I’m not surprised.
And democrats can’t figure out why their voters stay home on election day.
Money isn’t everything. Hillary raised 1.4 billion to Trumps 957 million, and Trump still won. Votes are what matter. If all people have to vote for is a wimpy corporate party that is scared of its own shadow and gives up before the fight even starts, then they aren’t going to be motivated to vote.
How important is the DCCC? Its stance is self-serving: DCCC is an organization sponsored by D incumbents for the benefit of D incumbents.
I’d like to hear real Democratic organizations condemn this DCCC action. But I won’t hold my breath.
Where does it say “progressive primary challengers”? From my reading, it’s talking about ALL primary challengers. If the progressive is an incumbent, then firms working with moderate challenger would get blacklisted.
Also, can you cite that Democratic voters stay home on Presidential Election years? They won the popular vote in 2016, 2012, 2008, and 2000, only losing it in 2004 over that time period. (Note to the inevitable nitpickers – I’m not saying winning the popular vote is more important than winning the EC, I’m just quibbling with the statement that Dem voters stay home)
The DCCC isn’t why anyone doesn’t vote. Seriously, get a grip.
And in general incumbents have an advantage in a general election … they certainly have a track record of winning. The interest is limiting internecine conflict that is more likely to hurt the party’s chances to win more seats than to help.
Again, yes. The DCCC favors incumbents, whatever their wing. Anyone challenging Ayanna Pressley or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez next time up will be subject to the same thing.
If they have traditionally stayed home at anytime it has been midterm years.
Yup.
Not sure that this is a great policy but it aint oh the horrors!
Yes, exactly.
I’m not familiar with “reader supported news,” but at a cursory glance it certainly bears a strong similarity to “news” outlets such as “US Uncut” (“Catastrophic California Earthquake Kills 25,000 Likely Sanders Voters, Clintons Probably at Fault”) and “Films for Action” (“Democratic Party Unfairly Allows Moderates to Vote, Stealing Victory from Deserving Progressives”). Organizations that do not allow mere facts to get in the way of the general editorial slants of “Progressives Good, Corporatists Evil” and “Everyone Is Out to Get Us.”
Not organizations that pack a lot of credibility, IOW.
The Democrats don’t win elections by appealing to the left. They win by building a coalition of moderate and liberal voters.
Progressive voters might want to control the party the same way the conservatives control the Republican party but they can’t repeat their success. Liberals aren’t backed up by the kind of power and money that supports the right wing. A right wing minority can win elections; a left wing minority couldn’t.
So progressives and moderates have to work together and that means each side has to make compromises.
The big problem for the Democrats is that most Democratic voters are not progressives. I think that progressives are on the upswing, but the news hasn’t filtered out to all Democrats, many of whom are quite comfortable being centrist.
Whoever winds up winning the presidential nomination will determine the perceived direction for the party and that will discomfit a large segment of the voters. No towering personality has emerged capable of uniting the whole party into a coherent political force.
In the meantime, the Congressional candidates will run on mostly local issues. The AOCs are the exceptions. Lots of incumbents will be primary challenged by more conservative candidates. The DCCC should be just as concerned about them.
That said, I think this move won’t last. There will be a backlash. Even so, this move is not as elitist or conservative or inside-Beltway as you’re making it out to be. Protecting the incumbents is why the DCCC exists, and doing so is not a completely stupid policy.
Yep, and the DCCC is abosultely right to do this. Look, the Dems can’t spend money on in fighting. The GOP maintains a tight front (in public).
If these hot new progressives want a congressional seat, let them challenge a Republican in a purple district. But they dont- because they know they will lose. So instead they come in and spend big bux and make the sitting candidate spend big bux to defend- money that could be spent unseating republicans. Pretty much these hot new progressives only run in safe districts.
They are hurting party unity and keeping the Dems from retaking all of congress.