Is The DCCC Supervising A GOP Win In Orange County's Most Flippable District?

One of California's most conservative Dems, Scott Peters, endorses his rich funder, Paul Kerr

According to OpenSecrets.org, this cycle's half dozen worst self-funders-- at least so far-- include 5 Democrats-- and 4 of this 5 are running ing in Orange County. These are men-- and one woman (an utterly worthless Qualcomm heiress from Brooklyn, pushed run by EMILY'S List-- who are trying to buy congressional seats. All are expected to spend much more before their races are over. Anyway, these are the sic with how much they've self0funded and what percent of their total campaign war chest comes out of their own pockets:

• David Trone (D-MD)- $5,281,939 (93.71%)
• Andy Thorburn (D-CA)- $2,335,900 (91.20%)
• Gil Cisneros (D-CA)- $2,052,762 (81.96%)
• Paul Kerr (D-CA)- $1,612,728 (82.75%)
• Bob Corlew (R-TN)- $1,300,000 (98.91%)
• Sara Jacobs (D-CA)- $1,087,461 (64.35%)

Kerr and Jacobs are running in the same district, CA-49. Kerr knows he has no shot at winning but he wants to build up name recognition so when his conservative pal, New Dem Scott Peters runs for mayor of San Diego in 2 years, he can then run for Peters' neighboring San Diego seat. Jacobs' ridiculous run is just something EMILY's List has cooked uo as a way for their corrupt consultants to get their hands on her money.

But the two biggest Orange County self-funders are Thorburn and Cisneros. Cisneros is the silliest candidate of the cycle, a former Republican potato chip taster for Frito Lay's who won $266 million in a lottery and thinks that entitles to him to a seat in Congress. He's been buying endorsements from easily corruptible members of Congress (like this guy) since he decided to run as a "Democrat."

When candidates have money to burn, they spend it foolishly. This week Cisneros, whose campaign is controlled by the DCCC, started running an ad on CNN attacking Thorburn. And Cisneros and Thorburn have started flooding Orange County mail boxes with slick, vicious attack ads against each other , like these 3:

Republican voters love is when their candidates attack each other. Democratic voters don't; in fact, they hate it. Democrats like positive primaries. And Democrats like the negative saved to be used against Republicans. Cisneros' incompetent task masters at the DCCC-- Jason Bresler and Kyle Layman-- should know better. But they don't. So, you have seen Cisneros and the DCCC smearing Thorburn relentlessly, asserting that he's a tax evader and giving the GOP weapons against him if he makes it into the general-- much like the DCCC did to Laura Moser in Houston.

Cisneros, whose every word is scripted by the DCCC and the high-priced consultants they made him hire, is on a kamikaze mission against Thorburn. "We already have a con man in the White House," they had him say. "We don’t need one representing the 39th District. Andy Thorburn’s career is an unbroken chain of tax evasion, financial mismanagement, and misreprersentation." What's especially funny about this is that it's coming from the mouth of a man who has constantly been caught in outright lies and an unending stream of misrepresentations. Cisneros is more like Trump than any other Democrat running for Congress anywhere in America.

This is the cached website the DCCC designed for Cisneros to use in his attack against Thorburn. They are such scumbags-- but also stupider than shit and unable to cover their own tracks. This is the site that has been taken down-- "Committee name here" written in the disclaimer box-- instead of anybody's disclaimer. Watch them screw up another race! Since Cisneros isn't even a Democrat and has no idea how to appeal to Democrats, his campaign is completely based around attacks against the Democrats running for the CA-39 seat. This are the claims he's been using his lottery winnings to make against Thorburn:

• Thorburn is running for office on his record of being a teacher but his only teaching experience was four decades ago in New Jersey. He is in fact an insurance executive who has bankrupted numerous companies, failed to pay his taxes, and made a fortune that he is now spending to misrepresent himself to voters.
• Thorburn says he’s a successful businessman but in fact he has a history of illegal and unethical business misconduct. He led a company that was forced to pay over 234 thousand dollars for breach of contract to a customer who asserts Thorburn defrauded him. A former business partner asserts Thorburn used fraud and defamation to push him out of their business and says that Thorburn did not pay taxes or use normal account procedures, used offshore bank accounts, and used insurance ratings improperly.
• Thorburn says he supports big government policies but won’t pay his fair share in taxes to fund these policies. He failed to pay his taxes for five years and has faced nearly three-quarters of a million dollars in federal tax liens. Thorburn and two of his businesses filed for bankruptcy. When wealthy men like Thorburn fail to live up to their responsibilities, the burden is shifted to ordinary families who pay their taxes. 

