A good day for progressives

by: Mike Lux

Wed Sep 15, 2010 at 14:30


Give voters in both parties some credit: they feel like they are being treated badly by politicians, and they are pushing back hard. The results in November probably won't be good for Democrats, because Democrats are running things and people tend to vote their pocketbook, but this anti-establishment thing can have some very good effects in it for progressives, too. Yesterday's results were for the most part an example of that.

On the Democratic side of things, there was only one big disappointment for progressives yesterday, and that was Steve Lynch winning his primary against Mac D'Alesandro. Lynch is a pro-war, anti-health care reform, anti-choice Democrat who was running against a strong progressive SEIU organizer. Mac got in late, was dramatically underfunded, and the old machine is still strong in Democratic politics in Boston, so this one was always a long shot, but it would have been great to have won that race. The good news, though, is very, very good:

  • In the NH seat left open by Paul Hodes running for Senate, strong progressive Ann Kuster shocked the Democratic establishment by beating Joe Lieberman's Presidential campaign co-chair Katrina Swett. Swett is part of one of NH's most powerful Democratic establishment families, and Kuster's win shocked a lot of people. Backed by MoveOn, DFA, PCCC and Blue America, along with many other progressive bloggers and NH's progressive activist community, if she can win her race she will be another strong voice for progressive values in Congress.

  • Carolyn Maloney utterly crushed the candidate of, by, and for Wall Street, winning her race 81-19 in an anti-incumbent year. Carolyn was a true champion on the credit card regulation bill last year and the financial reform fight this time around, and the big dogs on Wall Street decided they didn't like having such an independent-minded reformer in their back yard, so they recruited Reshma Saujani, a hedge fund lawyer known and trusted by the Street, to take Carolyn on. I guess the message about Carolyn beating up on Wall St too much didn't play so well, even in Wall Street's backyard.

  • Eric Schneiderman narrowly beat the more establishment (and conservative) Democrat, and former Republican, Kathleen Rice in the NY Attorney General race. This is one of the most important elected positions in the country, as the AG has a great deal of power over who and how to prosecute on Wall Street. If he wins the general election, he will be an aggressive prosecutor of the financial malfeasance perpetrated on us by the biggest banks.

As for the rest of the good news for Democrats, let me turn to the Republican side. Again, give voters some credit: Republican primary electorates have come to be dominated by angry voters just as mad at their own establishment as they are at Democrats, and they are letting their inner dogs howl. As a result, we now have a Delaware Senate seat that has gone from being very uphill for the Democrats to very unlikely for the Republicans in the blink of an eye. And in NH, where the conventional wisdom had AG Kelly Ayotte sweeping to a primary victory and then easily fending off Hodes, the primary there has left a complicated, likely recount election that might not be settled for weeks to come- and whoever comes out of that mess will be damaged and financially depleted.

Given how bad the political climate is, starting out the year, the establishment pols on both sides had assumed DE, NH, NV, CO, KY, and AK would all probably be in the Republican column on election day in November. As of today, Democrats have even or better odds in all those states. Even in FL, where the odds are still against Kendrick Meek, a Republican civil war has given us a chance where we had none. The tide is still against us, but some Republican ships are crashing against the shore, and as a result, Democrats are still alive. As I said last week, this idea of a narrative about Republican extremism is building strength fast, and may be giving us a key to beating them. What we have to remember, though, is that Republican primary voters are not the only ones feeling anti-establishment. Democrats had better seize the populist moment, expose the opposition's insanity but also paint themselves as progressive outsiders determined to clean up corruption in Washington, and fight for the other 98% of us who aren't Wall Street bankers and insurance company execs.

Mike Lux :: A good day for progressives

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
another bit of good news (0.00 / 0)
The Republican candidate for governor in Georgia just released his financials and he is virtually broke and penniless.  Now, if Barnes will run a positive anti-negative campaign (his only ads have been about Deal's lack of financial transparency), he might pick up some more voters.  This problem with Deal has made some Repubs say they are NOT going to vote at all, or they will write in another candidate.  So, Deal's problems may actually suppress the vote here.

My very Republican friend says that though she is sympathetic to his plight, the fact that his financial problems occured mostly during the recent financial meltdown, casts doubt on his judgement, at least on his financial and business judgement. Remember he won in a squeaker close run-off over Karen Handel, the former Secty of State who resigned her post to mount her governor campaign and who was endorsed by SP in a very visible public appearance in Atlanta.  

