Will Kentucky Democrats Shut Down Boss Hogg-- I Mean Boss Schumer?

Schumer picked a slate of miserable status quo Democratic Senate candidates for 2020. Not one of them stands for any change except the superficial change of replacing a corporate Republican with a corporate Democrat. If there's an anti-red wave, some of them will win. They define why there is no blue wave. There's nothing to vote for-- just a series of less-of-two evils races:

• Arizona- Mark Kelly (a recent Democrat)
• Alaska- Al Gross (not even a Democrat)
• Arkansas- Schumer neglected to recruit a candidate against Tom Cotton
• Colorado- Frackenlooper
• Georgia- Jon Ossoff*
• Iowa- Theresa Greenfield*
• Kansas- Barbara Bollier (a recent "Democrat")
• Maine- Sara Gideon
• Montana- Steve Daines (even a clock is right twice a day; Schumer got it right once)
• New Mexico- Ben Ray Luján*
• North Carolina- Cal Cunningham*
• South Carolina- Jaime Harrison (a lobbyist)
• Texas- MJ Heger*

The asterisk (*) denotes candidates whose photos could be in the dictionary next to the phrase "born loser." and then, at least symbolically, there's the most important Senate race of the cycle: Kentucky, where majority leader and professional impediment Mitch McConnell-- the most hated man in poll after poll-- in American politics. Schumer picked a "born loser" candidate and the media, obediently accepted her as THE candidate and treated it as a fait accompli... until last week, when, despite Schumer's attempt to pretend his candidate, Amy McGrath, was the candidate Kentucky Democrats started asking themselves who some lug from Brooklyn, fully owned and operated by Wall Street, gets to pick their nominee. Especially since there's a better candidate in the race, Charles Booker.

As of June 3rd, Booker had raised $788,270, almost entirely from grassroots donors. The Schumer candidate-- with lots of help from Schumer-- brought in $40,825,989. A consultant for Schumer's candidate persuaded her to come off as a pro-Trump Democrat, something that hasn't exactly impressed Kentucky Democrats. Booker's vibrant, progressive grassroots coalition helps explain his growing appeal-- and why the state's two most important newspapers, the Louisville Courier Journal and the Lexington Herald Leader endorsed him so effusively last week.

Schumer must have been going crazy on Wednesday when someone told him the Courier Journal endorsement was going to make much harder for him to quietly slip his nothing candidate into the nomination, the way he had already done in North Carolina, Georgia, Iowa and Texas. "This," wrote the editorial board, "is a historic time in our state and nation. A time when young and old, black, white and brown are calling for change-- not just incremental change, but sweeping reform that will usher in true equality and justice for all. To get there, we need political leaders with insight and vision, who understand the challenges of our times and are willing to put forth bold ideas and fight for everyday people. Voters in Kentucky and around the country deserve the chance to consider candidates who have strident beliefs and the courage to go beyond scripted, milquetoast politics." Schumer is all about pickinging "scripted, milquetoast" hacks. "Political leaders with insight and vision" scares the hell out of him and infuriates him. They wrote that Booker "is the kind of political leader and change agent that our commonwealth needs" but that the Schumer candidate-- doing exactly what Schumer directed her to do-- "has not shown the progressive ideas and bold leadership necessary to move our state forward. She has been overly moderate, measured and cautious throughout this campaign, focusing more on her military service (which we applaud and sincerely respect) or her motherhood than offering a sweeping vision for the commonwealth-- especially in these turbulent times. Unfortunately, her message to voters has been unimaginative and uninspiring."

The Herald-Leader described her as Schumer's "anointed front-runner with a war chest of donations that might even rival McConnell’s usual corporate haul," but Kentucky Democrats have been unimpressed by a campaign that has entirely ignored them and been focussed on appealing to Republicans and independents, once even saying she would have voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court!

By February, Blue America was convinced that Booker is the candidate to beat McConnell and we endorsed him in early March. Since then, AOC and Bernie weighed in for him, as did a whole slew of progressive organizations. The headline at Politico yesterday isn't what Schumer wanted to see: Insurgent threatens to derail McGrath-McConnell showdown in Kentucky. "State Rep. Charles Booker has captured late momentum in the June 23 primary, fueled by prominent endorsements and Amy McGrath's stumbles," wrote Jim Arkin and Burgess Everett. Booker, they wrote "now has all the momentum in the closing days of the election," which takes place June 23. You can contribute to his campaign by clicking on the Blue America Senate 2020 thermometer on the right.

McGrath is the favorite of the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm and many sitting senators, and it’s hard to imagine she could lose a primary in which she’s outspent her opponents combined by a nearly 30-1 margin through early June. But there are signs it's turning into a real race: Booker is panning McGrath as a bland national Democrat who is predictably tacking to the center, while McGrath is biting back at Booker, accusing him of talking a big game on health care and voting rights but not backing it up.

"I don't really know what position Amy McGrath takes because she goes back and forth on everything depending on what consultants seem to say,” Booker said in an interview. “I know that Kentuckians can smell BS from miles away.”

...McGrath had a bumpy rollout last year, saying in one of her first interviews that she would have supported Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination, only to reverse herself later that day. More recently, Republican governors and Cindy McCain, the late Sen. John McCain’s widow, condemned ads of hers using their images to attack McConnell.

And McGrath has few substantial in-state endorsements, while Booker has been endorsed by prominent Kentucky media and close to two-dozen elected officials.

...McGrath is positioning herself somewhere in the realm of Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), a moderate Democrat [a values-free conservative opportunist] elected in 2018 who works with Republicans more than her own party leaders. McConnell himself declined to pinpoint whom he would rather face.

Sanders' and Ocasio-Cortez’s backing helped boost fundraising for Booker, and he raised nearly $1 million in nine days, three times his entire first-quarter haul. Newspaper endorsements and backing from sports radio host Matt Jones gives Booker legitimate in-state boosters outside his base in Louisville.

After coronavirus stalled any effort at toppling McGrath, the protests against police brutality are sparking newfound momentum for Booker.

“How do you run your campaign when you can't go anywhere? And then these protests come around, and I think it helped Charles find his footing and find his voice,” said Jones, who considered running for the seat and criticizes the DSCC. He acknowledged that McGrath remains the favorite but predicted a close finish.

“I don't know that I’ve ever seen a race where somebody has this much money and seems to be struggling,” he added.

Most Democrats declined to criticize McGrath on the record. Even Sanders gave a guarded response when asked why he felt the need to weigh in.

“We’re going to support progressive candidates who are fighting for the issues that we believe in,” Sanders said this week.

Democratic leaders were perplexed by Sanders’ intervention. As Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) put it: “Bernie may have made some promise to someone along the way.”

