years he was a shoe-in in the general election. He would have been a shoe-in this time too, but he's been defeated. By his own party. So he is now a lame duck, to be retired in January. And his opponent in the Primary is a likely shoe-in for the general election.

Farewell to the Pro-Life Democrats | National Review

Lipinski loses primary
"Newman said that she was baptized Catholic at a local parish, in a campaign video that highlighted her ties to the district. She also secured the support of two nuns, Sisters JoAnn Persch and Pat Murphy of the Sisters of Mercy, who endorsed her in a campaign video."

So she's a Biden/Pelosi kind of Catholic, as if the world needed more of that kind. Guy McClung must be so proud that he prevented a few Catholics from voting for Lipinski by telling them it is a mortal sin to ever vote for any Democrat, even Dan Lipinski. Is It a Sin to Vote Democrat? - Catholic Stand

Vote Democrat, Mortal Sin

Well, now that Dan Lipinski is out of the way, a victory for Democratic 'purity' the remaining pro-life (or 'pro-life' as the case may be) Democrats are done. I don't think Sen. Bob Casey (Pennsylvania), Sen. Joe Manchin III (West Virginia), Rep. Collin Peterson (Minnesota), or Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas) have it in them to be as consistently pro-life as Dan Lipinski was and is. They know the Democratic Party machine will be after them next if they don't toe the line on abortion.

 

[paul1149]

From Wiki, Lapinski is the kind of Democrat you want if you have to have a Democrat. The problem with any Democrat, from my perspective, even a good one, is that he strengthens that party's position in Congress, helping give them the majority there, with the gavel and all the power that comes with it - deciding which bills come to a vote, the legislative schedule, etc. With a sharply divided Congress, who you send to DC can be absolutely critical. Also, a true pro-life Dem can expect not to have any influential committee assignments, have his proposals ever see a vote, etc. It seems to me the good he could do generally would be limited.

For the above reasons, over and above the ideology of the matter, I generally am in agreement that a Christian should not vote Democrat. Still I would take a Lapinski, on a practical basis, over a Rosa DeLauro, if I had to have a Dem. But if a district isn't hopelessly Democrat, maybe it would be better if prolife Dems changed their affiliation and voted in a Party that afforded their vote a better chance of sending a prolifer to DC and giving him power there. Again from Wiki, the IL 3rd doesn't seem to be that district. Maybe redistricting next year will bring changes. In any case, it's clearer than ever that the Democrat Party, which not long ago prided itself as being a Big Tent, is intolerantly monolithic on abortion.

 

[chevyontheriver]

From Wiki, Lipinski is the kind of Democrat you want if you have to have a Democrat. The problem with any Democrat, from my perspective, even a good one, is that he strengthens that party's position in Congress, helping give them the majority there, with the gavel and all the power that comes with it - deciding which bills come to a vote, the legislative schedule, etc. With a sharply divided Congress, who you send to DC can be absolutely critical. Also, a true pro-life Dem can expect not to have any influential committee assignments, have his proposals ever see a vote, etc. It seems to me the good he could do generally would be limited.

Lipinski was an old fashioned Democrat, from back in the ancient days when most Democrats were reliably pro-life. The Democratic Party changed from underneath him. It's a shame that the party of Hubert Humphrey no longer has room for a pro-life person. I do agree with you that Dan Lipinski probably got the worst of committee appointments.

For the above reasons, over and above the ideology of the matter, I generally am in agreement that a Christian should not vote Democrat. Still I would take a Lipinski, on a practical basis, over a Rosa DeLauro, if I had to have a Dem. But if a district isn't hopelessly Democrat, maybe it would be better if prolife Dems changed their affiliation and voted in a Party that afforded their vote a better chance of sending a prolifer to DC and giving him power there. Again from Wiki, the IL 3rd doesn't seem to be that district. Maybe redistricting next year will bring changes. In any case, it's clearer than ever that the Democrat Party, which not long ago prided itself as being a Big Tent, is intolerantly monolithic on abortion.