There's also a good candidate in the race-- Sam Jammal, the Democrat who actually lives in the district (unlike Cisneros, Mai Khanh Tran and Thorburn, the 3 multimillionaire carpetbaggers)-- but the clueless DCCC shenanigans could well end with 2 Republicans-- Young Kim and Bob Huff-- winning the jungle primary and no Democrat making it into the general election. That's the DCCC; that's Kyle Layman; that's Jason Bresler; that's Ben Ray Lujan... and that's what we get when Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer get to supervise the DCCC. Eric Bauman should kick them out of the state.

Republican Multimillionaire Gil Cisneros Is Wrecking The Orange County Democratic Party

Cisneros

CA-39, primarily in northeast Orange County, is viewed as a prime target for Democrats, The longtime incumbent, Ed Royce knew he wouldn’t win and announced his retirement. Although the PVI is “even,” Hillary beat Trump in the district 51.5% to 42.9%%. Unfortunately elements at the DCCC recruited 2 completely incompetent, self-funding multi-millionaires from outside the district, Gil Cisneros (who by December 31 had reported spending $1,352,762 of his lottery winnings) and Mai-Khanh Tran (who had wasted $230,000 of her money on the race). And neither of them is even the biggest of the self-funders trying to buy a congressional seat. Andy Thorburn, also from another district, spent $2,335,900 of his own as of December 31. What percentage of small individual contributions went to each of them and to the normal non-self-funding candidate who was actually born and raised and lives in CA-39?

• Andy Thorburn- 0.57%
• Gil Cisneros- 1.76%
• Mai-Khanh Tran- 12.48%
• Sam Jammal- 27.29%

So what’s “normal?” In Wisconsin, Randy Bryce is taking on Paul Ryan. As of December 31, Ryan had gotten 5.6% of his campaign funds from small individual donors and Randy Bryce had gotten 72.8%. Or let’s look at a neighboring district, CA-45:

• Mimi Waters (R)- 5.41%
• Brian Forde (D)- 4.92%
• Katie Porter (D)- 23.74%
• David Min (New Dem)- 13.37%
• Kia Hamadanchy- 14.31%

I don’t know if the amount a candidate gets from small donors— or the number of small donors— really shows the enthusiasm for a candidate or not. But it sure shows something compared too the self-financers. But let’s go back to CA-39 for a second. Two of the worst self-funders in the state— and the country— this cycle are Andy Thorburn, who has persuaded a large number of progressive groups that he’s a progressive, and Gil Cisneros, the DCCC candidate. They have begun turning on each other… or, more accurately, Cisneros, the ridiculous lottery winner with no support from anyone other that people he’s given money, has been smearing Thorburn, DCCC-style.

Cisneros sent out a very expensive mailer that attempts to shred the other multimillionaire as a tax evader. Cisneros is a lifelong Republican, pretending to be a Democrat, who doesn’t understand that Democratic primary voters are not like Republican primary voters. Democratic primary voters hate attacks between Democrats, even while Republican primary voters love attacks between Republicans. Look what happened in TX-07 when the DCCC went after progressive Laura Moser— it won her a place in the runoff, plus a tidal wave of contributions. But Cisneros plodded on anyway: “We already have a con man in the White House. We don’t need one representing the 39th District. Andy Thorburn’s career is an unbroken chain of tax evasion, financial mismanagement, and misreprersentation.” This is coming from someone who has constantly been caught in outright lies and an unending stream of misrepresentations. Cisneros in more like Trump than any other Democrat running for Congress anywhere in America.

These are the claims he made against Thorburn:

• Thorburn is running for office on his record of being a teacher but his only teaching experience was four decades ago in New Jersey. He is in fact an insurance executive who has bankrupted numerous companies, failed to pay his taxes, and made a fortune that he is now spending to misrepresent himself to voters.
• Thorburn says he’s a successful businessman but in fact he has a history of illegal and unethical business misconduct. He led a company that was forced to pay over 234 thousand dollars for breach of contract to a customer who asserts Thorburn defrauded him. A former business partner asserts Thorburn used fraud and defamation to push him out of their business and says that Thorburn did not pay taxes or use normal account procedures, used offshore bank accounts, and used insurance ratings improperly.
• Thorburn says he supports big government policies but won’t pay his fair share in taxes to fund these policies. He failed to pay his taxes for five years and has faced nearly three-quarters of a million dollars in federal tax liens. Thorburn and two of his businesses filed for bankruptcy. When wealthy men like Thorburn fail to live up to their responsibilities, the burden is shifted to ordinary families who pay their taxes. 