“She is in the mainstream of Democratic thinking, and I think is very electable in the commonwealth of Kentucky,” said Durbin, who is from neighboring Illinois.

Despite the intrigue in the primary, Kentucky is not central to Democrats’ campaign for the majority. Party officials say that it’s one of the longest shots to flip this election, and the money soaked up by McGrath would arguably go much further in North Carolina, Montana and Iowa.

“Those polls that show it tied are real. But the composition of the undecideds should give us great pause. I am more bullish on South Carolina, Texas-- I mean, almost every other race,” said one Democratic senator familiar with party strategy.

McGrath has been squeezed on both sides down the stretch: Booker is running an ad claiming she’s not a “real Democrat” and suggesting she’s too pro-Trump, while McConnell’s campaign released a new ad attacking her support for Trump’s impeachment and calling her “extreme.”

“You can’t run against McConnell from a defensive crouch with a playbook that was obviously cooked up by consultants. You have to perform every day, drive a message and keep him on his back foot,” said Adam Jentleson, who was a top aide to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). "Only Charles will be able to do that."

Bland Moderates Are Not What We Need In The White House Or In The Senate-- Let's Replace Mitch McConnell With Charles Booker

If Bernie wins in November, a hostile McConnell-led Senate will be pretty deadly for all his plans. And with the Democrats very likely to lose their accidental Alabama seat, they have to win five seats for a majority. Or, one seat-- Kentucky's-- to knock out McConnell. Schumer's DSCC has picked Amy McGrath, a bland moderate who doesn't stand for much and who couldn't win a House seat in 2018 that is significantly more open to Democrats than the state as a whole is. McGrath has little to offer beyond McConnell-hatred. Democrats have been trying that for decades-- unsuccessfully. This time, many Democrats in the state are telling Schumer and the DSCC to take a walk and they'll pick their own Senate candidate. Charles Booker seems like a better option and not just because he endorsed Bernie for president.

Blue America has been far more impressed with state Rep. Charles Booker than we have been with McGrath, whose confused and ever-changing positions in 2018 kept us from getting behind her. Booker's platform is crystal clear: Universal Basic Income and Economic Justice, Medicare for All and a Kentucky-specific version of the Green New Deal. McGrath is running on nothing but bullshit: pie-in-the-sky, cynical "bipartisan solutions." On guns, she's calling for "a conversation about guns"-- no solutions, no policies... a "conversation." This is exactly the kind of neither-here-nor-there candidates Schumer hunts for, a perfect explanation of why the Democrats are in the minority. His district runs along the Ohio River from Chickasaw Park, through Louisville and east as far as Woodlawn Park.

Booker won the House seat by placing first in a crowded primary and then defeating Republican Everett Corley 76.5% to 21.3%. Please read his guest post below and consider contributing to his campaign by clicking on the Blue America 2020 Senate thermometer on the right.

I’m The Candidate Who Can Beat Mitch McConnell
by Charles Booker

When you’re running for office, you get a lot of advice. Some of it is helpful; other pieces, not so much. Nonetheless, I appreciate it all.

But one piece of advice stands out from the rest. They are words of wisdom that never leave my head: “It takes a movement to beat a machine.”

That’s the whole idea behind my campaign for the U.S. Senate. I am running against Mitch McConnell, the second most powerful person in Washington. Even though he is the most unpopular Senator in the country, and proudly brags about stopping legislation that would improve the lives of everyday Kentuckians, he has proven difficult for Democrats to beat.

Until now.

This time, we are going to do this differently. Mitch wins because he plays into people’s fears. We are going to win because we listen to their hopes.

We are building a grassroots movement based around an economic populist agenda. We are fighting for the issues that matter most to the people I meet in every corner of the Commonwealth: Medicare for All, a Kentucky New Deal, universal basic income, and an end to generational poverty.

Some people think that you can’t run on those issues and win in Kentucky. In fact, it’s the only way we are going to win. Kentuckians are tired of the rich and powerful making decisions without everyday folks in the room. They want someone who will fight to make sure that every Kentuckian has clean water in their tap, a good job and access to prescription drugs that don’t bankrupt them.

I know there are some Democratic Party leaders who still believe that the way to beat Mitch is by running to the soft center, by saying nothing and taking no positions. But we’ve tried it their way, and we’ve lost. Over and over and over.

It’s time to try something new. It’s time to run against Mitch while fighting for the things we actually believe in, not the things pollsters tell us people allegedly want to hear.

We are not some cookie cutter campaign that could be run in any state. And I am not a cookie cutter candidate who speaks in sound bites approved by focus groups.

I am a Kentuckian, running for Kentucky. I speak from the heart, and I speak about the issues that impact the people who live in the Commonwealth, and I’m rooting my campaign in the ideas that will actually improve lives for working people.

This is not the first time I have been told to wait my turn, and I am sure it will not be the last. I became the youngest Black state legislator in Kentucky in nearly 90 years because I did not listen to the naysayers. Come November, I am going to be the first person of color to serve in federal office from Kentucky because, again, I am not going to listen.

As someone who comes from generations of Kentuckians, some of whom were enslaved and lynched in Kentucky, and others who broke racial barriers during the Civil Rights Movement, I owe it to my ancestors to fight for this next step toward equity, as well. I also owe it to the people of Kentucky who want a government of the people, for the people.

Winning these sorts of races is possible when you build diverse coalitions of passionate people. I saw that in my work as the director of Fish and Wildlife, in my leadership statewide and nationally, and as a state Representative.

I believe that the only way to defeat Mitch McConnell is to actually run against Mitch McConnell. Dancing around him isn’t going to get us anywhere. We have to take the fight directly to him.

It’s just common sense! You don’t beat the most unpopular Senator in America by running away from him, or trying to be like him. You win by putting him on the defensive, and holding him accountable for all of the wrongs he’s done since he became a Senator in 1984. There are over 30 years worth of cruel, self-centered, anti-democratic decisions. We need to keep calling them out. We need to make sure he has to answer for what he’s done to us, and for what he’s done to Kentucky. We need to remind everyone how he’s done those things at our expense, all for himself. We can’t stop talking about all the ways he’s profited from our pain.

We will win this race by building a movement.

The movement is made up of the people taking on the powerful and corrupt. The powers that be want us to give up, because they know what I know: the power is really in us.

The movement is growing every day, more and more Kentuckians whose voices haven’t been heard join us.

This is a movement of regular folks coming together to say we’re not going to be lied to, ignored, and robbed by Mitch McConnell any longer.

I am honored to be a part of that movement, and can’t wait to take it over the finish line.

We are going to beat the machine. We are going to win for Kentuckians.