All of the Democratic Party contenders were fanatical on abortion, even to the point of jettisoning the Hyde Amendment. They have been very clear that there is no room at all for someone who is pro-life. Defeating Lipinski is pretty much the final act.

What I hope Lipinski does is runs with the American Solidarity Party. It seems like a natural fit. AND there is a possibility that he, as an incumbent, could pull it off. If he does switch to the ASP I want to contribute to his campaign. Shoot, I'd want to figure out a way to go to his district as a volunteer.

With Lipinski gone, I think the last fully committed pro-life Democrat is going away. Maybe Colin Peterson, but his voting has been more mixed as of late and I suspect the Democratic Party Machine pressure is really going to be on him to go totally for abortion. I noticed National Right To Life endorsed his Republican opponent. Democrats for Life of America endorsed him two years ago but have not endorsed anyone yet for 2020 it seems.

Anyhow, I have been critical of folks like Dan McClung, who said voting for any Democrat would be a mortal sin. As long as Dan Lipinski was on the ballot I think it was OK to vote for him even as a Democrat. But now that the Democrats basically kicked him to the curb, I can't see how it could be right any longer to vote for a Democrat. Certainly not Marie Newman, a supposed Catholic, or Joe Biden, a supposed Catholic. That would just be wrong.

 

[paul1149]

With Lipinski gone, I think the last fully committed pro-life Democrat is going away.

From the comments at the article:

Sadly, on March 19,2020, Mr. Lipinski declared he will support Ms. Newman in her run for congress. In doing so, I think he loses any credibility in the pro-life movement. Ms. Newman’s Republican opponent is pro-life. Supporting him would be more commendable.
​

By what calculus does a pro-lifer support a pro-abortion Democrat over a prolife Republican? Is perhaps party more important to this person than protecting babies? Is this what a "fully committed pro-life Democrat" looks like?

​

 

[chevyontheriver]

From the comments at the article:

Sadly, on March 19,2020, Mr. Lipinski declared he will support Ms. Newman in her run for congress. In doing so, I think he loses any credibility in the pro-life movement. Ms. Newman’s Republican opponent is pro-life. Supporting him would be more commendable.
​

By what calculus does a pro-lifer support a pro-abortion Democrat over a prolife Republican? Is perhaps party more important to this person than protecting babies? Is this what a "fully committed pro-life Democrat" looks like?

​

Very interesting. Thanks for pointing this out.

Lipinski will support an abortion supporter over a pro-life person? Whacked!

Now we don't know what the Republican endorsed candidate is all about, but it seems just whacked for Lipinski to support Newman. I remember that in a previous election the Republican candidate was a Neo-Nazi. I could see not supporting such a candidate. But I can't at all see supporting Newman. I had hoped Lipinski would have run as an American Solidarity Party candidate.

 

[paul1149]

Lipinski will support an abortion supporter over a pro-life person? Whacked!

Following up on this, I am unable to verify that Lipinsky endorsed Newman. Considering both their sites still maintain a negative caste against the other, it doesn't seem plausible. I was going off a couple of comments on the original article, but I don't know if their correct, and I don't want to smear the guy if he's holding the line.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Following up on this, I am unable to verify that Lipinsky endorsed Newman. Considering both their sites still maintain a negative caste against the other, it doesn't seem plausible. I was going off a couple of comments on the original article, but I don't know if their correct, and I don't want to smear the guy if he's holding the line.

Nothing I have seen yet confirms he will support Newman. The animosity between Lipinski and Newman is well known.

I had hoped Lipinski would join the American Solidarity Party, which he may well do. I had also hoped he would run under that party banner and give Newman a run for her money. But I expect she now has big Democratic Party money that makes her practically unstoppable. Money Lipinski never had access to.

'People make their political party their religion,' says Catholic congressman