The report itself is 28 pages of the kind of opposition research that Republicans will be able to use to defeat Thorburn if he gets the nomination. This comes right out of the arsenal of sleaze bag DCCC political director Jason Bresler. He had signaled that if Thorburn didn’t get out of the CA-39 race, the DCCC would destroy him. It looks like he did it through his Clem Kadiddlehopper excuse for a candidate.



This is the cached website the DCCC designed for Cisneros to use in his attack against Thorburn. They are such scumbags-- but also stupider than shit and unable to cover their own tracks. This is the site that has been taken down-- "Committee name here" written in the disclaimer box-- instead of anybody's disclaimer. Watch them screw up another race!

Meanwhile Cisneros sued the other candidates for something spurious, the kind of frivolous law suit Republicans use against each other all the time but that Democrats try to avoid. Remember, Cisneros has invested a lot of money in Walmart and oil stocks and is also a slumlord. Like Trump, Cisneros is a funny and ridiculous character, and really dumb. His high-priced consultant-run campaign just put out a new TV ad showing he can read a script that makes him sound almost like a Democrat. Yeah, he’ll "stand up to the NRA" just like real Democrats do. But he owns something like $10 million in iShares, a mutual funds company that invests in the gun industry. That’s Gil! And have you seen the Climate Hawks Vote call for Cisneros to divest from his approximately million dollars worth of oil stocks? But at least his consultants are teaching him to sound like a Democrat.

I reached out to Mac Zilber, who works with Thorburn. His statement was kind of boiler plate considering the DCCC’s role in this Cisneros bullshit: "It comes as no surprise that a Republican like Gil Cisneros is making up lies about a progressive Democrat-- that's what Republicans do. Gil Cisneros is misleading voters to distract from the fact that he invests his lottery millions in gun stocks and tobacco-- that is, when he's not donating that money to Republicans." Zilber also pointed me to a Setting the Record Straight page that exposes the lies Cisneros and the DCCC are spreading about Thorburn. And below is the mailer Thorburn sent to labor union members on Gil, revenge I'm assuming... but who knows? My suggestion... get behind Sam Jammal.

The DCCC Would Rather Lose An Election-- So Long As It Can Make Sure Everyone Gets Paid Off

If CA-39 is any indication, the perennial losers at the DCCC appear ready to give up on the House. It's not even March and they are organizing their puppets around one of the worst and least electable candidates running for Congress in Orange County.

In the 39th district, which Hillary won by nearly 9% and where local activists forced out 24 year incumbent Ed Royce, the DCCC is rallying around lottery-winning, slumlord Gil Cisneros. Cisneros doesn't live in the district and has no ties to the community, but he is a rich conservative "ex"-Republican-- all that matters when the DCCC prioritizes lining the pockets of its revolving door consultants over winning elections.

By any measure, the 39th should be one of the most winnable seats this cycle. The district is 35% Latino and 30% Asian American. Democrats won the state Senate seat that covers the entire district for the first time in 40 years last cycle. Democrats and Republicans are basically equal in voter registration and the Cook Report rates the seat as "lean Democrat." The key to flip the 39th will be voter turnout, which means actually running a candidate who connects to voters.

None of this matters to the DCCC. While it's hard to imagine there are many more favorable seats across the country, the DCCC is willing to throw away one of the 24 it needs.

Why? Cisneros and his wife have donated nearly $150,000 since 2013 to California Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. One member of the Hispanic Caucus has a family foundation that Cisneros has donated tens of thousands of dollars to in just the past 3 years. Cisneros alone has given $16,000 in the past 3 cycles to the California Democratic Party and this cycle he and his wife have given $10,000 to the Democratic Party of Orange County. This doesn't include the tens of thousands he and his wife donated in 2015-2016 to the Clinton campaign and state parties on her behalf. I guess it's fair to say we know how much it costs to buy Democrats. Throw a few grand in several directions and even a former Republican slumlord can have the corporate version of the "progressive" label.