Glad To See Conservatives Frackenlooper And Moulton Gone From The 2020 Race

Two of the worst 2020 candidate bit the dust: Moulton and Frackenlooper

As we saw last week, Seth Moulton's polling numbers are so low-- nationally, in Iowa and even in New Hampshire, which borders on his congressional district and shares media with it!-- that he was buried at the bottom of the 2020 barrel. No debates, no events, no interest, no nuthin'! All Moulton wants is to be Biden's Secretary of State or Defense Secretary. When he dropped out of the race yesterday it barely caused a stir in the news cycle. It wasn't even a blip.

So he dropped out with his head up Biden's ass: "I think it’s evident that this is now a three-way race between Biden, Warren and Sanders, and really it’s a debate about how far left the party should go," he told the New York Times. He announced he will run for reelection for the House.

He added that "I’m not going to endorse anyone right away, but the vice president is a mentor and a friend and I think he’d make a great president. Anybody in this race will be better than Donald Trump and I will enthusiastically support whoever the nominee is." But Moulton is somewhat reactionary and a member of the Wall Street-owned and operated New Dem caucus, so, of course, a Biden supporter. Funny how the whole Republican wing of the Democratic Party in Congress prefers Biden. Moulton has no following and virtually no admirers outside of his immediate circle of cronies. Perfect for Status Quo Joe.

This is how the ProgressivePunch rates the Massachusetts House delegation, by lifetime crucial vote score. Note who's at the very bottom. The number in parenthesis is the district's PVI):

• Ayanna Pressley (MA-07)- A 100% (D+34)
• Katherine Clark (MA-05)- A 97.03% (D+18)
• Jim McGovern (MA-02)- A 96.71% (D+9)
• Lori Trahan (MA-03)- A 95.35% (D+9)
• Joe Kennedy (MA-04)- B 90.75% (D+9)
• Richard Neal (MA-01)- C 85.96% (D+12)
• Bill Keating (MA-09)- D 80.52% (D+4)
• Stephen Lynch (MA-08)- F 77.98% (D+10)
• Seth Moulton (MA-06)- F 73.51 (D+6)

The Boston Globe summed his race up nicely the day before he finally dropped out: Politics is all about timing and it isn't Seth Moulton's time. For the sake of the Republic, hopefully it will never be Seth Moulton's time. Nor is it Frackenlooper's time. He polled better than Moulton, but never got to 1% either. It was good to see him go... except for one thing. He's now running for the very winnable Colorado Senate seat-- and he's been dubbed the "front runner" already.

Blue America has endorsed the progressive in the race: Andrew Romanoff. His response to Frackenlooper's announcement to leave the presidential race and try to get into the Senate as a consolation prize was classy:

We deserve-- and I pledge to run-- a campaign grounded in public policy. I know and respect both Cory Gardner and John Hickenlooper, but I disagree with them on some fundamental issues.

As Colorado’s next senator, I’ll lead the fight for a Green New Deal. They’re leading the fight against it.

I’ll champion Medicare for All. They’ve vowed to defeat it.

Cory and John have attacked these progressive priorities as socialist or Stalinist. That’s outrageous. Would they say the same of Social Security or Medicare itself?

Democrats must decide whether we want to combat the climate crisis and end our reliance on fossil fuel—or allow polluters to bankroll Congress and block reform. Whether we’ll ensure health care for all—or condemn half a million Americans to bankruptcy each year and thousands to an early grave. Whether we’ll build an economy that works for everyone—or force families to work even harder for less.

Those are the stakes in this election. They couldn’t be higher, and we can’t afford to cower now.

The best way to defeat Cory Gardner is to present a clear alternative. Echoing his talking points will achieve nothing and inspire no one.

This is no time to surrender our dreams. Let’s go fight for the world we imagine.

And meanwhile... Trumpanzee's #1 enabler in Washington just got a taste of his own foul medicine from his Democratic electoral opponent in Kentucky, Amy McGrath in the form of a super-powerful one minute TV ad. Believe me, this is very much worth watching:

Can The Democrats Win Back The Senate Next Year?

Dan McCarthy, a right-wing Arizona Republican skincare company executive who is challenging Martha McSally for her Senate seat next year, told a Phoenix radio audience this week that "the Washington DC establishment, Mitch McConnell... the swamp creatures of Washington, DC-- they've given us two choices, McSally or Kelly. I'm a conservative outsider. I've been looking at this for a little while and I said, 'I'm not so sure if that's acceptable to me; I'd don't know if the status quo's OK... What I'm hearing is-- from a lot of people-- very smart people, by the way-- that losing another Senate seat is unacceptable... I think the voters deserve an actual choice, not an appointment. People like the idea of a conservative outsider... I don't think Arizona will allow DC money to buy votes."

McConnell and the DSCC are counting on holding the Arizona seat, one of the two top Democratic Party targets for the 2020 Senate elections. If Bernie and/or Elizabeth Warren wins in 2020 a hostile McConnell-lead Senate will be pretty deadly for all their plans. 2018's anti-Red wave didn't extend into the Senate races last year and the Democrats ate shit, losing seats where very right-wing Democrats had been banking on the accumulation of Republican-lite voting records to save them. It didn't work. There are 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats (including 2 independents) in the Senate today. 4 of the worst Senate Democrats-- Claire McCaskill (MO), Heidi Heitkamp (ND), Bill Nelson (FL) and Joe Donnelly (IN), perfect DSCC lesser-of-two evils candidates-- lost seats that the Democrats couldn't afford to lose, even while 3 of them outspent their Republican opponents. The only Republican incumbent the Democrats managed to oust was Dean Heller (NV), who Trump had been spatting with and who was not embraced by Trumpist voters. The Democrats managed to slip another worthless conservative, Jackie Rosen, into the seat-- a complete waste. (She already sports a solid "F" from ProgressivePunch and currently is ranked as the 4th worst Democrat in the House.

Even worse than Rosen, was the other winner (of Jeff Flake's open seat) from 2018. Kyrsten Sinema was previously the worst Democrat in the House. She has already surpassed Joe Manchin (54.01) and Doug Jones (46.88) as the Senate's worst Democrat (43.40). Congratulations to Little Chucky Schmucky, who hand-picked her. For 2020 Senator Schmucky, has picked an "ex"-Republican, Mark Kelly, for the Arizona special election to fill McCain's seat (temporarily filled by appointee Martha McSally).