It will be interesting to see how the state Dem party handles this.  My opinion is they should stay away from Deal's problems in the short term and focus on energizing those who will/may vote for Barnes.  


Deal (0.00 / 0)
Deal co-signed loans for his daughter's business, an outdoor store with a hiking and hunting motif.  Although the daughter and her husband declared bankruptcy, Nathan Deal and his wife have already lost a $2 million dollar investment and are on the hook for $2 million more.

This says more about his heart overriding his judgment.  I suspect Deal should have gotten out of DC earlier and gone the lobbyist route.  AJC.com says he's averaged $150,000 per year.  Real nice money but not enough for this.

Tread carefully and this may be a plus.  Play it hard and who knows, Barnes could make Deal a "regular guy."  


[ Parent ]
This is a nice story. Father helps his daughter. Who won't? (0.00 / 0)
Sry, but I really don't see how this can be turned into something negative. When it comes to kids, parents don't show the best financial judgment. Everybody knows that. And then, how many people have lost money, or even their whole savings, in the recession? Telling this story will make voters feel connected to Deal, not put him into a bad light. Only my two eurocent. Any other opinions?

[ Parent ]
Hmm, there may be a chance to exploit this, though. (0.00 / 0)
What if Barnes puts a proposal for state support for bankrupt families into his program? To be financed by a property tax increase for real estates exceeding, say, one million dollars? That would be very difficult for Deal to argue against, because of his bankrupt daughter, but at the same time his voters would be pissed off if he supported a tax increase. How about this?

Just a spontaneous idea. Dunno if this has any value.  


[ Parent ]
That'd be better (0.00 / 0)
than going after a candidate's personal finances.  If Barnes is gonna blast Deal for bad financial decisions, he'd have to blast half of America too.

But, I can see Republicans squawking about how such a policy proposal is being made purely to score political points, and the media and voters nodding along dumbly.


[ Parent ]
It's real easy to turn it into a negative (0.00 / 0)
A) Do some opposition research and look for details that allow you to paint his daughter as an incompetent at business.
B) Suggest that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree and if he spawned someone who ran a business into the ground, then there's a good chance he'll run government into the ground.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

[ Parent ]
Wow that's weak (0.00 / 0)
So if Commodus was bad, I guess Marcus Aurelius must've been REALLY awful!

[ Parent ]
That's contrary to the people's personal experiences. (0.00 / 0)
a) So, what? Lots of people either have kids that are incompetent, or at least feel pity for a family they know where this is so.
b) Too many kids are unlike their parents, and people know that. This dog doesn't hunt, either.

So, sry, but you really have to come up with a narrative that sounds plausible to the audience. But this will be very difficult, since in real life family stories like that of the Deals are much too common, and result in people feeling compassion for the "victims". And that would boost Deal's popularity instead of reducing it, of course.  


[ Parent ]
Having said that, ok, maybe there's something in the details. (0.00 / 0)
Dunno, if the daughter made really stupid decisions (that everynbody would recognize as such), and if Deal knew about this, had even been warned it would be a waste of money, and still went all in, there may be a point. Even if it's about  his own daughter, it would make him look bad if he acted like a total fool. But so far nothing shows that this has been a case. However, it may be worth bit to dig a bit deeper.

[ Parent ]
This is a bad idea (0.00 / 0)
We shouldn't go after candidates' families.  Not because "it won't get any political traction"; because it's wrong.  Leave his daughter out of this campaign.

[ Parent ]
Generally, I agree. (0.00 / 0)
This should be obvious from my comments. I don't like the idea to use that.

But then, this is a cynical world, and the rules of engagement have changed in the last decades. It's not a gentleman's business anymore, if it ever was. And being the "beautiful loser" because of ethical concerns time and again won't improve anything. IF there is something in the details of the Deal's deal, this is fair game nowadays. There probably isn't, that guy isn't a total fool, after all. And so the much stronger argument against using this as a campaign issue is that it will SERIOUSLY backfire! The voters will have none of it, and feel compassion for the Deal family instead, because they know too many of such stories from their own lifes.