Here are the facts on the ground-- when local Democratic activists and clubs have had an opportunity to vote on the candidates, progressives Sam Jammal and Jay Chen have come out ahead. At the Democratic Party's pre-endorsement caucus-- a generally corrupt process driven by party elites-- Cisneros was so toxic to party controlled delegates that he only received just one (1) vote. Chen received the plurality of votes but fell shy of the endorsement. At a meeting of the Tri Counties Democratic Club, one of the few clubs in the district, Cisneros received 0 votes. Jammal received the majority of votes but fell shy of the endorsement. Time and again, when people have met Cisneros, they have chosen anyone but him.

You would think Democrats would have learned that you can't force a candidate down voters throats. Especially a candidate that local voters have shown no interest in supporting. But nothing has changed. If anything, it's gotten worse.

Does this look like a man trying to buy an election? It is

Cisneros has used his money to buy endorsements from the Giffords Campaign where he is one of their biggest donors and has a number of local elected officials who followed their congressional counterparts in Cisneros' pay-to-endorse scheme. He has also started to get the DCCC signal from their puppets to endorse. SEIU came on board this week and you can expect more to come as the DCCC tries to give Cisneros a clear path to defeat-- and the patina of being a Democrat.

This is all pathetic and why voters generally dislike the Beltway Democrats. Cisneros is a former Republican, who only became a Democrat 2 years ago, but a few bucks thrown around makes you a credible voice for Democrats so long as the checks keep cashing. If you are looking to lower turnout in a district that will only flip if Democratic base voters maintain enthusiasm, Cisneros is the perfect candidate-- uninspiring, pay to play and easily set up to be lampooned as an out of touch, out of district millionaire who didn't earn his money and is a slumlord.

There are few better positioned seats for a win but the DCCC is more concerned with getting paid. It's probably better for their consultants to lose the House and raise money off of Trump than actually be concerned about what 2 more years of an unchecked Trump will bring.

Yesterday I spoke with Nancy Leeds, campaign manager for Andy Thorburn, one of the candidates the DCCC is trying to pressure into leaving the race in order to clear a path for Cisneros. "Our campaign," she told me, "has amazing momentum. Andy is racking up endorsements left and right from nurses, steelworkers, teachers and grassroots leaders across the district AND he has the most cash on hand of any candidate in the race. He is the Democrats' best chance to flip the 39th district. Furthermore, our campaign believes is it against the values of both our system and our party for a candidate to be chosen by Washington rather than the voters. The idea that Andy would drop out is ridiculous."

2018 Opposition Research Against Nothing-Burger DCCC Recruits Is Going To Be Even Worse Than Usual

Hans-- a congenital liar

One of the problems with the DCCC pretending not to be a bunch of scummy politicians and recruiting "clean" non-politicians is that politicians who have been coming up in the ranks are usually well-vetted by the voters. The garbage candidates the DCCC digs up from under rocks invariably have a little something horrible they've been hiding-- perfect for GOP opposition research firms to find. The NationalJournal gave some juicy Orange County examples-- without even getting into the silliest DCCC recruits of all, Gil Cisneros and Sarah the Quaalcomm heiress, the two super-rich vanity candidates who are destined to provide the biggest laughs of the cycle.

The NationalJournal begins with the DCCC's biggest recruit of the cycle, Hans Keirstead, who looks excellent on paper, but who has turned out to be a really dismal failure on the stump. First off, in a season where the energy of the the voters has nothing to do with preserving the status quo, Hans is the epitome of a status quo candidate-- and immediately sought out and received an endorsement from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, the New Dems. The Journal immediately notes that Hans "has the kind of standout resume that national Democrats [meaning the corrupt slime dogs who run the DCCC and have a decade of serial failures for paying attention to people like Ian Russell; see below] have prized as they recruit fresh talent in a bid to take back the House.

He’s a pioneering stem-cell biologist specializing in spinal-cord injuries whose work has been profiled in the New York Times. And, according to his LinkedIn profile and a biography on his biomedical company’s website, he holds a doctorate in neuroscience from the University of British Columbia.

But that Ph.D, as national Democratic consultants found, is technically in zoology-- a discrepancy, however innocent or not it may be, that could hinder a top challenger to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, one of the most vulnerable Republicans in Congress.

This is just the latest example of what strategists predict will be a trove of opposition research dogging the glut of Democratic political neophytes hoping to benefit from a favorable national climate. And it will be dug up by Republicans and primary rivals alike.

