Let's All Shake Hands And Be Friends And Defeat the Real Enemy, Donald Trump And His Enablers-- Ummm... Just A Minute There

My political enemies are conservatives and reactionaries, and in Trump's case, mentally deranged fascists. The Democratic establishment will never hesitate for a moment to say "All you Bernie (and, to whatever small extent is needed) Elizabeth Warren supporters get on board the Biden for President train now." I'm not going to try to dissuade anyone from doing so-- and I wish people who discovered electoral politics 2 weeks ago would stop frothing at the mouth about me refusing to personally vote for Biden-- but Biden has a long and repulsive record going back 5 decades that has helped me form a hatred for him that's not going away. I know Trump is worse. I don't like racists and Biden only ran on one issue in his first election: racism. I don't like corporatists and he has always tried-- even harder than some Republicans-- to fellate Wall Street and the banksters and to wreck Social Security and Medicare in the name of Austerity... Yeah, yeah, you're heard it all before. But locking arms with a bunch of corrupt status quo Democrats to help elect Status Quo Joe Biden and other establishment candidates is not something I have any intention of doing. As you already know, the lesser of two evils is still evil.

Who's better? Who's worse?

My grandfather, a socialist and a devoted FDR fan, once told me, when I was very young, that there's only one thing in American politics worse than the Democratic Party-- the Republican Party. As I've written many time, Chuck Schumer went to James Madison High School in Brooklyn at the same time I did (a few years after Bernie graduated). He was as much "Little Schucky Schmucky" back then as he is now.



Writing for Too Much Information yesterday, Andrew Perez revealed that Schumer spent $15 million destroying progressive primary candidates. And now they expect us to vote for putrid conservatives like Frackenlooper (Colorado) or somewhat less putrid nothing candidates like Sara Gideon (Maine), Amy McGrath (Kentucky), Jon Ossoff (Georgia), Theresa Greenfield (Iowa), Ben Ray Luján (New Mexico), Barbara Bollier (a Kanas Republican pretending to be a Democrat), Jaime Harrison (South Carolina), and Cal Cunningham (North Carolina). I wouldn't vote for any of them. I vote for someone, not against someone who is worse. "With the help of the party, its major donors, and the Senate Majority PAC (SMP)-- a super PAC funded by labor unions, corporate interests and Wall Street billionaires-- candidates endorsed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee have won contested primaries in four battleground states," wrote Perez.

Colorado was the most emblematic example of the party putting its thumb on the scale against progressives: There, former Gov. John Hickenlooper cruised to a primary victory over former Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff. In the final weeks of the race, SMP spent $1 million to boost Hickenlooper, after he spent his failed presidential campaign attacking key tenets of progressives’ legislative agenda, including Medicare for All and the Green New Deal.

At the time of the cash infusion, Hickenlooper was losing ground in the polls and engulfed in scandals: He had just been fined by Colorado’s Independent Ethics Commission for violating state ethics law as governor, the local CBS station uncovered evidence of his gubernatorial office raking in cash from oil companies, and a video circulated showed Hickenlooper comparing his job as a politician to a slave on a slave ship, being whipped by a scheduler.

With the help of SMP and the endorsement of the DSCC, Hickenlooper held off the more progressive Romanoff to win a 17 point primary victory.

SMP is led byformer top staffers at the DSCC. The super PAC has raised a staggering $118 million this cycle, pooling cash from both organized labor and business titans to promote corporate-aligned candidates over more progressive primary challengers.

Working for Working Americans, a super PAC funded by the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, has donated $5 million. The Laborers' International Union of North America’s super PAC has given $1.5 million. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers’s political action committee has chipped in $1.3 million. SMP has received also big donations from groups affiliated with labor unions like the Service Employees International Union ($1 million), the National Association of Letter Carriers ($750,000), and Communications Workers of America ($500,000).

Overall, the top donor to SMP so far this cycle has been Democracy PAC-- a super PAC that’s bankrolled by billionaire George Soros and the Fund for Policy Reform, a nonprofit funded by Soros. Democracy PAC has contributed $8.5 million to SMP.