So, this is counterproductive, and that's why it won't be used as a cmapign issue. Let's be glad about this. Campaigns are ugly enough nowadays anyway.


[ Parent ]
Yes, but it shouldn't be used even if it would be a political winner (0.00 / 0)
Barnes should be able to run and win on his own merits.  If he doesn't think so, then he shouldn't be running.

[ Parent ]
Maybe I'm more cynical than you. (0.00 / 0)
I've never been one of those who argue that the end merits all means, quite to the contrary, I have always protested that this is nazi ideology. However, as I see it, politicians can't expect their families to stay out of the scope of criticsm. That's part of the job. And if there's a REAL problem in the private life of a politician, he can't reasonably expect that this is off limits.

Sry, lm, I very much respect your high ethics, but I really wouldn't go that far in applying it to politics. I hope you don't see me as a bad person now, but I'm too pragmatic to play pedantically by gentleman's rules when the other side constantly shows a total disregard for them.


[ Parent ]
No I get what you're saying (0.00 / 0)
And if there's a REAL problem in the private life of a politician, he can't reasonably expect that this is off limits.

I agree.  But a "REAL problem" would be something like breaking a law, not pitching in for your child's business that eventually didn't turn out so well.


[ Parent ]
More shoes have dropped (0.00 / 0)
There's another loan of 2 plus million taken out in 2009 on behalf of his scrap metal business.  Self-same business was at root of his ethics problems with the House, resulting in his resignation on the eve of his officially being investigated.  Reported 75M from that business as wages in 2008, but reported on his House filings as dividend income, because the 75M exceeded the allowable limit of earned wages above  his house salary.  

This is becoming very obviously a man without sound financial judgment.  He is de-energizing many Republicans, who won't vote for Barnes, who, in spite of running away the party, is still a Dem.  So the energized voter thing can work both ways.  It is a new game here.


[ Parent ]
Good roundup, Mike! (0.00 / 0)
I like the way you're structuring this: Progressives first!

And as for "Democrats had better seize the populist moment", well, DINOs and centrists can't and won't. But that's the right way for good left wingers to position themselves, especially for the PCCC team. And they should be the ones who get the most support from the progressosphere! The others, only if it makes sense. Let's not forget: "He who defends everything defends nothing." (Frederick the Great)


re: structure (4.00 / 2)
I like the way you're structuring this: Progressives first!

see rachel? that's how you do it


[ Parent ]
Hehehe, rethuglicans are not amused! (0.00 / 0)
Want to know how angry the state's Republican leaders are at the campaign of Christine O'Donnell, the perennial candidate who is threatening Rep. Mike Castle in the U.S. Senate race? Here's what Delaware Republican Party chairman Tom Ross told me last night:

   I could buy a parrot and train it to say, 'tax cuts,' but at the end of the day, it's still a parrot, not a conservative.

That, so far, is my favorite line of this election season.


http://voices.washingtonpost.c...

:D


Wall Street (0.00 / 0)
I guess part of the rub with Wall Street is that no one who works on Wall Street actually lives there, so they can't vote for their own champion.

Another Interesting Contrast (0.00 / 0)
The civil war in the Republican party has resulted in yahoos ousting long established Republicans. In the Democratic party, the "civil war" (if that's what you call it) has resulted in the comparatively quiet replacement of corporate Democrats with progressive Democrats. For Republicans, replacing competent office holders with fringe candidates, or losing seats entirely, is a disaster. For Democrats, replacing corporatists with progressives should lead only to better more fair governance. The Republican fight is public and loud. The Democratic fight is more under the sheets.

That said, the success of Tea Party candidates and progressive candidates is one of the few signs at least part of our democracy is healthy and functioning. When voters only get elite-approved choices, we all lose.


Wait a second, there's been "comparatively quiet replacement of corporate Democrats with progressive Democrats"???? (0.00 / 0)
I was not aware of this, and I follow primarying corporatist Democrats like no other.  This replacement must really be quiet.  So quiet it's also invisible, not to mention inaccessible to the other three human senses as well.

Mother Jones did a nice summary of liberal/progressive victories in primaries this election cycle, besides Ann McLane Kuster (though they may have missed some, so if they did feel free to add something).

