Why Is The DCCC Leaning So Heavily In Favor Of Conservatives And Against Progressives?
>
Sean Sullivan covers national politics for The Fix. Prior to joining the Washington Post in the summer of 2012, Sean was the editor of Hotline On Call, National Journal Hotline’s politics blog. He has also worked for NHK Japan Public Broadcasting and ABC News. Sean is a graduate of Hamilton College, where he received a degree in Philosophy. He lives in Washington, D.C. If you read Sean's latest for the Post, Democrats Are Looking To Exapnd The 2014 House Map, Here's Where, you will have a better understanding of the depths political journalism has sunk to inside the Beltway. Sean, apparently, sees his job-- as do most of his colleagues-- as a stenographer for the two parties' political committees. He recycles their talking points and the Post passes it off as journalism in a world where anything smacking of "analysis" is strictly avoided (unless it's by someone really credible, like Richard Cohen. And it is just like all the other crap that gets passed off as "political journalism" in Washington… so no one even notices. And a p.r. person gets a gold star for placing the client's messaging in a prime location. Can't the Post afford actual journalists aside from Greg Sargent? Or do they just not want to disturb the apple cart by hiring them?
"House Democratic strategists," he writes, "are aggressively looking to expand the 2014 map by competing in some districts that were not major battlegrounds in the 2012 campaign in the hopes of giving themselves a bit of a margin for error next November." OK, who are these House Democratic strategists? Steve Israel? And what's behind this strategy? Aren't "who?" and "what?" something they teach on the first day of journalism school anymore? He quotes from DCCC staffers, all of whom are presumably working towards the same goal: personal wealth and never gets into any of Steve Israel's motivations.
Although there is absolute truth to say that the Democrats stumbled into some good luck with James Lee Witt in western and southern Arkansas (AR-04), let's be clear; this is a district with an R+15 PVI, where Obama took 37% against McCain and did even worse against Romney and where the last Democrat who ran-- also in an open seat situation-- managed to win just 3 of the district's 17 counties.
The other targeted incumbents mentioned are:
And then there are the better targets that Israel is determined to ignore for personal and political reasons, like these obvious vulnerable incumbents:
So Steve Israel is trying to expand the map. Perhaps Sullivan should have looked at these two independent polling results from MoveOn and PPP, one for OH-06 (Johnson vs Garrison) and one for MI-06 (Upton vs Clements). Keep in mind, Israel and his cronies are already squandering thousands of dollars in OH-06 on behalf of the anti-Choice, anti-gay, anti-environment, anti-worker Garrison… and not a cent in MI-06 on behalf of the progressive Democrat, Paul Clements. Even an Inside-the-Beltway fake journalist might notice something amiss here:
If you'd like to help offer an alternative to Steve Israel's efforts to stock the House Democratic Caucus with conservatives, you can contribute to any of these progressive candidates.
"House Democratic strategists," he writes, "are aggressively looking to expand the 2014 map by competing in some districts that were not major battlegrounds in the 2012 campaign in the hopes of giving themselves a bit of a margin for error next November." OK, who are these House Democratic strategists? Steve Israel? And what's behind this strategy? Aren't "who?" and "what?" something they teach on the first day of journalism school anymore? He quotes from DCCC staffers, all of whom are presumably working towards the same goal: personal wealth and never gets into any of Steve Israel's motivations.
Although there is absolute truth to say that the Democrats stumbled into some good luck with James Lee Witt in western and southern Arkansas (AR-04), let's be clear; this is a district with an R+15 PVI, where Obama took 37% against McCain and did even worse against Romney and where the last Democrat who ran-- also in an open seat situation-- managed to win just 3 of the district's 17 counties.