“The Democratic nomination is worth having in 2018,” said Ian Russell, a former deputy executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who now advises several House campaigns. “You’re going to see candidates and campaigns pull out more stops than they would otherwise to win the primaries."

At this point, the NationalJournal probably should have identified Russell as representing one of the Orange County candidates, the wealthy, but otherwise total nothing-burger of a candidate, Sarah the heiress. Maybe Russell didn't tell them. He's like that. He used to work at the DCCC, which he was instrumental in ruining.

Consultants working on House races said they expect a flurry of oppo dumps as primaries begin in earnest, describing rumors they’ve heard or files circulating that reveal potential candidate vulnerabilities. Several operatives described it as routine for campaigns to conduct cursory research into the background of an opponent, even if only to inform strategy.

The problem is particularly acute in California, where a jungle-primary system, swingy open seats, and the state Democratic Party’s endorsement process, which began last weekend, increase the urgency to stand out in crowded fields.

A Keirstead spokesman confirmed the candidate’s doctorate was in zoology, but clarified that it was with a specialty in neuroscience and added that he later became a professor of that discipline after further study at Cambridge University. Keirstead’s LinkedIn page was updated by Monday morning to note that his Ph.D. came from the university’s zoology department.

“Whomever tried to pitch this laughable attempt at mudslinging stands to benefit from Hans’ tireless efforts to boost STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Math) curriculum in our public-education system,” campaign spokesman Kyle Quinn-Quesada said.

Opponents on both sides of the aisle could use Keirstead’s academic characterization to craft a narrative that he has a tendency to exaggerate. He drew scrutiny this month when he said that Democratic leaders wanted to appoint him chairman of the House Science committee and give him a seat on Appropriations-- something that leadership quickly denied to Roll Call.

In other words, he's already a known liar, as we noted, in all its gory details, a month ago. The DCCC should have dumped him then but they didn't and now they may be stuck with a candidate who can't win (unless the nationalized blue wave is just too strong to not drag him along as well). And it isn't just Keirstead. The other New Dem in the CA-48 race, isn't as bad but... "Harley Rouda, sits on the board of a shoe company that did business with a supplier accused of using sweatshop labor. In response, Rouda’s campaign stressed that he had never been involved in the company’s day-to-day operations." One of his consultants, Mac Zilber, said that "This is the first Harley has heard of this allegation and bragged that Rouda had been endorsed by six major labor unions. Maybe they wouldn't have endorsed him if they knew about the sweat shops.

NationalJournal, which depends a little too much on the DCCC for "facts," then went on to claim that "Elsewhere in Orange County, three top Democratic contenders are running to replace retiring Republican Rep. Ed Royce, including two self-funding multimillionaires. Researchers compiled a 27-page file on one of them, Andy Thorburn, a businessman who seeded his campaign with a $2 million loan." Which are the 3? Can you tell from this graphic below? The self-funding millionaires are Gil Cisneros and May-Khanh Tran (each of whom got one vote from the California Democratic Party pre-endorsement conference last weekend) and Andy Thorburn,who got two votes.

The report showed, among other things, that the IRS took out several tax liens against him [Thorburn] when he failed to pay an estimated $600,000 in back taxes, and that Thorburn’s company bases some of its operations in Guernsey, an island off the coast of France that has been blacklisted as a tax haven by some European countries.

Thorburn’s campaign said it doesn’t view the research as a liability, noting that Thorburn has never hidden his bankruptcy filing and that Guernsey is one of the few places with regulations that enabled the creation of Thorburn’s insurance company.

Meanwhile, Republican outside groups, which dug up much of the opposition research that dogged Democratic folk musician Rob Quist in last year’s Montana special election, plan to have a similar role ahead of November’s elections.

The Congressional Leadership Fund began conducting field research last year in 15 races as part of its $100 million campaign to protect the Republican House majority. Its team of researchers deploys in the districts to scour old court cases, dig up property records, and conduct interviews. CLF partners with America Rising, which plans to target 30 to 40 House districts this cycle in an effort to discredit Democratic challengers.

Corry Bliss, CLF’s executive director, said the effort has uncovered potentially damaging information on several Democrats, particularly those who are wealthy or first-time candidates. He highlighted as an example possibly harmful divorce records that his team found on one highly touted DCCC recruit.