If Elizabeth Warren or another Democrat is vice president, the Democrats will have to win a net of 3 seats to wrest the leadership away from McConnell. That means they have to reelect Doug Jones in Alabama (R+14) and win 3 of these seats or 4 if they lose in Alabama:

• Alaska (R+9)- Dan Sullivan
• Arizona (R+5)- Martha McSally
• Colorado (D+1)- Cory Gardner
• Georgia (R+5)- David Perdue
• Iowa (R+3)- Joni Ernst
• Kansas (R+13)- (Open)
• Kentucky (R+15)- McConnell
• Maine (D+3)- Susan Collins
• North Carolina (R+3)- Thom Tillis
• Tennessee (R+14)- (open)
• Texas (R+8)- John Cornyn

Even with Sen Schmucky making all the (wrong) calls, do the Democrats have a shot at winning next year? They do-- a chance. I want to piece together 3 posts from Thursday in The Hill about this. The first was by Jordain Carney: GOP frets over nightmare scenario for Senate primaries. It actually knits the other two-- Kansas Republican suggests Kobach candidacy threatens Senate GOP majority and Alabama senator says Trump opposed to Sessions Senate bid-- together. "In Alabama and Kansas, two deep-red states that should be safe GOP seats," wrote Carney, "the party is facing bids from conservatives Roy Moore and Kris Kobach, respectively, who are viewed as unelectable in a general election and have a history of stealing the national spotlight. Republicans say they feel good about their chances to hold onto the chamber in 2020-- when they will be playing defense in mostly red territory-- but bloody fights in those two states could help widen Democrats’ path back to the majority."

A GOP operative watching the Senate races who is “cautiously optimistic” about Republicans keeping the majority, warned that Republicans can’t “afford to play games” by potentially nominating a candidate with baggage that compromises their ability to win in November.

“We don’t need to be having any problems, it’s not a state we can stumble in. The map for the majority is OK, but if you have to start diverting resources to Kansas it complicates things,” the operative said, adding that Alabama is also viewed as a “must-win state.”

National groups have wasted little time staking out opposition to Moore and Kobach. The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) and the Senate Leadership Fund (SLF), which is aligned with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), blasted both of their campaign announcements. Neither group has ruled out intervening in the primaries if either emerges as a viable contender for the party’s nomination.

A second Republican strategist added that the message against the candidates is that the two states should be easy Republican wins that will help the party keep control of the chamber-- and “people like Kris Kobach and Roy Moore threaten that.”

“They both have a record of losses that doesn’t sit well with Republican voters,” the strategist added, characterizing the two candidates as an “unnecessary headache” and a “distraction” in the larger battle for the Senate.

It’s not the first time conservative challengers have created early frustrations for Republicans.

During the 2012 cycle, then-Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) was viewed as likely to lose her race until GOP nominee Todd Akin, who defeated more-mainstream picks during the primary, said that “if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

In the same election cycle, conservative challenger Richard Mourdock defeated longtime Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) during the primary, only to lose against Democratic nominee Joe Donnelly.

But the party has become more adept at beating back primary candidates they either view as anthema to general election voters or likely to spark a fierce intraparty fight.

National Republicans spent heavily in 2018 to successfully defeat former coal CEO Don Blankenship during the West Virginia Republican Senate primary. And, causing a sigh of relief for party leadership, Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC) passed on challenging Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) for the party’s nomination next year.

This cycle they are defending almost two dozen seats, compared to 12 that Democrats are trying to hold onto. But most of the GOP seats are in deeply red states, meaning the battleground for the Senate will likely be limited to a handful of seats like Maine, Colorado and Arizona.

The dynamic has left Republicans feeling optimistic about their ability to hold onto the Senate, where Democrats would need to win at least three seats and the White House in order to have a vice president break ties in their favor in an evenly-divided chamber, and four seats to win an outright majority.

“The map’s going to be fairly large, our members are going to have to work hard to win reelection and we think that they’re well positioned to do that,” said Sen. John Thune (SD), the No. 2 Senate Republican.

Republicans also argue that Democrats have struggled to snag big-name recruits in several Senate races, including Georgia and Montana, that would allow them to expand the map of top-tier races beyond the handful of early toss-up states.

How much of a threat Moore and Kobach will be during the 2020 cycle, and if they can help expand Democrats’ path to retaking the Senate, remains to be seen.

Lacking Moore’s personal baggage, Kobach could be the bigger headache for Republicans. The former Kansas secretary of state lost last year’s gubernatorial election by 5 percentage points. Before that he was considered for a Cabinet post, headed up Trump’s panel investigating alleged voter fraud and was briefly considered for an administration job overseeing immigration policy.

“It seems to me that if you have just lost a statewide race that the chances of you winning, running again for another statewide race would be very difficult,” said Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS), who Kobach is trying to succeed. “Kris Kobach, once he makes up his mind, makes up his mind.”

McConnell sidestepped weighing in on the Kansas Senate race except to plug his preference that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo get in the race.

“I’m not sure the president agrees with this, that I’d love to see the secretary of State run for the Senate in Kansas. But the filing deadline is not until next June,” McConnell said.

Moore won the party’s primary in 2017, including defeating Sen. Luther Strange (R-AL), only to narrowly lose to now-Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL) by less than 2 points after facing several allegations of sexual misconduct with teenage girls when he was in his 30s. Moore, 72, denied the allegations, but Republicans are hopeful the damage will keep him in a distant third place during the 2020 race.

McConnell, asked about Moore during a weekly press conference, predicted that Alabamians have “seen quite enough of Roy Moore.”

Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) told The Hill that he had discussed the seat and various candidates with Trump.

“He’s damaged,” Shelby said, about Moore. “He wouldn’t be good for Alabama.” 

Trump, almost never a team player, could hurt the Republicans in Alabama because their surest path to victory would be to nominate Jeff Sessions. Trump is against it. On top of that, he is very much a Kobach fan since, like him, Kobach is an extreme xenophobe and racist. And then there's the albatross problem. Trump is polling badly in Iowa (-12), Maine (-11), Colorado (-12), Arizona (-7), North Carolina (-3) and not as well as he should be in Texas (+4), Kansas (+4), Georgia (0) and Alaska (+4).


UPDATE: The Dems Want To Win? You Sure?

Iowa looks like a very prime target to me, but the DSCC seems to have given up before they started Although Tom Harkin (former Senator), Tom Vilsack (former Governor and Cabinet Member), Chet Culver (former Governor and son of a Senator), Bruce Braley (former Congressman and Senate candidate) and Dave Loebsack (7-term Congressman) all are alive enough to run for the Joni Ernst seat next year. But the DSCC has already endorsed Theresa Greenfield, who was disqualified in her House campaign last year for forging signature petitions, and has no relevant experience or accomplishments whatsoever. This is likely to be a wipeout that will far surpass the Patty Judge wipeout-- and in a state where Trump is completely underwater and where Ernst is a 100% enabler.

Mitch McConnell's Kentucky: "A Place Where Ideals Go To Die"

Kentucky is a very red state, more so in national politics than local politics. Trump beat Hillary there 1,202,971 (62.5%) to 628,854 (32.7%), one of Trump's best performances anywhere. He lost only two counties (out of Kentucky's 120)-- Jefferson (Louisville in the 3rd congressional district) and Fayette (Lexington in the 6th congressional district). The state's PVI is a daunting R+15.

