General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Great Democratic Crack-Up of 2016
Robert Draper, The New York Times:This past March, when Barbara Mikulski, the longest-serving woman in United States Senate history, unexpectedly announced that she would not be seeking a sixth term in 2016, national progressive groups quickly threw their weight behind their dream candidate: Donna Edwards. A pugnacious former community organizer, Edwards is a four-term African-American congresswoman from Prince Georges County, one of the most affluent majority-black counties in the United States. But she wasnt the favorite of establishment Democrats. For them, the obvious choice to replace Mikulski was the seven-term congressman Chris Van Hollen, who is considered a progressive like Edwards, but has a reputation for coolheaded practicality and for working well with Republicans. Of the bills sponsored by Van Hollen in the previous session of Congress, 37 percent included at least one Republican co-sponsor. For Edwards, the corresponding figure was 0 percent. Where she is viewed as a warrior for liberal causes, he is seen as a conciliator, one whose lets-sit-down-and-talk-this-over geniality led to his tenure as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee from 2007 to 2011 and, thereafter, to his designation as the House Democrats point man on bipartisan budget discussions. As their lead negotiator, Van Hollen has immersed himself in the sort of legislative sausage-making that typically entails compromise, like his expressed willingness, in 2012, to consider restructuring Social Security as part of an overall deficit-reduction agreement. To progressives, this was nothing less than apostasy.
Though the Senate Democratic primary was a year away, the national groups supporting Edwards knew that Van Hollen would be viewed as the prohibitive front-runner if they didnt define the stakes of the contest immediately. Three of these groups the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Democracy for America and Blue America sent out a blizzard of fund-raising solicitations, petitions and emails to members and to the media, one of which hailed Edwards as a true Elizabeth Warren Democrat, referring to the U.S. senator from Massachusetts whose confrontational stances on economic issues have galvanized the left. Van Hollen received an altogether different reception. Within hours after he made his candidacy official on March 4, three other voices from the liberal wing of the party MoveOn, Credo Action and Daily Kos, the website run by the activist Markos Moulitsas openly questioned his progressive bona fides and implied that he was one of a breed of corporate New Democrats.? Moulitsass website declared that Van Hollens flexibility on Social Security amounted to a major red flag, making him a candidate that may bargain away retirement security. Edwards, meanwhile, entered the race pointedly pledging never to tamper with Social Security, no ifs, ands, buts or willing-to-considers.
Whichever Democratic candidate wins the primary next spring, he or she will be heavily favored to become the states next U.S. senator. Because of this, the Maryland contest is unlikely to hinge on which candidate can appeal to the broadest spectrum of voters on Election Day. Rather, it will be a fight over what a true Democrat should, and should not, be. This identity struggle was born out of devastating losses at the polls last November, but it is rooted in intraparty disagreements that have been decades in the making. And it is by no means limited to Maryland. In Illinois, Florida, California and elsewhere, progressive groups have asserted their energies to promote what they hope will be populist warriors in the Elizabeth Warren mold while weeding out those judged to be ideologically tepid. The recently announced presidential candidacy of Bernie Sanders, the self-described socialist senator from Vermont, will no doubt increase the partys gravitational pull leftward. Still, given Van Hollens history as a highly effective liberal legislator, the effort to push him aside in favor of Edwards is a striking development for a party that has largely kept its internal skirmishes under wraps. As Neil Sroka, the communications strategist for the liberal group Democracy for America, puts it, We view primaries like this one as a fight over the future of the Democratic Party.
I've met with Donna Edwards, and I'd meet with Van Hollen if he asked me, but I'd be happy with either candidate and don't see a need to get into the middle of this race in the Primary.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)You get what you pay for you know.
brooklynite
(94,745 posts)...I never ask for anything (except for mainstream Democratic policies), and whomever wins will get elected, so my money can go to races that are far more difficult (currently IL, CO, MO, FL and OH).
I know it spoils your stereotype, but I'm happy to support progressives (incl. Warren and Grayson) if they can prove to me that they can win.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)brooklynite
(94,745 posts)Are you insinuating that, I'm a 1%er so I must be supporting Republicans?
It would be impolite to suggest that would be idiotic and stereotypical comment...so I won't suggest it.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)I'm from CO and you mentioned my state.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)What is 'winning'? We 'won' in 2008, supposedly.
brooklynite
(94,745 posts)Infrastructure spending...elimination of the Bush tax cuts...elimination of DADT...support for Marriage Equality...the Affordable Care Act...Immigration reform...
Fortunately, your long nightmare will be over in 2017.