He represents a majority African American district that normally votes Democrat. His votes undoubtedly reflect the views and desires of his constituents. If he does not vote for their interests when the major bills come to vote, he will lose his bid for reelection.
News reports indicate he withheld his vote until it was clear the Democrats had the majority they needed to pass the legislation. One could infer he was prepared to vote against the bill if his vote would have changed the outcome.
Unfortunately we do not have a color blind society. African American majority districts have been gerrymandered throughout the country. Given the predisposition of African Americans to vote in a block for race and the Democrat party it is nearly impossible for a non African American Republican to be elected to office in these districts. If the Republican party is to have any chance of capturing more minority voters it must take advantage of these opportunities, recognizing to preserve the seat the representative will have to serve his/her constituents. I’d rather have an Republican of any race who votes conservative 20% of the time representing this district than a Democrat of any race who votes far left 100% of the time. The 20% is better than nothing and over time we have the open up the minds of the voters in that district to new ideas.
The Democrats are capturing “white” southern districts with their blue dog strategy. They don’t get 100% allegiance from these representatives but they do get enough support on key votes to pass the critical elements of their agenda as we’ve just seen.
To return to majority status, Republicans will have to capture some moderate to left leaning districts. We cannot win and capture those districts without representing the wishes of those voters.
Recognize today the Republicans have no leadership and are coming across to the public as having no ideas. They are playing defense and showing up as the party of “no”. The party lost the elections of 2006 and 2008 because it gave the people nothing to vote “for” and they had been fiscally irresponsible during the time they had majorities in Congress. The Democrats came to power with a promise of “change” and the public responded to that agenda, giving the Dems large majorities in the legislature as well as the Presidency. Until the Republicans move from the party of “no” to a positive message, we have no chance to shift the balance of power. While a Republican alternative health care plan was defeated yesterday, who knew anything about it?
While I’m disappointed Cao didn’t stand with the rest of the party on this vote, I don’t blame him. Had he voted no on principle, he would have assured his loss in the next election and received nothing in return. This way, he voted with his constituents as they elected him to do. He can fight his opponent with a record of serving his constituents without the corruption of his predecessor. He will have given them reasons to vote for him rather than against him. A Congressman actually representing the preferences of his district. What a novel concept!
What if your choice was a Republican who votes conservative 20% of the time vs. a Democrat who votes conservative 80% of the time?
The 20% is better than nothing and over time we have the open up the minds of the voters in that district to new ideas.
Those 20 percenters are called RINOs and they arent good for anything except for losing to Democrats. And they never open the minds of anyone to vote Republican much less convince some to accept some or any conservative ideas.
Yeah Yeah yeah...the same strategy has given us losses in both houses.
Just WHAT has he actually DEFEATED?
How have his ‘brave conservative stands against Nancy Pelosi’s agenda’ done a thing to further freedom from these fascist euro loving socialists except to be a member with R after his name and not a very reliable one at that?
“Cao, R-La. Cao has tried to convince his overwhelmingly Democratic constituency that he is an independent, moderate Republican. Congressional Quarterly found that through August, Cao sided with most Republican colleagues against most Democrats on just 58 percent of party-line votes, the lowest “party unity” score among GOP Members.” [Yahoo News]
Screw him and the horse he rode in on.
Principles have to mean something or we are certainly doomed. We may already be doomed,,,,but thats another post.
.....
A Congressman actually representing the preferences of his district. What a novel concept!
Bad post Soul.
Several points.
A)Screw what they may think, they're wrong. Most of them don't think at all or else they wouldn't vote heavily democrat. Harsh? True. Sheeple need conservative representatives to protect them from their own MSM fueled ignorance.
B)It's most certainly NOT in their "interest" that this passes. This bill would lead to heath care rationing for the poor. Only the insurance companies that own the DNC benefit from this.
C)Most of the 49% of people in the low turnout election that actually voted for Cao likely do not support this and are not happy with this vote.
D)He's not going to win reelection anyway. If he did it wouldn't be by voting identically to a democrat. Urban voters need an alternative to liberalism. Me to RINOism is pointless and will never succeed in electing Republicans in heavily rat areas.
Now it's possible several rat nay votes here were "catch and release" meaning if Pelosi had needed their votes she would have gotten them.
Assuming there were none (which is likely not true, perhaps Cao was catch and release for the GOP side) then we failed stopping this by 3 votes.
1 lost NY special election (the rat that succeeded Gillibrand voted nay, the newly elected Owens voted yay), 1 stolen Ohio seat in 2008 and 1 Cao. Or alternatively 1 Rosanna Pulido, David Harmer, and Betty Chu away (more lost special elections all in dem districts, only Harmer got major support and it was too little too late). Boo. GOP allowed the rats to steal a few too many seats.
I understand your position, but there are a number of problems with it. First of all, this was an absolutely horrible bill, it is antithetical to our freedoms. It is about the government’s attempts to nationalize 1/7th of our economy, dangerously Marxist. In supporting this, Cao, who fled a Marxist country ostensibly to find “Freedom”, has voted for something that he sought to escape. It’s offensive in that regard.
Also, pandering left does not earn a Republican anything. It destroys any credibility they have with the GOP base, and they become a useful idiot for the Democrat/Left, and they are then quickly deposed for their (Dems) favored candidate at the next election and are quickly forgotten. Cao could vote 100% liberal and it would NOT save him in this district. So he has now not only assured his defeat (because Republicans will not support him, and Black Dems want a Black Dem), he has killed any political future he has in Louisiana that might’ve been winnable for him (statewide office). He not only disemboweled our freedoms, he slit his own throat. I have no sympathy for someone who does that, he has rightly earned our enmity.