In 2018, Amy McGrath won a tough Democratic primary in the 6th district and took on Republican incumbent Andy Barr. The PVI of the 6th is R+9. McGrath did extremely well... for a Democrat. In 2014 Barr won with 60% of the vote and in 2016 with 61%. McGrath held him down to 51%. She took Fayette County in a landslide and won Franklin County as well. But in the 17 smaller more rural counties, Barr wracked up gigantic margins.

This morning, as expected, McGrath announced her candidacy for McConnell's Senate seat. People wondered how she can expect to win statewide when she couldn't win in one of the least Republican areas of the state. McConnell is the answer. The the single most hated senator-- by his state's voters-- of any of the 100 U.S. senators. Kentucky voters say they want him out. But they always say that... and he always wins reelection anyway.

She will play up her status as a Marine fighter pilot, in contrast to his scary military record, which lasted a few weeks when he was discharged for fondling the privates of a private, something that was covered up but has been circulating beyond the Louisville "fruit loop" for decades.

Can Trump protect McConnell's reelection bid?

Yesterday, the Lexington Herald-Leader reported that McGrath would make her case by contrasting herself with McConnell. McGrath: "Everything that’s wrong in Washington had to start someplace. How did it come to this, that even within our own families, we can’t talk to each other about the leaders of our country anymore without anger and blame? Well it started with this man, who was elected a lifetime ago and who has, bit by bit, year by year, turned Washington into something we all despise."

With the announcement, McGrath is shrugging off a three-point loss in her first attempt to obtain political office. She becomes the first major Democrat in 2020 to challenge the architect of Kentucky’s modern Republican Party. While Kentucky Sports Radio host Matt Jones and House Minority Floor Leader Rocky Adkins have indicated they are considering running, McGrath’s wide fundraising network-- she raised more than $8.6 million against Barr-- and a courtship by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee make her a formidable opponent in a primary.

The race will be an uphill battle for any Democrat. While McConnell has long had low approval ratings in the state, he’s bulldozed his opponents and beat Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes by 15 points in 2014. His political machine will likely be aided by President Donald Trump’s name at the top of the ticket in 2020. Trump won Kentucky by a larger margin than he won Alabama in 2016.

McGrath, 44, with her made-for-Hollywood military background, attempted to bridge the divide between rural and urban voters in her bid for Congress, only to come up short in the rural counties of the district by wide margins on election day. But after spending a year appearing at events throughout the state, she appears intent on capitalizing on the perpetual stalemate in Washington D.C.-- and the perceived unpopularity of the man who has gleefully become the face of it.

McConnell’s campaign responded on Twitter with a highlight reel of the attack ads Barr’s campaign used against McGrath in 2018. It included clips of her saying she would support single-payer healthcare if the country were starting from scratch, that she supports abortion rights and a clip of her saying she isn’t very different from the national Democratic Party. [Below]


McGrath launched onto the political scene a little less than two years ago with a similar video, that time standing on a runway while she told her story of accomplishing her childhood dream by becoming the first woman in the Marine Corps to fly in an F-18 into combat. The video quickly brought in both national attention and money as the Democrats attempted to win back control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

After upsetting Lexington Mayor Jim Gray in the primary, McGrath was met with a barrage of ads from Barr and the Republicans defining her as “too liberal for Kentucky.” They were aided by a McGrath comment at a fundraiser in Massachusetts where she said “ I am further left, I am more progressive than anybody in the state of Kentucky.”

The clip played on repeat in the buildup to the election and the narrative stuck. While McGrath talked about putting country over party and taunted Barr, her campaign refused to run traditional attack ads.

That appears to have changed in the Senate race. McGrath went straight for McConnell in her announcement video, blaming him for a congress where “dysfunction and chaos are political weapons, where budgets and healthcare and the Supreme Court are held hostage, a place where ideals go to die” as images of McConnell flash across the screen.

McConnell, 78, has not backed away from his reputation as the killer of bills in the Senate. When Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-California, called him the “grim reaper” in the Senate, McConnell’s campaign openly embraced the moniker. They even started selling t-shirts.

McConnell was ready and released this video, Welcome to the race, Amy, moments after she released hers. It may look pretty good to us, but in a state utterly brainwashed by Fox, it will probably have the opposite effect than it would in a normal state:

How Big Will The Anti-Red Wave Be?

Joe Cunningham (SC) & Amy McGrath (KY)-- their races will be the 1st reported. If they both win, the  Republicans will lose 60 seats

Next Tuesday we may have an idea how big the wave is going to be because of something that happens in South Carolina. SC-01 is, generally speaking, the coast-- not counting the stretch from Georgetown to Myrtle Beach and the North Carolina border. It includes most of Charleston (the white parts of the city), stretches down through Beaufort to Hilton Head and takes in a lump of inland country northwest of Charleston to Summerville and Moncks Corner as far north as Lake Moultrie. The PVI is R+10 but Trump (53.5%) didn't do as well as either McCain (56.1%) or Romney (58.3%). I'll guess it's the least Trumpified of the 6 red districts in the state. And the Republican candidate for Congress this cycle, Katie Arrington, is pure Trump. With Trump's help she ousted Mark Sanford in the GOP primary and now she has to face Democrat Joe Cunningham. People will still be voting in most of the country when South Carolina polls close on Tuesday. If Cunningham wins, it will signal a humongous Democratic wave is sweeping the country. Can he?

Well... as of the October 17 FEC reporting deadline he had outraged her $1,908,175 to $1,313,382 and outside spending has been modest on both sides. A very conservative 538 underestimates his chances, which are not great to start with.

In June, soon after Arrington beat Sanford 33,089 (50.6%) to 30,428 (46.5%), she was in a serious auto accident suffering a broken ribs and a back fracture that have kept her from vigorous campaigning. There hasn't been any public polling since the end of August when PPP found Arrington leading Cunningham 49-42%. What's changed since then? Cunningham has become much better known. And Trump has become more disgusting than ever. This week the Post And Courier reported that Sanford won't endorse Arrington. "Sanford’s silence," wrote Caitlin Byrd, "comes as Arrington’s race with Democrat Joe Cunningham is showing signs of being much closer than Republicans envisioned months ago, with the National Republican Congressional Committee on Monday sinking $87,000 into TV ads on her behalf.

The buy signals the race could be more competitive than initially thought, experts say, in a district traditionally considered “safe Republican.”

“She’s in a fight,” College of Charleston political scientist Jordan Ragusa said of Arrington. “She is still likely to win that fight, but it’s going to be a tough battle.”

...The fact the NRCC is investing at all in this race is raising eyebrows among political watchers.

