General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLaelth
(32,017 posts)Do you agree that the United States would benefit from being more liberal, as a whole?
If you said yes, then we should primary incumbent Democrats to the right of the partys mainstream and not the ones to the partys left.
That is all.
-Laelth
jorgevlorgan
(8,351 posts)Unfortunately many don't agree.
lapucelle
(18,408 posts)but she is to the right of Nancy Pelosi, Jerrold Nadler, Carolyn Maloney, Eliot Engel, and William Lacy Clay all of whom faced primaries from "progressives".
Ilhan Omar is a Populist-Leaning Liberal
*******************************************************************************************************
Nancy Pelosi is a Hard-Core Liberal
******************************************************************************************************
Jerrold Nadler is a Hard-Core Liberal.
******************************************************************************************************
Carolyn Maloney is a Hard-Core Liberal.
*****************************************************************************************************
William Lacy Clay is a Hard-Core Liberal.
*****************************************************************************************************
Eliot Engel is a Hard-Core Liberal.
https://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm
lapucelle
(18,408 posts)mcar
(42,467 posts)primarying incumbents.
lapucelle
(18,408 posts)mcar
(42,467 posts)Seems like, for some, it's more about image than reality.
Demsrule86
(68,800 posts)the left until the left does the hard work of winning hearts and minds and can win generals...and it is required for all Democrats to support the Democratic nominee...not doing so is ground for a primary...party loyalty matters.
George II
(67,782 posts)..."centrist" candidates won the primaries and the general elections. Had the "progressive" won any of those primaries the seats would have been lost to the republicans.
qazplm135
(7,447 posts)1. how do you determine "the party's mainstream?" Biden ran away with the nomination so is he the party's mainstream?
2. Primaries are the only manner in which constituents can express either their happiness with or disavowal of their current rep in this scenario. Your "no primaries unless they are to the right" rule tells them to fuck off if they happen to be upset with someone who you think is to the left of the mainstream.
Primary anyone. If they have the will of their people, they will win, easily. If they don't, they lose. That's how representative democracy works. And last time I checked, representative democracy was a pretty effing core democratic AND Democratic AND Liberal/progressive value.
JI7
(89,288 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)#158 of 232 Democrats, far behind Democrats that some deem "not progressive enough" like Carolyn Maloney (#4), Eliot Engel (#31), Jerry Nadler (#36), and William Clay (#54)
George II
(67,782 posts)For one thing, there aren't many incumbents who meet that criteria.
For another, we have to consider the constituency of the incumbent which is an indication of their ability to WIN.
I'd much prefer a Democrat in office ("in office" being the key words) who is in sync with Democrats 80% of the time than a Democrat who would be 100% in sync but has no chance of being elected - resulting in a republican who would be 0% in sync with Democrats.
This isn't an all or nothing proposition. We saw that a number of times in 2018 when, thankfully, Democrats "to the right" (who judges that?) won their primaries against Democrats "to the left" and then went on to win their general elections.
A "non-pure" (in the eyes of some, not me) Democrat in office is 100% better than a "pure" Democrat sitting on the sidelines.
George II
(67,782 posts)Of the roughly 235 Democrats in the House, Omar is rated #158 (67th percentile. 50% being "mainstream" so she is, as you put it, "to the right of the party's mainstream. Using your criteria she should be primaried.
For that matter, since someone mentioned them in this discussion, the rest of "the squad" are:
Pressley #113 (48th percentile)
Tlaib #129 (55th percentile)
Omar #158 (67th percentile)
Ocasio-Cortez #169 (72and percentile)
https://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?topic=&house=house&sort=overall-current&order=down&party=
That is all.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)I stand by my original position. If we want a more liberal America, we should avoid primarying Democrats on our left wing. Thats not to say I favor primarying any incumbent Democrats, per se, but if there are primaries against our incumbents, I would prefer to see our more conservative members primaried.
If representative Omar fits this bill, so be it, but I remain uncomfortable about the fact that the Governor of Colorado decided to tip the scales on this race. He has every right to do so, of course, but it strikes me as heavy-handed and undemocratic.
-Laelth
George II
(67,782 posts)Do you consider that "heavy-handed"? Endorsements are commonplace by politicians, both in office and out of office.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Somehow the campaign contribution seems unethical, coming from a sitting Democratic Governor of another state, but thats just me.
I dont want to fight with you about this, George. I avoided responding to anyone after I made my initial response in this thread. I did want to thank you, however, for some useful data on the voting habits of various members of our caucus.
Thanks again.
-Laelth
George II
(67,782 posts)....campaign filings. I pore over them periodically.
qazplm135
(7,447 posts)that best represents them, and I will support whomever wins.
redstatebluegirl
(12,265 posts)bullimiami
(13,114 posts)The people of the district will decide it at the ballot box.
If Polis makes a poor decision in the voters eyes then he can be primaried when his turn comes round.
Raven123
(4,932 posts)Seems to me there is enough work to be done in Colorado.
lapucelle
(18,408 posts)He made a campaign contribution.
brooklynite
(94,974 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Only 8%* of Omar's contributions came from people within Minnesota (probably much less from her District)
Why are contributors of 92% of her contributions getting involved?
*28% from California
*10% from New York
maximusveritas
(2,915 posts)I do think AOC and the Squad are a net negative for the party so if there is a good chance to defeat one of them, I'm all for it
tritsofme
(17,440 posts)liskddksil
(2,753 posts)and defenders of public schools, evil on Twitter. I will never support him in a Presidential Primary.
http://jonathanpelto.com/2013/09/20/democratic-congressman-tweeted-ravitch-evil-goes-compare-koch-brothers/
marmar
(77,118 posts)MineralMan
(146,351 posts)what the Governor of Colorado thinks? I can't imagine anyone at all cares who can vote in our August 11, primary in Minnesota. Nobody except voters in that district matter in that primary election.
Happy Hoosier
(7,480 posts)Her refusal to endorse the Party nominee is a problem. I think a candidate who can't support the party nominee should not expect party support, and if someone primaries her for that? Hard to to argue with that, IMO.
judeling
(1,086 posts)Whoever wins the primary will win the general.
judeling
(1,086 posts)of that 7 of us caucused, 4 ended up with Antoine and 3 with Omar.
Of that three, two have or will have switched to Antoine.
This will be closer then people think and I have no idea how it will come down. Being on Trump's list is a huge positive for her. But most of the rest is trending against her.