In a huge sign of the way the winds are blowing in the extremely important Illinois 3rd primary next Tuesday, Representative Luis Gutierrez, the only member of Congress listed on Dan Lipinski's endorsement page, has now un-endorsed him:
Many progressives were bitterly disappointed when Congressman Luis Gutierrez went along with the powerful Daley Machine to endorse reactionary incumbent Dan Lipinski in his hotly contested bid for re-election. But, like so many politicians from Chicago, regardless of how they are on national issues-- and Gutierrez is good-- when it comes to local issues, the Machine rules…. So it came as quite the shock in Chicagoland politics today when Gutierrez officially withdrew his endorsement of Lipinski.
Blue America, Blue Majority, Democracy for America (DFA), Citizens Action/Illinois, Democratic Leadership for the 21st Century, Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, Irish-Americans for Pera, Jewish Political Alliance of Illinois, Mexicanos for Political Progress, NARAL/Pro-Choices America, Northside DFA, NOW - National Organization for Women, Oak Park DFA, Planned Parenthood Action Fund, United Citizens for a Better America, United Muslims and Arabs for a Better America
I have argued it before, and I will argue it again: victories in Democratic primaries like IL-03 and MD-04 will have more of an impact on Democratic congressional behavior than will the outcome of the presidential primary. We can only influence Democrats in Congress when they believe we have serious, legitimate means of pressuring them, including removing them from office. So, with only a few days left, I am asking you again: Donate to Mark Pera for Congress. If you live in the area or if you can make the trip, volunteer for Mark Pera. We have very few chances to influence national Democratic behavior like this. We have to make what few chances we have count.
Speaking of Blue Majority, Mark Pera's primary against Dan Lipinski is in just 11 days time (February 5th), and Donna Edwards faces off against Al Wynn only one week later. The time to give to them is now.
Asked to explain what precisely he found problematic, Feingold offered that Edwards had "taken in" voters by switching positions on several key issues.
"You have to consider what the audience is, and obviously these are very popular positions to take when you are in a primary where you are trying to get the progressive vote. But wait a minute -- there were opportunities to vote against the bankruptcy bill, there was an opportunity to vote against the China [trade] deal. Those are the moments where you sort of find out where somebody is. So I think, people are being taken in a little bit that now he is taking these positions."
There is no one in the Senate who I respect more than Senator Feingold. While I disagree with him on this one, I have to admit that Edwards did not engage the big fights he needed to while he was in the Senate.
President Clinton put this country on a fundamentally different path. He changed the fiscal nature of this country, he changed the international relations of this country…He left the country on a totally different trajectory where people felt they were prepared for the 21st century."
Whatever. "Fundamental change" is not something that can be immediately wiped away by the next President. Outside of Kosovo, I can't think of anything that Bill Clinton did, against Republican objections, that Bush has not entirely reversed. Considering that "Clintonian" has come to mean a series of incremental, targeted government programs, I can't see how anyone would think that Bill Clinton fundamentally changed the country.
Now that we are down to just three candidates, primary straw polls become much simpler. So, I have included one in the extended entry. I'm interested to know where Open Left readers stand.
This is an open thread. Tell the world what is on your mind.
Cleveland Congressman Dennis Kucinich is dropping out of the Democratic race for president.
Kucinich will make the announcement Friday at a news conference in Cleveland. In an exclusive interview with Plain Dealer editors and reporters, Kucinich said he will explain his "transitioning" tomorrow.
"I want to continue to serve in Congress," he said.
Kucinich said he will not endorse another Democrat in the primary.
While I don't think Dennis Kucinich is a very good spokesperson for the left, I do hope that he is able to fend off his primary challenge from Rosemary Palmer, who is coming from his right on Iraq.
The Presidential campaign is exiting and important, and will have a major impact on the national party. However, underneath the national radar, another, equally important effort to change the Democratic Party is taking place: primary campaigns against Bush Dog Democrats. One of those primaries will take place in just twenty-two days on February 5th, as Mark Pera challenges Dan Lipinski. The 3rd congressional district of Illinois is the battleground, and it also happens to be the bluest district in the nation held by a Bush Dog. The simple, blunt truth is that if we can't win here, we are going to have a difficult time winning anywhere. This primary is a key test of progressive strength in the party, and as such will have a major impact on Democratic behavior in Congress. The case against
Deep Blue District: Lipinski represents an overwhelmingly Democratic district, with a partisan voting index of Democrat +10.3, and where Kerry won 59% of the vote in 2004. This is a blue district in absolutely no danger of falling into Republican hands. It should be represented by a strong progressive.