If Arrington wins in an R+11 district it won't say anything at all about the rest of the night's results. If Cunningham wins, the GOP nationally should be on suicide watch. J.D. Scholten's district is also R+11. But the next bellwether seat that will probably be reporting is KY-06 (with an R+9 PVI), where Democrat Amy McGrath has outraised Republican incumbent Andy Barr $7,767,610 to $4,778,302 and has him on the ropes. Ryan's sleazoid SuperPAC has felt that it had to jump in to save his seat and has spent $3,237,558 smearing McGrath. The DCCC and Pelosi's PAC responded weakly with around $1.3 million. If Cunningham and McGrath both win, Republicans waiting on line to vote in Orange County and the Central Valley will stop waiting and start to drift home, understanding that they've lost the House-- by a lot. Cunningham and McGrath victories will signal that the pundits and pros had it all wrong again and that the Democrats won't be taking 25 seats by closer to three times that number!

So what happened to all that GOP enthusiasm because of Kavanaugh? It motivated more Democrats than Republicans. And Trump's rallies? They're  motivating more Democrats (and independents) than Republicans. If anything, the hate rallies are actually turning off mainstream Republicans! The frontlines are mow deep in the heart of Republican territory... like the aforementioned districts in South Carolina, Iowa and Kentucky. No, Democrats can't wage plausible battles against Mo Brooks or Rob Aderholt in Alabama or in the Florida, Texas and Oklahoma panhandles, serious fighting in those districts would be like Republicans trying to win inner city districts in Chicago, Baltimore, Newark, Los Angeles and New York. Instead, there are no longer any safe GOP seats in California... and Orange County-- once the soul of the party-- is about to be free of Republicans completely. Washington state has 4 GOP-held seats. 3 of them are all but gone. Democrats-- if not the lame and short-sighted DCCC-- are fighting seriously for Amish country in Pennsylvania, for Wichita, Kansas, for severely gerrymandered Texas districts, for at-large seats in Alaska and Montana... even for seats in West Virginia.

It looks like this is the year that women take their revenge on the GOP for its anti-family agenda, its anti-education agenda, for its anti-women agenda, for its gun agenda, its pollution agenda, and for the divisiveness, bullying and immoral essence of its contemptible leader. Here's where they get pay-back for the enabling and the rubber stamp attitude just when a Congress with some guts and dignity is most demanded. You think Kavanaugh is going to help GOP incumbents with women in suburban districts.

And the #MAGAbomber Trump rally nut from Florida and the murderous #MAGAshooter in Pittsburgh... you think women appreciate that? Or independent voters. That was a last straw for many-- even in Republican strongholds in Utah, Kansas, North Carolina... where the party never expected to be forced to spend millions of Sheldon Adelson's dollars to defend incumbents in carefully gerrymandered seats Trump won on auto-pilot.

Writing for super-cautious RealClear Politics, Sean Trende reports the outdated conventional wisdom that even he doesn't believe: "The consensus view is that Democrats are favored to take the lower chamber. Analysts disagree on just how large a majority they are likely to win, and how likely that majority is. If you split the RealClearPolitics tossups in half, it results in Democrats gaining about 25 seats, for a narrow 220-215 majority. I tend to think that the tossups will break disproportionately toward Democrats, and see something more on the order of a 225-210 Democratic majority." It's hard to realistically see the Republicans with 200 seats.

He also admits that almost all their House polling comes from a gimmicky and totally unreliable source, the worst polling operation of the cycle-- sillier than GOP polling firm Rasmussen: "[M]ost of our House race polling has come from the New York Times, in partnership with Siena.  On the one hand, this is good, because without them we would have virtually no polling. On the other hand, polling is both an art and a science, and having a disproportionate amount of our data coming from a single view of what the electorate looks like increases the chances of" absurd assumptions and ridiculous mistakes. (My words, not his.)

Democrats Are Doing Well In The Money Race, But The Midterms Will Be Decided By Which Side Can Get Out The Vote

Yesterday was the end of the third quarter. You were probably barraged with hysterical fundraising requests. I sure was. The ones that say "personal" in the subject line cause me to automatically unsubscribe. Elena Schneider reported for Politico that small dollar donations are an answer to the Koch Bros fundraising machine and that "Democratic House candidates raised nearly $36 million online in August."

As it does every cycle, the fall sees an accelerated pace of small dollar donations. In the last two weeks, Blue America brought it over $350,000 for our candidates, more than in the previous entire quarter. Yesterday our fundraising letter was on behalf of Nate McMurray, the progressive Democrat running for the seat disgraced by GOP criminal Chris Collins. We talked about what he wants to accomplish for the people of western New York, not about how many hours 'til the quarter is up. Who gives a shit about when the quarter is up or how many hours are left? Or even what the fake matching promises is today? Campaign staffers; no one else.

Voters want to know about who candidates are-- in terms of honesty, integrity, character-- and what they're going to do for them... and that's how we try to present our candidates to our members. No hysteria about fake FEC "deadlines."

Schneider's report emphasized that "hundreds of thousands of online donors are pouring gobs of cash into Democratic House campaigns at an accelerating clip-- a bulwark against a late-summer advertising assault that Republicans hope could save their majority. Republicans have long seen their outside-money advantage as a key factor in the battle for the House, with Congressional Leadership Fund pledging to spend a massive $100 million in 2018. The super PAC’s plan is to attack Democrats early and often, and it unleashed a salvo of TV attack ads in 15 districts before Labor Day, seeking to disqualify Democrats before the fall campaign even heated up."

Wild, insane attacks on Blue America-endorsed candidates Randy Bryce (WI-01), Kara Eastman (NE-o2), Jared Golden (ME-2), Katie Porter (CA-45), Ammar Campa-Najjar (CA-50), Lisa Brown (WA-05). Small dollar donors have come to their defense. The smear campaign against Bryce has been so intense-- $1.8 million worth, compliments of Paul Ryan's sleazy SuperPAC-- that we were forced to form the IronStache Fund to respond (especially since the DCCC refuses to). In fact... that thermometer on the right is for the IronStache Fund.

Among those leading the way was Abigail Spanberger, a former CIA officer [and current Blue Dog] running in Virginia who raised $790,000 online in August-- and saw a fundraising spike after disclosing that CLF had obtained her confidential security clearance application while conducting research on her employment history, according to her campaign.

But by the time CLF used the information to attack Spanberger on TV on Sept. 6, the Democrat had already aired nearly 900 positive TV spots in her race against GOP Rep. Dave Brat, according to data from Advertising Analytics.

“Our ads helped set the baseline of who I am and that was probably very helpful in combating those attacks,” Spanberger said in an interview with Politico. “The juxtaposition of the visuals of the ads, ours showing me as a normal person and theirs are just scary.”