Joe Sestak beat party-switcher and White House-backed Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania Democratic Senate primary. Liberal- (and Daily Kos-)backed candidate Manan Trivedi (a doctor and Iraq war vet) won a tough House primary race against a more conservative, self-funding opponent in May and will face incumbent GOP Rep. Jim Gerlach in the fall. The night Trivedi won-May 18-Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway beat a more conservative opponent for the Democratic Senate nomination in that state. And on June 22, liberal favorite Elaine Marshall beat establishment-backed Cal Cunningham (the pick of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee) for the Dem Senate nomination in North Carolina.

While these victories are awesome and important and I cheer them, in only one case - Sestak - did a (relatively) liberal Democrat defeat a centrist/corporatist Democrat.  In all the other races, a liberal beat a centrist for the right to face the Republican in the general election, and if they get elected - which I hope they do - they will be replacing Republicans, not Democrats.

Not to mention that none of these candidates are leftist in the way that teabaggers like Rand Paul and Christine O'Donnell are conservative.  For example, AFAIK none of these candidates support Medicare for All. (Elaine Marshall might support a Medicare Buy-in, IIRC.) There is no comparison between Jack Conway, he-who-supports-extending-the-Bush-tax-cuts, and Rand Paul, who has positioned himself as the second coming of Barry Goldwater.  Don't get me wrong; Conway's a fine candidate and better than Dan Mongiardo, but he and the others mentioned are by no means analogs for the left the way their teabagger (or even non-teabagger) opponents are for the right.

All this is to say that we've come nowhere near the success of the Tea Party Movement in both elaborating our principles (that goes without saying, as articulating a simple, clear and consistent ideological message is apparently anathema to the left) and getting standard-bearers nominated.  I hate to be so single-issue about it, but Medicare for All/single-payer really is a very definitive dividing line between true economic liberals/progressives and mainstream, weak-kneed liberals/progressives.  The right has nominated quite a few Social Security opponents; have we nominated any non-incumbent Medicare for All supporters this year?  You know, mock them all you want, but the Tea Party Movement has been extraordinarily successful in controlling the political narrative, articulating and disseminating their core beliefs and winning at least nomination contests, if not general elections (and with the exception of Christine O'Donnell, all their Senate candidates are at least competitive, with many of them favored to win).  We have a lot to learn from the Tea Party.


[ Parent ]
New Hampshire Yesterday (0.00 / 0)
I'm speaking mostly about Swett in NH which, from what I could tell, got zero national news coverage. Instead, the coverage was wall to wall Tea Party. Blanche Lincoln's race got lots of coverage but that was covered as one race, not part of a deliberate strategy by progressives to get rid of DINOs.

[ Parent ]
That's because there is no such strategy (0.00 / 0)
Progressives, by and large, are still sucking President Obama's balls.

You're right that Kuster got zero coverage, and for good reason.  First of all she's just one isolated House race, and House races are usually not as high-profile as Senate ones.  Second, she's isolated, and not part of a larger pattern.  Just like Bill Halter was isolated and not part of a larger patten.  That's my point - we don't have a Tea Party movement on our side.  We just look at who's already running and hope that the slightly less bad one wins, which they do about 1 out of every 10 times.


[ Parent ]
Republicans have every right to be mad. (0.00 / 0)
Their ideologically misfit organization has lied, cheated and stolen its way into near oblivion two elections in a row!

Bush and his civil service-embedded ilk, the taint of Rove going back to Nixon and his Southern strategy, the hangover of TWO illicit wars which were a disproportionate response to cover for crony capitalism ...& Blackwater -- the corruption of our first freedoms, suspension of habeas corpus, an intrusive wire-tapping government and surveillance state AND TORTURE!!! -- if I were a Republican loser who voted for ANY OF these abnegating creeps, I'd be madder than hell!

It's no wonder they now seek power by racism, xenophobia, fear and hate. They have zero platform. Nothing, nada, zip! All they propose is turning back the hands of time to the eighties. Good luck with St.Ronnie ...the worst President ever - before we got the idiot!

The phrase, "Never again!" takes on a whole new meaning!  

They only call it class war when we fight back.


Big infight now among rethuglicans over their O'Donnell coverage! (0.00 / 0)
In the run-up to Delaware's Republican Senate primary, conservative media figures noticed that their colleagues are "lazy and unfair"  "idiot[s]" and "mouthpieces for the Republican establishment" who engage in "ranting, not serious arguments" and whose commentary consists of "smear tactics," "mischaracterizations," "exaggerated claims," "slander," and "attributing sinister or corrupt motives to those who disagree with them."

http://mediamatters.org/resear...