Nepotism Lipinski never had to campaign for the seat, not even in a primary. When he first won back in 2002, his father actually was the Democratic nominee. However, after his father won the primary, he stepped aside and had the junior Lipinski placed on the ballot in his stead. In other words, Lipinski has no real campaign experience, and only scored his seat in Congress through pure nepotism.
Until his dad crowned him a congressman, he spent 15 years out of town working at universities in North Carolina, Indiana and Tennessee. Somehow, while being a resident of other states, he managed to vote here, not by absentee ballot but in person. Election judges in his father's 23rd Ward marked him present in every Chicago election since at least 1990, according to official records.
Oddly, Lipinski, can't recall casting those votes. "I'm trying to think back to that time," he told me. "I honestly cannot remember."
Now the voter records are missing. This is clear voter fraud perpetrated by a local machine. Lipinski probably did not vote for over 15 years.
Bush Dog: Lipinski is a Bush Dog who voted with Bush on the war and on FISA. In fact, the IL-03 is by far the bluest district represented by a Bush Dog. We will never have a progressive governing majority if Bush Dogs occupy seats like this.
Hard Right Anti-Choice: In addition to being a Bush Dog, Lipinski is staunchly anti-choice. He has a zero rating from NARAL and Planned Parenthood. He doesn't believe in family planning at all, in fact.
Not Progressive On Much Of Anything: In addition to his records on Iraq, FISA and choice, he also is below average for a Democrat on immigration, gets a big fat zero from Progressive Punch on GLBT issues, and only a 50% score from the Drum major institute on progressive family issues. Basically, he sucks at just about everything.
Already has a primary opponent: Recruiting a primary challenger against Lipinski isn't even necessary. Mark Pera has already signed on to run against him. You can compare some of their views here.. The simplest way to put it is this: Dan Lipinski is one of the worst examples of Democrats out of step with their districts. Mark Pera is a real progressive who has a good chance to defeat him. If we want to change the behavior of the Democratic Congress, this will be one of our very best chances to do so.
This is designed to be a blogosphere-wide push to help bring victory in IL-03. We are targeting 5,000 donors for Mark Pera on Act Blue, and we started today at about 2,300. Already, nearly 200 new donors have participated. Even thought I had already participated, I've chipped in, too. This is how we can make a better Democratic Party, but it won't happen unless we donate to all of the campaigns that campaigns that can change the party. The Presidential primary isn't the only way to make change, and through the IL-03 we can have a huge impact even before November rolls around.
There's no rest for the weary Iowa Democrats in and around Des Moines who were involved in the competitive and high-profile presidential campaign precinct caucuses on Jan. 3. Democrats in Iowa's 3rd District will soon turn to weighing their two candidates for Congress.
Iowa Democrat Ed Fallon, a former state legislator who ran unsuccessfully for governor in 2006, has filed papers with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to formalize his challenge to six-term Democratic Rep. Leonard L. Boswell in the June 3 primary election in Iowa's 3rd, which includes Des Moines, the state capital.
Fallon served in the Iowa House from 1993 through 2006, when he finished third in a Democratic primary for governor that was won by Chet Culver , who was elected in November. Fallon narrowly carried the 3rd District in that primary election.
Fallon's history suggests strongly that he will run a populist-minded campaign to the left of Boswell, who has a somewhat less liberal voting record than most of his House Democratic colleagues.
If he does not correct the way he votes and continues to side with Bush over his constituents on these key matters, given Boswell's lean Democratic district and history as a fairly weak campaigner, it is pretty easy to see him as one of the top five targets for a progressive primary challenge against a sitting Democrat in 2008. Can you imagine any lower hanging fruit? A fairly simple television ad pointing out that he voted to authorize the use of military force in Iraq in 2002, to renew the Patriot Act in 2005, to eliminate Habeas Corpus in 2006, to fund the war without any troops withdrawal mandate in May, and to grant the Bush administration warrant-less wiretapping powers a few weeks ago would probably cause his approval rating to crash in just a matter of weeks. Not a single one of those positions is popular in his district--especially among Democrats--and this long-term pattern paints a clear picture of Boswell as a neo-conservative. A primary challenger to Boswell would have a legitimate change of success.
Boswell has responded to this pressure, flipping his Iraq vote in December. Will it be enough to stave off vulnerability? We will have to see.
STATE BLOGS