CLF has doubled down on the attacks with more TV ads, highlighting Spanberger’s stint as a substitute teacher at the Saudi-funded Islamic Saudi Academy in Mount Vernon, Virginia, and calling it “Terror High.” A Republican familiar with polling in the district said that “the race was trending in the wrong direction, and that ad helped stabilize things.”

CLF spokeswoman Courtney Alexander said that Democrats have been “forced to spend whatever they have raised responding to attack ads which are putting Democratic candidates on defense and setting the terms of these races,” adding that “no first-time candidate wants their first ad to be a response ad, and that’s what we have seen repeatedly from Democrats across the country as they are forced to scramble to answer for their records as the truth comes out.”

But Spanberger called the ads “ridiculous,” adding that the attack has “fallen flat.”

She’s just one of many Democrats bringing in big money and pouring it right back into mass communication with voters. Overall, ActBlue-- which surpassed $1 billion raised in 2018 on Aug. 2-- had its biggest month ever in August, bringing in $100 million to candidates and progressive organizations. Other top House fundraisers that month included Sharice Davids, who raised over $782,000 online in August for her campaign against Rep. Kevin Yoder (R-KS), and Jared Golden, who brought in over $729,000 online for his campaign against Rep. Bruce Poliquin (R-ME).

Jared still needs contributions here

...The resulting well-funded campaigns have put House Democrats in an unusual position: They and their allied outside groups are currently out-advertising the GOP in some battlegrounds.

“Candidates and Democratic groups have been running even or we have an advantage in paid communications on the air in many of the top 25 to 30 districts across the country,” said Charlie Kelly, executive director of House Majority PAC, the Democratic House super PAC. “Time and time again, Democratic enthusiasm is off the charts.”

These August online fundraising totals track with Democratic candidate performance over the last year. A whopping 56 Republican House incumbents raised less money than their Democratic challengers during the second quarter, along with 16 congressmen with less cash on hand than their Democratic opponents.

“This is the manifestation of a larger problem-- the massive enthusiasm gap,” said one Republican consultant working on House races, granted anonymity to speak candidly. “Republicans and our outside groups are raising a lot of money, too, but we can longer say or think we can rely on just our super PACs, because now Democrats have money as well. Everyone has money.”

But the money is no guarantee of success. Amy McGrath, a former combat pilot who’s challenging Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY), also caught fire online early by telling a compelling personal story in TV ads. Her first campaign video has received nearly 2 million views on YouTube, and public polling show the first-time candidate jumped ahead in public polling.



But CLF aired TV ads featuring a clip of McGrath saying: “I don’t know that I’m different than the Democratic Party nationally,” then cut to voter saying, “When I first saw Amy McGrath’s ads, I thought she was a moderate, but now we know the truth.”

CLF released a polling memo earlier this month, showing an early lead built by McGrath had evaporated. (A recent poll conducted by the New York Times also shows a tied race.) “Now 66 percent of voters see her as a liberal, compared to 39 percent in June,” the CLF polling memo reads.

McGrath has raised $3,017,831 to Barr's $3,147,866, although she had to spend much of her money in a tough primary against a Blue Dog favored by the DCCC and Pelosi. Today the general election race is a toss-up. It won't be decided by expensive ads. It'll be decided by Get Out The Vote efforts.

In a powerful fundraising plea for Kara Eastman yesterday, Senator Elizabeth Warren noted that "Republicans are scared to face the voters this November. So they’re calling in the cavalry-- asking their biggest donors to sling the filthiest mud against some of our strongest Democratic candidates. Paul Ryan’s pet Super PAC is flooding the airwaves with false attacks-- and in some cases dog-whistle garbage-- in districts that will help decide whether Democrats win back the House... Ryan’s Super PAC-- the Congressional Leadership Fund-- has raised over $100 million from sources like Sheldon Adelson, Koch Industries, and Big Oil. A recent New York Times story explained that lots of their megadonors benefited from the Republicans’ $1.5 trillion tax scam. They grab tax breaks with one hand-- and shove campaign cash at Republicans with the other. Now they’re attacking Democrats like Kara-- a first-time candidate who’s fighting for strong progressive values. She’s dedicated her life’s work to serving others, including starting a nonprofit housing organization, Omaha Healthy Kids Alliance. But get this: the right-wing Super PAC is attacking Kara for supporting Medicare for All and opposing Donald Trump’s $1.5 trillion tax scam." The thermometer above takes you to a page of candidates who have-- like Kara-- said that when they are sworn in in January, they will sign on as co-sponsors of the Medicare-For-All legislation.

Democratic Women Who Served In The Military And Now Want To Serve In Congress

Unless this is the first time you've landed at DWT, you probably know I hate identity group politics. Women belong in electoral office! OK, we need more women in Congress-- excellent ones, like the House's single best member, Pramila Jayapal (D-WA)-- but not crap ones-- like the House's single worst Democratic member, Kyrsten Sinema (Blue Dog-AZ). Congress needs more Hispanics, right? Absolutely-- great Hispanics like Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), but not right-wing shitheads like Henry Cuellar. (Blue Dog-TX) How about some more LGBTQ congressmembers? Yeah! But solid progressives like Mark Pocan (D-WI), not nightmares like Sinema and Sean Patrick Maloney (New Dem-NY). You name an identity group and I'll tell you an outstanding member of Congress from that group... and a POS from that group. Identity group politics is no way to pick candidates, but people use it all the time.

And the newest subgroup is... women from the military. The DCCC invented the category is strategy sessions before the cycle began. They thought recruiting a bunch of centrist female corporate lawyers who had once served in the military would be a good idea. They went out and looked for them and came back with some absolutely mediocre candidates to reinvent as heroines of the Republic, like Mikie Sherrill from New Jersey and Chrissy Houlahan from Pennsylvania.

But the idea took on a life of it's own, and women who had served in the military were encouraged by that idea and decided they could run too. Two campaign intro ads this cycle were from that identity group. First we had the electrifying ad from Amy McGrath of Kentucky (up top), an ad, made by a skilled ad-maker, that was better than the novice candidate. The DCCC may have been committed to centrist women who had serviced in the military but they already were committed to recruiting another candidate from KY-06 from their very favorite identity group: multimillionaires and they through their weight behind very rich Lexington mayor (who is also an extremely conservative Blue Dog-- always a plus for the DCCC-- and they endorsed him during the primary and urged donors to not fund McGrath). Over the course of the primary, McGrath, the novice candidate, got better and better and in the end, she shoved the DCCC's Blue Dog multimillionaire up their ass. In a 6-person race, she made the DCCC sad:

• Amy McGrath- 48,860 (48.7%)
• Jim Gray- 40,684 (40.5%)
• Reggie Thomas- 7,226 (7.2%)

Mayor Gray spent $1,437,206 on the primary (including $250,000 out of his own bank account) but it is Amy McGrath who is now duking it out-- a much better candidate than she was when she started-- with Republican Andy Barr, in Kentucky's only swing district. After the primary, the DCCC took another look at her and seeing she isn't too progressive for them, endorsed her and added her to their Red-to-Blue page. Though the district went to Trump 54.7% to 39.4% and has a PVI of R+9, the race is neck-and-neck and if the anti-red wave holds, McGrath has an good chance to win.