“In a couple of the races, the research is so good we don’t want to use it too early because a candidate may drop out of the race or it may cause their lead in a primary to crater,” Bliss said. “Timing is everything.”

CLF plans to engage in some Democratic primaries and will use its research to guide its efforts, boosting the weakest general-election nominee.

With an unusually large battlefield this cycle, Democrats can dust off research collected on longtime incumbents who haven’t had a competitive race in years. American Bridge, a Democratic super PAC, has trackers on the ground in 25 states who have recorded more than 1,200 House GOP campaign events this cycle. Its video database has more than 25,000 hours of footage of Republicans.

Hey, Hey! Ho, Ho! Ben Ray Lujan's Got To Go!

I've been mad at the DCCC since Pelosi named Rahm Emanuel chairman in 2005. It's barely over a decade and other people are starting to catch on as well. The latest shit from this assholes: Pelosi and Ben Gay Lujan now admit the DCCC recruits and funds Blue Dogs and anti-Choice freaks and passes them off on unsuspecting Democratic voters as normal Democrats, Monday. Becca Andrews, reporting for Mother Jones used the DCCC p.r. shop's deceitfully-crafted messaging: "The Democrats will not withhold financial support from candidates who oppose abortion, according to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)." Oh... "not withhold?" As if they ever did! Conservatives always get the biggest share of DCCC money.

Democratic party leaders, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have also said the Democratic party should not draw a hard line when it comes to abortion. In June, DNC chair Tom Perez met with Democrats for Life of America who demanded that abortion not be a “litmus test” of the party. The 2016 Democratic platform stated that the party believed “unequivocally” that “every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion.”

At a time when the Democratic party is searching for a coherent identity and program after its resounding defeat in 2016, the debate over whether the party openly supports abortion rights will likely continue to heat up as the 2018 races loom.

“Throwing weight behind anti-choice candidates is bad politics that will lead to worse policy,” Mitchell Stille, who oversees campaigns for NARAL Pro-Choice America, told The Hill. “The idea that jettisoning this issue wins elections for Democrats is folly contradicted by all available data.”

I asked a couple dozen incumbents and some 2018 candidates what they think of the new controversy Ben Ray has blindly and stupidly stumbled into. I mean can you imagine how fast Ryan would fire NRCC chairman Steve Stivers if he announced they are going to start recruiting and funding progressive pro-Choice candidates? The first coherent response I got was Paul Perry, a progressive Democrat running for the PA-07 seat in the Philly suburbs currently held by Pat Meehan (R):

Yesterday, the DCCC stated publicly that it would compromise women’s reproductive freedom in a misguided attempt to win elections. This is dangerous nonsense. A woman’s right to bodily autonomy is not a bargaining chip; it is a fundamental part of what should be every Democrat’s commitment to economic justice and healthcare for all.

Therefore, in order to transform words into actionable solidarity, I am using my resources to support the Women’s Medical Fund, an organization that provides financial assistance to economically vulnerable women seeking reproductive care in Philadelphia, Montgomery, Chester, Delaware, and Bucks counties-- and I am encouraging my supporters to do the same. If elected to Congress, I'll ensure that programs like this have the necessary funding and support to provide full access to quality care for all women.

Because access to quality, affordable care for women should not depend on their financial circumstances nor the whims of party leaders. Period.

#TrustWomen #WeWon’tGoBack

Mary Ellen Balchunis was the Democratic candidate for PA-07 last cycle and the DCCC sabotaged her race. Sh'e thinking about running again next year. This morning she told me that "I understand supporting candidates crossing the finish line in the primary. If I had the support of the DCCC after my huge primary victory, I believe that I could have gone much further. However, I disagree with supporting candidates who win the primary and do not support the Democratic platform. As a Political Scientist, I believe if the DCCC goes through with this, you will see numerous women and Progressive men supporting Independent candidates. The DCCC may be giving several victories to Independents; and if the Independents don't win, the DCCC will be giving the election to the Republicans. In either case, the Republicans will maintain their majority. Haven't we learned anything from the 2016 election? The people want candidates who help them with jobs, wages, healthcare and education. It is why Sen.Sanders had such 'huge' support!"

The next post to come in was-- surprise, surprise-- from a woman candidate, Katie Hill, running against GOP crackpot and Trump rubber-stamp Steve Knight in CA-25, an evenly split district leaning blue.