LOL! Pass the popcorn, pls.


Maloney's win not surprising (0.00 / 0)
Carolyn Maloney is a master at winning elections.  Unlike the Republicans who fell to the tea baggers, Carolyn did not sit idly by.  She ran as though she was the underdog.

Maloney does not loose elections--she would have beaten Gillebrand and then the Republican.  She knows her stuff.

I live in a true blue state--I will have a choice in November


"only one big disappointment for progressives yesterday"???!!! (4.00 / 3)
Have you never heard of David Segal?

Segal: Yes, I am. And in Rhode Island I've tried to develop alternative structures for legislators to lean on when the leadership makes such threats. I am the lead organizer for our progressive caucus. I founded a political action committee to support members of our progressive caucus so that if funding from sources dries up at leadership's request because something was done to offend them, that we would have at least some, some degree of money to fall back on to help fund our campaigns nonetheless. We've run ten, twelve races relatively modestly in the last cycle and hopefully we'll be able to do something in the forthcoming cycle.

And I've also helped organize my colleagues to stand up to leadership relative to budgetary issues in particular, and we've stood as a bloc to prevent the de-funding of municipal services during supplemental budget a year ago. It was the progressives negotiating hard with the leadership while the bell calling us into session to come in and take the vote was ringing for two hours and compelled them to restore tens of millions of dollars, well, $25M which in Rhode Island is a big amount of money to municipal services and education funding that if not restored would have compelled progressive property tax increases and cut critical services for our constituents.

So, I'm an organizer at heart and I don't go into this naively and think that as a freshman legislator at the federal level you can just go around and wrangle all of your longer-standing colleagues and get them to do something different than they have done before. But my goal, if I get elected, is to be an organizer to help build solidarities among members and help strengthen the Progressive Caucus so that it can stand stronger up against leadership when it comes to war funding, when it comes to health care, and so on.

This guy, if he stayed true to his word, would've been politically priceless, especially given the spectacular failure of liberals in Congress to negotiate effectively these past two years.  He would've been worth ten members of Congress who call themselves liberals but couldn't negotiate their way out of an open cardboard box (which may or may not apply to the victors you mentioned).  Oh, but Segal lost.  Badly.  And now if he wants to run again he'll have to clear the extra hurdle of primarying an incumbent Democrat, and we all know how easy that is.

Also, don't know if you've heard of Jonathan Tasini.

He is, of course, for a "Medicare for All" single-payer healthcare reform, and for fair trade policies that benefit workers and communities in the United States and the countries it trades with. He's for marriage equality and real reproductive rights for all women.

But Tasini pushes well beyond the standard list of progressive positions to sample from the best of the libertarian playbook. For instance, he's a staunch critic of eminent-domain abuses that take property from low-income families. And he's highlighting his support for decriminalization of personal marijuana use.

Most importantly, however, Tasini is bringing his long experience as a labor and workers-rights activist to the campaign. He promises to "lead the fight for democracy in the workplace, not just make rhetorical statements that talk about the good works unions do."

[...]

Tasini is taking New York City voters seriously. He is offering them a real alternative, not just to Charlie Rangel but to the narrow, unthinking approaches of both major parties. That may not make him a congressman right away. But it does make his one of the most credible - and, I would argue, valuable -- candidacies of a year when our politics needs to be stretched in bolder and better directions.

The silver lining is that Rangel may be retiring in 2012 anyway, so Tasini could have a shot an open seat then.  But still, he pulled in something like 5 percent.  Not very encouraging when his campaign promised to walk the streets and talk to every voter in NY-15.

So no, Mac D'Alessandro was not the "only" big disappointment for us yesterday.  That statement should jump out right away to any progressive as being suspect, since disappointment and defeat are the dominant mainstays of life as a progressive in this sorry country, and last night was hardly an exception.  Please add David Segal and Jonathan Tasini to your list of disappointments.  And personally, I was unimpressed with D'Alessandro that time he came on to Open left anyway.






USER MENU


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you

Donate to Open Left

QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

STATE BLOGS