The second wildly inspiring video (below)-- that seemingly came out of nowhere-- was from MJ (Mary Jennings) Hegar in a Texas backwater that no one was considering flippable, TX-31. She's running against right-wing Trump-enabler John Carter in a district north of Austin that stretches through Williamson and Bell counties, from Round Rock to Killeen and Temple. Bell County includes Fort Hood, the largest military base in the world. The district PVI is R+10 and Trump beat Hillary there 53.5% to 40.8%. Her policy platform looks decent. As of the June 30 filing deadline she had outraised Carter significantly-- $1,612,439 to $996,707 and had about $300,000 more than he did on hand. If the wave is big enough...



Yesterday, AP ran a story by Laurie Kellman and Bill Barrow, Next mission for women with military service: Run for office, as though the election cycle had just started and someone just came up with the idea. "Hegar," they wrote, "is part of a crop of female veterans running for Congress in this year’s midterm elections. Almost all Democrats and many of them mothers, they are shaped by the Sept. 11 attacks and overseas wars, including the longest war in American history. Many are retiring from the military and looking for another way to serve the country. They’re part of a record number of women running for seats in Congress, but in certain ways, they are a class apart. The female veterans claim expertise in national security and veterans issues, with a track record of thriving in institutions dominated by men. Regardless of party, they cast themselves as the antidote to bitterly partisan politics-- describing themselves as 'mission-driven' and trained by the military to work toward a common goal." Most are right of center within the Democratic Party and are being pushed by right-of-center Democrats with ambitious personal agendas for higher office, like Seth Moulton (D-MA), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Joe Biden and Cheri Bustos (Blue Dog-IL).

The increase in candidates with military experience is no accident, and the hopefuls are expected to be propelled by Democratic luminaries. Former Vice President Joe Biden, for example, is expected to campaign for McGrath, among others, according to officials close to them who spoke on condition of anonymity because the schedule is not set.

Two Democrats-- Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton, a retired Marine Corps captain and Bronze Star recipient, and Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth, who lost her legs and partial use of an arm when her helicopter was shot down by a rocket-propelled grenade in Iraq-- have been instrumental in recruiting veterans to run for office.

Moulton said female veterans in his party carry a particular authority when talking to voters concerned about President Donald Trump’s leadership.

“It’s the year of the woman, but it’s also the year of yearning for bringing integrity and honor back to politics,” Moulton said. “We need Democrats with the credibility to tell people what’s really going on.”

The women are hardly the first to use their military service to their political advantage-- men have been doing it for decades.

One of the traditional knocks against female candidates is “they aren’t tough enough, they aren’t strong enough, and they might not have the leadership skills,” said Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University.

Not female candidates who are veterans, particularly of combat.

“They kind of automatically get that kind of respect as leaders; it’s well-earned,” Walsh said. “It’s such a logical next step for people who are committed to this country and are committed to service.”

But their campaigns highlight a set of political concerns specific to female veterans.

The candidates acknowledge that their extraordinary stories of trailblazing military careers could make it difficult for some voters to relate to them. Will they come off as too tough or hawkish? Is it possible for any candidate, male or female, to overemphasize his or her military background in the post-9/11 era?

McGrath, who retired as a lieutenant colonel, opened her campaign with an online video in which she wears a bomber jacket, a fighter jet in the background.

McGrath sees herself as a bridge to male voters who “sort of see women as being weaker,” she said in a telephone interview. “But yeah, I have to make an effort to reach out to women and make sure that they’re not scared, or think that I’m too militant.”

Out came a 30-second spot that mentioned the 89 combat missions-- but focused on McGrath taking her three children to the pediatrician.

“I’m Amy McGrath and I approved this ad,” she says, as her young son takes off down a hallway with his pants down. “Because I’d like to see the other guys running deal with this.”

She upset popular Lexington Mayor Jim Gray in the Democratic primary and will take on Republican Rep. Andy Barr in November, a closely watched race considered competitive in a district Barr won by 22 points in 2016. Poised for the different calculus of the general election, Barr last week released an ad quoting McGrath saying of herself, “Hell yeah, I’m a feminist” and calling herself “a progressive.”

“Seriously? Is that all you got?” McGrath retorted in a video response, sharing the screen once again with a fighter jet. But this time, she traded her bomber jacket for a denim one.

Much of Hegar’s story was already public by the time she decided to challenge Republican Rep. John Carter in the Austin-area district, so she went for the full reveal-- tattoos and all.

Her video, “Doors,” features the door of the helicopter in which she was shot down on her third tour of Afghanistan as a combat search and rescue pilot. Her medals, including a Purple Heart, play a role, as does Hegar’s 2012 lawsuit against the federal government that forced it to repeal the ban on women in combat.

The spot also features an intimate detail: One of Hegar’s first memories was of her father throwing her mother through a glass door.

“That’s been one of the most difficult transitions for me, is talking about myself more,” Hegar said. “I hope that they take away that we have to start putting our faith in people who have a history of putting other people first, fighting against intimidation and bullying, and trying to do the right thing.”

Air Force veteran Gina Ortiz Jones, the Democratic nominee for a House seat in West Texas, hopes her active military duty and intelligence work will “neutralize this perceived strength” of Republicans as strong on security issues.

That could be important in the race for the San Antonio-area seat, currently held by Republican Rep. Will Hurd, a former CIA operative. Ortiz Jones supports single-payer health insurance, a position that could be considered too liberal for the district.

“‘Liberal’ isn’t a word that is normally used to describe my work in national security,” she said.

Trump is an existential danger to America-- if not the world. I'd vote for any of these candidates if I lived in their districts, but we might as well do it with our eyes open and our expectations realistic. And I can say with confidence that none of them are going to be on par with women like Ilhan Omar of Minneapolis, Alexandria Cortez of NYC, Pramila Jayapal of Seattle, Judy Chu of Los Angeles, Katherine Clark of suburban Boston, Jan Schakowsky of Chicagoland, Kara Eastman of Omaha or Rashida Tlaib of Detroit, the women I expect to be the tip of the spear when it comes to pushing a strong progressive policy agenda in 2019. I hope some of these miltary women get on board. We'll see.

Not military-- but a fighter and a leader for working families