Other donors from the financial industry include: Renaissance Technologies founder and billionaire Jim Simons and his wife Deborah ($5.5 million) and billionaire D. E. Shaw & Co. founder David Shaw ($1 million).

Some major donors have financial stakes in current and future legislation.

For instance: SMP received a $1 million donation from billionaire Jonathan Gray, an executive at Blackstone, which owns the hospital staffing chain, TeamHealth. SMP also received $2 million from the Greater New York Hospital Association.

In late 2019, Schumer helped stall Senate legislation that would have kept patients from receiving “surprise medical bills,” the hefty charges that occur when they visit hospitals that are in their insurance network but are unknowingly treated by providers who are considered out-of-network.

SMP is affiliated with Majority Forward, a dark money group focused on attacking Republican Senate candidates. Majority Forward received $450,000 in 2018 from pharmacy giant CVS Health-- which also owns health insurer Aetna. The group also received $300,000 from the American Health Care Association (AHCA), a trade association that represents the nursing home industry.

The Democratic primary candidates backed by the DSCC have expressed reservations about Medicare for All, arguing they believe people should be allowed to keep their private health insurance if they want it. Many of the DSCC’s favored candidates do support creating a public health insurance option.

Meanwhile, the Real Estate Roundtable, a trade group for real estate investors, donated $50,000 to Majority Forward. Schumer and Senate Democrats recently helped Republicans unanimously pass pandemic relief legislation that included a special, little-noticed provision that amounted to $170 billion worth of new tax breaks for wealthy real estate investors.

Schumer has also derailed progressives in Maine, North Carolina, New Mexico, Kentucky, Texas, Georgia and Iowa. He and his cronies basically ignored West Virginia-- allowing Paula Jean Swearengin to win the primary and find herself as the only progressive challenging a Trumpist incumbent in the Senate this cycle. The 2020 Blue America Senate thermometer on the right makes it easy to contribute to her campaign. It's either that or an all-Schumer status quo Democratic caucus in the Senate next year-- doing nothing but disappointing people so badly that 2022 will see a replay of 2010, when progressives didn't even bother to vote, giving the Republicans massive wins in both houses of Congress and bringing on a decade of right-wing control.

And one more thing-- a question. Do the Democratic committees, like the DCCC and DSCC get behind progressives in the general election when they manage to win primaries? Sometimes, but rarely. They want progressives to help them after primaries... but they usually refuse to help progressives.

This Senate Race Was Supposed To Be A "Sure Thing" But If Hickenlooper Wins The Primary It Won't Be

On Friday, Elizabeth Warren released a list of congressional candidates she had just endorsed. The list included progressive champions like Jamaal Bowman (NY), Mike Siegel (TX), Charles Booker (KY) and Julie Oliver (TX). I'm sure all of them are overjoyed at her backing-- even if it's a little late in the game for Bowman and Booker, whose primaries are tomorrow. But whatever goodwill and cred with the progressive netroots, the endorsements generated for Warren, it was squandered when she stepped all over herself by adding grotesque corporate whore John Hickenlooper to the list.

Widely hated by liberals and reformers for his virulent anti-progressive mania-- both as a dismally failed presidential candidate and in his current Schumeristic senatorial campaign-- Hick, AKA, Frackenlooper, has virtually nothing in common with any of Warren's other endorsed candidates and not much in common with Warren herself. I noticed that the #1 Warren-backing outside group in the country, the PCCC, quickly sent out an e-mail to their list emphasizing that they not only back Romanoff but that in their opinion Hickenlooper is "one of the worst corporate Dems" and reminded their supporters that he is "the guy who ran for president and consistently attacked Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders from the right. This is one of the most winnable Senate seats in the nation, and there's no excuse to elect a right-wing Democrat. Andrew Romanoff's running on Medicare For All and a Green New Deal. John Hickenlooper opposes those, supports police policies that encourage violence while proclaiming 'every life matters,' and is now embroiled in an ethics/corruption scandal that could hurt our chances of winning this easy-to-win race in November." BOOM!

