Voting Strategically In Iowa-- Against Blue Dog Leonard Boswell

Last night we looked at the horrific choices in some of the Senate races around the country-- exceedingly bad Democratic candidates like Joe Manchin (WV), Joe Donnelly (IN), Claire McCaskill (MO), Bob Kerrey (NE), Shelley Berkley (NV), and Tim Kaine (VA), to name a few, running against-- in every case even worse Republicans. Claire McCaskill, for example, has been one of the worst Democrats in the Senate since she beat Jim Talent in a Democratic sweep year with a bare 50% of the vote. This session her ProgressivePunch vote score was a dismal 67.86 on crucial substantive votes,, the third worst of any Democrat in the Senate, beaten out only by the wretched Jo Manchin (62.50) and Republican-all-but-in-name Ben Nelson (57.14). McCaskill, in other words, has voted more frequently with the Republicans than Joe Lieberman (CT), Mark Pryor (AR), Mary Landrieu (LA), and Max Baucus (79.09). But McCaskill's opponent? Todd "legitimate rape" Akin. What a horrible choice for voters in Missouri to have to make.

Right after writing that post I found an e-mail from an old friend from Iowa, Ed Fallon, who Blue America backed in his primary challenge against Blue Dog Leonard Boswell in 2008. We even had a cool song for the campaign:

Ed didn't challenge Boswell again this year. Instead Boswell is caught in an incumbent vs incumbent drag-out-knock-out battle with conservative corporate whore Tom Latham. I'd grade Boswell and Lathan both "F," although Latham is an even worse congressman than Boswell. Ed, still one of the loudest and clearest progressive voices in Iowa, is urging his followers to vote against both of them.

Just as I am most certainly voting FOR Barack Obama, I am most certainly NOT voting for Leonard Boswell. I am also not voting for Tom Latham. Before I tell you who I AM voting for for Congress, let me give you five reasons why you, too, should not vote for Boswell.
1. Lack of integrity. Perhaps you have your own stories. I have heard some of them. Mine include Boswell sending an aide to bribe me with the offer of an $80,000 a-year job to not run against him. The aide also told me that Boswell was so in love with power that he had "become like Gollum with the ring." The 2008 campaign itself was brutal, and it seemed there were no lies or half-truths that Boswell and his operatives would not stoop to.
2. Of the Democrats who have represented Iowa in Congress over the past several decades, there are none whose voting record is more out of sync with Democratic priorities than Boswell. Yet Party leaders insist we support him because Latham is so, so bad. It's a lousy argument and we shouldn't buy it, because when we do it empowers the Party to stuff another corporate Democrat down our throats next time. In fact, I guarantee you Party insiders have already drafted the short list of pro-big-business Democrats they want to foist on us when Boswell loses.
3. A common reason given for not voting for third party candidates is they will most certainly lose. Well, Boswell will most certainly lose, so let's be consistent. In 2008, Boswell outspent me 3 - 1 and I got trounced (39%). At last count, Latham raised six times as much money as Boswell. I sure wish money in politics didn't matter, but let's be realistic. There's a name for a candidate who gets outspent 6 - 1. It's "loser."
4. Some argue that Democrats and moderates need to support Boswell because we don't want the US House controlled by right-wing Republicans. Granted, Paul Ryan's House is a very scary place. But even the most favorable projections don't see a path to Democrats taking control of the House. So, Boswell losing will not tip the balance of power in Congress.
5. Conceding the seat to Latham opens the door for a strong, progressive-populist Democrat to win the primary in 2014 and beat Latham in an election where voters are actually presented with a clear choice. The best thing we can do in the third district is to create some momentum through a write-in campaign for a strong progressive who can beat Latham in 2014. So, with that in mind, I'm writing in...

Frank Cownie! To be clear, I have not communicated with Frank about this in any way, shape or form. In fact, Frank may want to issue a disclaimer, and that's fine. But Frank, you've served well as Mayor of Des Moines. You've got your priorities right. You'd make a heck of a Congressman, and if enough of us write-in your name, it will send a message to the Party elite that we won't tolerate another hand-picked corporate Democrat representing us in Congress.
And to be clear about one other thing: I am absolutely not running for Congress ever again, neither in this life nor the next.

The DCCC will probably spend around $2 million trying to keep the Des Moines based seat for Boswell. With that money they could elect 3 progressives-- like Lee Rogers (CA), Sue Thorn (WV) and Aryanna Strader (PA)... and for an extra $500,000 Patsy Keever (NC) as well. Those 4 would actually vote for Democratic Party  ideals and values and work diligently for working families. Boswell works diligently too-- for corporations and for Republican values. In the current 2011-12 session of Congress, Boswell has voted about equally with the GOP and the Democrats. His ProgressivePunch crucial vote score is 52.76. What a piece of shit! And that's reflected in recent polls showing Latham beating him in November. At this point it looks like the only thing that could save his miserable career would be Obama's coattails. In 2008 Obama won the 3rd district with 54% of the vote. After redistricting, the seat is less Democratic-leaning; Obama would have won but only with 52%. One less Blue Dog is always a good thing.