The other targeted incumbents mentioned are:
• Tim Walberg (MI-07) R+3, good target, decent candidateHad Sullivan bothered to glimpse at the DCCC's Jumpstart page-- Israel's priority candidates-- he might have found some interesting names that weren't mentioned and wondered about some interesting races that Israel is ignoring and leaving off the radar entirely. There are twenty Jumpstarters so far and surely an article about expanding the map should include Israel recruits like Jennifer Garrison, in deep red OH-06 (R+8), and John Lewis in Montana's at-large district, where Obama took 42% last year, Jon Tester was reelected with 49%, a Democrat retained the governor's mansion with 49% and Republican Steve Daines was elected over the conservative DCCC hack Israel recruited in 2012, Kim Gillan 53-43%. And then there's Pete Aguilar in solid blue CA-31, an empty suit who Israel recruited in 2012 and who lost to two Republicans back then but who Israel is determined to back again, despite a far better candidate, Eloise Reyes. Israel's endorsement of proven losers like Aguilar and Garrison, are a key to understanding his recruitment strategy. Aguilar, a conservative who raises money from local Republicans (like GOP mega-donor Jack Dangermond), has a scant record (although he did admit that he would vote to cut Social Security benefits, unlike Reyes) but Garrison is the embodiment of everything Democrats are fighting against. She is Ohio's most homophobic Democratic politician and single-handedly prevented her state's ENDA bill from passing. And she voted against the Ohio minimum wage increase. Both of these are inconvenient facts that Israel is desperate to hide from his House colleagues just at the time the Democrats are trying to pass ENDA and raise the minimum wage. I guess Sullivan couldn't connect those dots for the Post; maybe they pay badly.
• Frank LoBiondo (NJ-02) D+1, good target, decent candidate
• Stevan Pearce (NM-02) R+5- interfering in a viable primary on behalf of the more conservative candidate
• Lee Terry (NE-02) R+4- plausible target, plausible candidate
• Tom Reed (NY-23) R+3- good target, good candidate
And then there are the better targets that Israel is determined to ignore for personal and political reasons, like these obvious vulnerable incumbents:
• Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-27)All of these districts have a few things in common aside from Israel's refusal to engage. Obama won each in 2008 and/or 2012. Each has a far easier PVI than most of the districts Israel has chosen to spend money on. Upton and Reichert, for example is in R+1 districts, unlike Garrison's R+8. Garrison, however, is the kind of corrupt conservative Israel loves and Upton's and Reichert's opponents, respectively Jason Ritchie and Paul Clements are progressives and ethically solid.
• Fred Upton (MI-06)
• Buck McKeon (CA-25)
• Dave Reichert (WA-08)
• Mike Rogers (MI-08)
• John Kline (MN-02)
• Paul Ryan (WI-01)
• Erik Paulsen (MN-03)
• Pat Meehan (PA-07)
So Steve Israel is trying to expand the map. Perhaps Sullivan should have looked at these two independent polling results from MoveOn and PPP, one for OH-06 (Johnson vs Garrison) and one for MI-06 (Upton vs Clements). Keep in mind, Israel and his cronies are already squandering thousands of dollars in OH-06 on behalf of the anti-Choice, anti-gay, anti-environment, anti-worker Garrison… and not a cent in MI-06 on behalf of the progressive Democrat, Paul Clements. Even an Inside-the-Beltway fake journalist might notice something amiss here:
If you'd like to help offer an alternative to Steve Israel's efforts to stock the House Democratic Caucus with conservatives, you can contribute to any of these progressive candidates.
Labels: 2014 congressional races, DCCC, Steve Israel
2 Comments:
Why Is The DCCC Leaning So Heavily In Favor Of Conservatives And Against Progressives?
Because the Democratic Party is composed of the same corporate whores who comprise the Republican Party. Duh!
You think the Dems work for you? Ha! They serve their corporate masters, and no one else. (Well, sometimes they serve the state of Israel. But not you.)
"We have only one political party, which is the party of corporate America, and it has two right wings - one called Republican, one called Democratic." - Gore Vidal
They're all a bunch of criminals and assholes. The only difference between the two parties is that the Democrats have a few - FEW - respectable members, while the repubs have none.
That's OK with them. A few, they can tolerate, because "a few" have no significant power. Keeping them around prompts normal people to think they have some control over the situation, when they really don't.
I contribute, but I'm getting damned sick of not getting significant results. When we do have someone good come up - Howard Dean, for instance - who shoots him down? It wasn't the republicans! It was the motherfucking DEMOCRATS who killed Dean's candidacy! Then they put in that worthless Kerry instead. You know, John "I'll fight for every vote" Kerry, who five minutes after the polls closed, hightailed it to Europe for two months.
So what do we get for president now? A "Democrat", who is almost as bad a corporate shill as any of the republicans would have been.
Like I said, I contribute, but it's hard to compete with the 100's of millions from the Kochsuckers. If voters weren't so damned stupid, they wouldn't fall for the lies and propaganda. But, to offer another quote,
"Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain." - Friedrich von Schiller
You remember George McGovern, of course. It wasn't the republicans who beat him either - it was the DEMOCRATS.
I fucking HATE the Democratic Party.
Post a Comment
<< Home