Blue Mass Group

Jared Golden has just won the Maine 2 Congressional race unseating incumbent Republican Representative Bruce Poliquin.

The results of the Ranked Choice Voting tabulation requiring 50% plus 1 majority were :

Golden (D)  139,231  50.5%

Poliquin (R)   136,326  49.5%

Lessons :  1. when all the votes are counted, Democrats usually win.  2. Massachusetts needs to make RCV the law.

Back when I was a more active blogger around a decade ago, there was an expression: “More and Better Democrats.” We wanted to elect more Democrats, sure, but specifically the best Democrats we could in each district, acknowledging that some Democrats were too often disappointing, especially when they represented districts that offered the political freedom to Better Democrats. Yes, there are still unfinished races around the country from this past 2018 cycle; and, any minute now, most political oxygen will be consumed by the 2020 Democratic Presidential primaries. So, during this post-election period before it’s all-presidential-all-the-time, I wanted to share my wish list of the Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives most in need of a one-on-one progressive primary challenger in 2020 – Democrats we can replace with Better Democrats.  I’ve ranked the top seven members I’d like to see primaried, whose average age is 64 years old (i.e. for some, at least, the prospect of a vigorous primary challenger could encourage thoughts of retirement).

7] Jim Costa (CA-16, age 66) – Costa has been in elected office for 40 years, and has served as a co-Chair of the Blue Dog Coalition, a coalition of conservative Democrats in the House. He has the House Democratic caucus’ third worst Progressive Punch score, which compares the conservative bent of his voting with the liberal bent of his district. If progressive Democrats could unite behind a single progressive candidate, and if a Republican runs, this is a district in which California’s unusual “top two” primary could work in progressives’ favor, as conservatives would likely support a Republican candidate, eroding Costa’s right flank, as non-conservative Democrats potentially break for the more progressive option (if, in fact, progressives unite behind a sole challenger). Costa reportedly has been an unengaged campaigner, leading to surprisingly narrower wins in 2010 and 2014 than the district’s makeup would expect. If Costa hemorrhages support from both the right (to a Republican) and the left (to a more progressive Democrat), he could easily finish third in a “top two” primary. Also, after four decades in elected office, a strong challenger from his left with unified grassroots support could encourage Costa to simply retire.

6] David Trone (MD-06, age 63) – Trone now holds the distinction of being the largest self-funder in House race history. He spent $13 million of his own money trying to win the neighboring MD-08 seat in 2016, finishing second in the Democratic primary. In 2018, he spent another $12 million of his own money winning the MD-06 Democratic primary, with just 40.4% of the vote, nearly 10 points ahead of state delegate Aruna Miller who finished with 30.6% (who spent only $1.25 million). Trone calls himself a “progressive Democrat.” As he embarks on his first term, we’ll see how his voting record bears out in this solidly Democratic district. Failure to live up to that self-designation of “progressive Democrat” should immediately earn him a primary challenger, as he won the primary in 2018 on the strength of his checkbook and on the serendipity of a crowded primary (in addition to Trone and Miller, two other candidates in the primary topped 10%). If Trone doesn’t walk the progressive walk as a Congressman, and if progressives can unite behind one candidate, Trone would remain vulnerable to a one-on-one progressive primary challenger, even with his checkbook. For those seeking out breadcrumbs, Delegate Miller did like a tweet urging her to run again next cycle. Read More…

The republic is literally on the brink and he’s being cute.

Faction over country, Seth!

 

I almost never write in the first person in political posts, but I have a confession to make.

Last year, despite my long-time admiration for the tremendous legislative achievements of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, I was wavering. I was wavering because we faced a grim future of total Republican control of our federal government, combined with nearly total appeasement by that Republican establishment of an authoritarian-minded ‘President’. This ‘President’, while very likely to be found, with the tincture of time, to be illegitimate by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, or by history, was still ascendant politically.

It seemed last year that Pelosi’s best days might have been in the past, with the Republicans’ decades-long smear campaign against her appearing to be an irredeemable success. I, like many, was finding it hard to imagine sticking with Pelosi out of sheer loyalty based on her past achievements, if that loyalty risked an unthinkable failure to take back the House.