I have spent my whole life in one of those long-held Republican districts that Democrats have to flip next year in order to get back a majority in the House. A Republican has been in the seat for 42 out of the last 50 years. The instinct among Democrats at the national level that we need to be talking to people in those districts differently to be able to win them over is absolutely correct. But that does not mean we should compromise or go backwards on some of our most fundamental values, including women's rights.

Many members of my community have strong religious ties that affect their views on abortion. However, the vast majority of them-- including members of my immediate family-- acknowledge that, while they may not agree with a woman's choice to have an abortion, it is not their place or the government's place to get involved in one of the hardest decisions a woman will ever make in her life. They also almost universally agree, in my experience, that the best way to prevent abortions (and/or the devastating cycle of kids entering the foster care system) is by preventing unplanned pregnancies. So education and access to birth control are absolutely key in that. There is national polling and research that shows that 80% of people support a woman's right to choose, if not morally, then at least from the perspective that it's not a decision that the government can be making for her. We need to be appealing to that overwhelming majority of people-- not the 20% or less who want to strip away the rights we've worked so hard to protect.

A woman's right to choose is something that our party, and progressives in general, have been fighting to earn and to protect for generations. We cannot give that up because of a mistaken belief that this is somehow the way we will win over conservative voters, and more conservative-leaning districts. As a woman, and someone who fundamentally understands the culture and the dynamics of purple districts, I can say with utter confidence that this is the wrong tactic.

The best Democrat running in IL-13, David Gill, is a stalwart, no-nonsense progressive. I knew the DCCC announcement would sound unpleasantly familiar to him. Last night a good feminist Democrat was complaining on twitter that "liberal men" were willing to throw women under the bus and back Lujan on this. Well, not any of the liberal men I know! Dr. Gill sure had a different perspective than that too! "I would have no way of knowing what the DCCC is doing all around the country," he told us, "but I am intimately aware of their actions here in IL-13. I lost this seat in 2012 by three-tenths of ONE point (with the handicap that year of having a liberal independent on the ballot who was expressing all the same views as myself), after defeating the moderate DCCC-backed candidate in the primary (despite being outspent 5 to 1). Subsequent Democrats have lost the seat by 50 to 60 times as much as I lost it by, and Senator Durbin lost in this district by 20 times as much as I lost it by. But in spite of the fact that I have so vastly outperformed other Democratic candidates, I am unable to interest the DCCC in getting behind my 2018 campaign. I suspect that they do not like the fact that some of the main planks in my platform are driven by my 25 year membership in Physicians for a National Health Program (a leading single-payer advocacy group) and my 20 year membership in Physicians for Reproductive Choice. I also speak frequently and passionately about the need for true campaign-finance reform, and the need to end the corporate ownership of our politics and government. These are the issues which have resulted in my relative success here in the district, and yet these same issues seem to keep the DCCC from embracing my campaign. There will not be a liberal independent protecting the Republican who squeaked by me in 2012 this time around (Illinois' bizarre ballot access laws only make that a realistic possibility in years that end in a '2'), so I intend to make up that 0.3% next year and get to Congress, whether the DCCC likes it or not. Of course, first I will have to defeat another moderate DCCC-backed candidate in the Democratic primary next March, a candidate who has not expressed any public support for single-payer or tuition-free public universities or a $15 per hour minimum wage."

Doug Applegate, a former Marine Corp colonel and not someone who gets pushed around by political hacks told us that "the DCCC sets it's own policies and I set the policies for my campaign. Supporting women's hard-won right to choice is a core value of mine and-- a value shared by the majority of San Diego and Orange County voters-- and Beltway strategists aren't the folks I'm looking to for advise on the subject. Women who live in CA-49 are." Doug is likely to replace anti-Choice fanatic Darrell Issa in Congress. Up the road a bit Wendy Reed is running for a deep red seat held by Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy. She's another candidate unenthusiastic about the DCCC's latest move. "Ben Ray Lujan's willingness to toss off a Constitutionally protected right of women for political expediency exemplifies the rotting of DCCC strategy," she told us. "Lujan seems to have passed his expiration date, and I stand with Tom Perez and Howard Dean on this. Only principles, platform integrity, and informed conversation will win elections in 2018."

Tom Guild is a progressive Democrat in exactly the kind of "red state," Oklahoma, where the DCCC wants to run anti-Choice Blue Dogs. Of course, they're wrong... and are unlikely to back Tom. He told us that "The progressive coalition is made up of many disparate interests. Environmentalists are often primarily concerned with climate change and the future of our planet. Progressive populists may be most concerned with raising the minimum wage, Wall Street Reform, and the reduction of college student loan debt. Women’s health issues are at the forefront of the concerns of many women and men in the progressive movement. Seniors may emphasize increasing Social Security benefits and protecting Medicare from being reduced to worthless vouchers, leaving older Americans without meaningful affordable health care. There is an abundance of other groups constituting the progressive movement and each has issues crucial to them. To undercut women’s health is offensive and is no more acceptable than the undermining of other values important to diverse elements of our movement. We need candidates who run the gamut and mutually support our progressive allies on issues essential to them. As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. so eloquently said, injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together. We must support our coalition partner’s progressive causes, along with our own. Anti-Choice=Anti-Progressive. Together we win, and as Abe Lincoln, also eloquently, opined, a house divided against itself cannot stand."

Harley Rouda is one of the 40 or so Democrats running for GOP-held seats in Orange County. He wants to replace Dana Rohrabacher, an anti-Choice nut. "A woman's right to choose is non-negotiable. We can compromise on many things, but not on a woman's right to autonomy over her own body. I’m in complete agreement with 70% of Americans who, regardless of their personal feelings on abortion, recognize it is a woman’s fundamental right to control her reproductive decisions and that government has no place in deciding for her. I’m disappointed that the Democratic Party won’t stand up without hesitation and in unanimity on this very important issue."

Another Orange County candidate, Andy Thorburn-- who is eager to replace Ed Royce-- jumped into the race yesterday. He told me that "I'm 100% pro-choice, and I believe that the government should not tell a woman what she can or can't do with her body. I do not believe that the national party should actively recruit anti-choice candidates."

I asked a whole slew of Democrats in Congress. A few cursed out Pelosi and Lujan or told me off the record how angry they are and how divisive this is for the party-- but no one was willing to speak on the record except Bay Area progressive freshman Ro Khanna, who said simply and right to the point, "I believe being pro-choice is about gender equality and a core value. The DCCC should not support anti-choice candidates." BOOM!

Dotty Nygard is the progressive candidate taking on Jeff Denham in northern California. Again, clear and right to the point: "There is zero reason for our party to invest in fringe, anti-Choice candidates. Americans are tired of politicians who feel more compelled to regulate a woman's body than Wall Street corruption. 70% of Americans support safe access to abortion services, it's clear now more than ever that members of congress need to accurately represent our values and defend the health of Women."

And Derrick Crowe, the progressive in the Austin-San Antonio corridor district occupied by anti-Choice freak Lamar Smith sums up with all the candidates I spoke with said: "The DCCC should retract this statement, apologize to the women they were selling out when making this statement, and issue instead a new statement in which they make it clear that women's rights are not negotiable."

Rep. Kaniela Ing is the most progressive Democrat in the Hawaii legislature. He may not be running for federal office-- I hope he does-- but he's certainly paying close attention to what Pelosi and Lujan have been saying. I like his response a lot: "Embracing candidates who do not support every woman's right to choose is a huge step backward for our party, both morally and strategically. Roe v. Wade was nearly 45 years ago. So abortion should not be framed as a new fight between progressives and moderate Democrats. It's a pillar of what Democrats stand for. We can and should learn from Republicans, who have recently dominated American politics on every level by running unapologetically conservative candidates. People vote when they are inspired by candidates who stand for something. Our advantage is that more folks share progressive values and support our issues. We have dignity, fairness, and equality on our side. When we run on our values, and not from them, we win."

Want to watch some good ideas from the Democratic Party? This guy was speaking at Politicon in Pasadena this last weekend-- and there was nothing in what he had to say about taking away women's right to choice. One has to wonder why party leaders like Pelosi and Lujan aren't on the same page as this DNC spokesperson. They should be if they're serious about winning back Congress:




UPDATE: From Crowley's Opponent

Alexandria Ocasio is running or the Queens/Bronx seat occuried by the corrupt conservative Pelosi has picked to run the House Dems after she's gone, Joe Crowley. "The United States has the highest maternal mortality rate in the developed world," she told us. "Women across this country already suffer in their access to healthcare. The very idea of the Democratic Party compromising on healthcare for half of Americans is tantamount to becoming the very Republicans we are trying to overturn. Our focus should be on expanding healthcare to all Americans, not taking it away."