I also had been a Bernie supporter, and was very concerned about the savaging of Bernie supporters on social media by some of my closest allies, and Pelosi seemed to be from that wing of the party (even though she largely kept her counsel on Bernie). Watching the Russian intelligence manipulation of a very small segment of Bernie supporters that many of us saw early on and were later proven right about, also had the counter-effect of causing many Bernie supporters like me to more easily support Hillary in the final, but it still created some additional suspicion of Pelosi for a time.

I also admired, and continue to admire, Congressman Seth Moulton, and I could see the logic in moving on, and I agreed with his implication that no politician “deserves” to be Speaker. It is a question of the best means to achieving political goals to benefit others, and is simply a matter of political utility. (Despite Moulton not being an ally of Pelosi, in the end he will likely not vote against her on the floor, when we sorely need a united front against our ‘President’.)

Yet by earlier this year, I was involved with another brilliant female candidate, Alexandra Chandler, and I felt personal loyalty to her campaign manager, Fred Rich LaRiccia. (Fred had managed my run for office two decades ago, and Fred managed Katherine Clark’s first campaign. I knew they all fiercely supported Pelosi.) I had long known Clark personally through Fred, and I had seen Clark not only excel in Congress, but also show extraordinary character in many personal matters, including quietly taking the time to attend the very small and very private memorial service of Fred’s partner.

I met Pelosi in 1986 when I was an intern in the House with Detroit Democrat John Conyers, Jr., and I myself felt loyalty toward her, because she had been the leader in the House on human rights issues dear to me both domestically, and internationally – particularly with regard to China.

So I kept my misgivings to myself.

In sum, had it not been for my cross-cutting ties, I was so concerned at that time about continuing with Pelosi, I might have jumped ship. That is my confession.

But here’s the real story. While some of us were engaged in all of this hand-wringing, Congresswoman Katherine Clark of Melrose was in action. Katherine Clark was working day and night on behalf of Nancy Pelosi as the head of Pelosi’s effort to recruit the best possible candidates in an unprecedented effort to mount viable campaigns in as many of the 435 House districts as possible.

Look at where we are today.

We are not out of the populist, Know-Nothing, proto-authoritarian woods, but it is now a brighter day. And we are seeing this new day in no small part due to the quiet, unsung (until recently) hard work of people like Nancy Pelosi and Katherine Clark to harness the energy of the decent left and center of this nation to flip the House.

And we did flip the House. We won. Big.

This puts Pelosi allies like my congressman Richard Neal as head of the Ways and Means Committee (the only committee in all of Congress with the legal authority to demand the ‘President’s’ tax returns), and Worcester’s Rep. Jim McGovern as head of the Rules Committee, with the power to advance or kill legislation.

There is something we can all do to reward all of this good work in the trenches by Katherine Clark. Katherine Clark is currently running to be the vice-chair of the Democratic House Caucus. I urge BMG’ers to call their member of congress to urge their support for Katherine Clark’s present candidacy for this position, the fifth most powerful political post in the House. She surely earned it this year.

I learned a lesson. Sometimes loyalty is not something that is pursued for its own sake. Sometimes the wisdom of the broader community, including our elders, is something to respect – not for the sake of adhering to conservative cultural shibboleths, but because sometimes our elders and those who work to advance their judgment, actually know what they are doing, and best advance progress.

Experience is never something to be glibly disregarded. Nancy Pelosi is not a creature of the past. Nancy Pelosi and her allies have responsibly and skillfully nurtured this blue wave. We are all very fortunate that Nancy Pelosi is standing between us and this malignant aberration in the White House. Today. Nancy Pelosi, Katherine Clark, Richard Neal, and Jim McGovern know what they are doing. Now, more than ever, we need everyone, including experienced people who know what they are doing, to be an effective check on this ‘President’.

I’m always a sucker for the who’s moving up games and the Boston Globe has obliged.  Of course the most prominent name on this list for Dems is AG Maura Healey whom I love in her current office, but when was the last time an AG actually got the top spot (and not for want of trying)?  I can’t think of whom I might want at the moment, but maybe that’s due to lack of imagination.  I’m not keen on someone for whom business is their only experience.