In a spat with Warren on the debate stage, he hissed that maybe Medicare for All could be achieved in 15 years. They'll be dead in 15 years and the way to achieve Medicare for All sooner is by defeating candidates like Cory Gardner and John Hickenlooper and electing candidates like Andrew Romanoff. It isn't that complicated. Hickenlooper has finally stopped calling progressives "Stalinists," probably because he's running against a progressive who happens to be named Romanoff.

Yesterday, Politico's James Arkin pointed out that "Hickenlooper has stumbled in the closing weeks of Colorado’s Senate primary, creating openings for his opponent and Republicans that have unsettled a critical race for Democrats in their bid to recapture the Senate. Democrats acknowledge Hickenlooper has made serious mistakes on what was supposed to be a glide path to the Democratic nomination. After being cited for contempt this month for initially failing to appear before Colorado’s Independent Ethics Commission, Hickenlooper was fined $2,750 for two violations dating back to his second term as governor. He’s also apologized for comments about race, including responding to a question about the Black Lives Matter protests in a recent forum by saying the phrase means 'every life matters,' echoing a common refrain among conservatives."

Republicans are all over Hickenlooper's stumbles, pummeling him as they anticipate gleefully that he will be the easy target for Gardner in November and now, the primary has tightened considerably with all the momentum shifting towards Romanoff.

Not really that "mysterious"-- Schumer's paw prints are all over it

A sewer money SuperPAC, led by Schumer and the DSCC, Let's Turn Colorado Blue, dropped several million dollars into a jihadist-like smear campaign against Romanoff. After defying a subpoena and dodging nearly two dozen debates, Frackenlooper is now hiding behind Schumer's sewer-money attacks, claiming, deceitfully, he doesn't know who's paying for ads.

Arken explained how "Romanoff appeals to primary voters eager for his message of more radical change, including the Green New Deal and Medicare for All. He argues a middle of the road approach doesn’t meet the moment and has said Hickenlooper’s ethics issue is a problem. 'If you break the law, defy a subpoena and get held in contempt, you jeopardize our chances to hold the seat,' Romanoff said in a interview."

Schumer is trying to replace a conservative Republican Senate with a conservative Democratic Senate. With the exception of Steve Bullock in Montana, Schumer's candidates all suck shit. Democratic primary voters are largely unaware that they're voting for a pack of Kyrsten Sinemas. (Sinema was handpicked by Schumer in 2018 and has been the most consistently anti progressive Democrat in the Senate ever since, the closest thing to a Trump-enabler among congressional Democrats.) It still isn't too late to turn the tide, by supporting Andrew Romanoff, which you can do by clicking on the Blue America 2020 Senate thermometer above and contributing what you can.

Better To Declare Victory After Victory Has Come

He's young, he's probably gay and probably a murderer and definitely a fascist... but he's young

Reid Wilson isn't exactly who I look to for good electoral news for progressives, but his post at The Hill yesterday, Wins by young progressives start reshaping establishment, was almost suspiciously, if not downright prematurely, optimistic. "The left wing of the Democratic Party may have lost the war over the party's presidential nomination," he wrote, "but its members are quietly winning battles in states and cities across the country. Progressive candidates have knocked off incumbent officeholders in places such as Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, D.C., and New Mexico in recent weeks in elections that are marking the end of an older generation of the political establishment. Those elections may be a preview of the rest of the primary season, when long-serving Democrats find themselves the targets of well-organized campaigns to oust them." Hmmmm... key words: "may be."

There were a few legitimate big wins of national import (Marie Newman in Chicagoland and Kara Eastman in Omaha)-- and, yes there were some nice local races too, where progressives won but he seems to be hung up on "young" as a end-all for, perhaps forgetting that the youngest members of Congress when they were elected included not just AOC, but far right extremists like Patrick McHenry (R-NC), Aaron Schock (R-IL) and Matt Gaetz (R-FL), as well as shitbag ConservaDems Harold Ford, Jr. (Blue Dog-TN) and Patrick Murphy (New Dem-FL). In this argument, I'm afraid, "age" is over-rated.

At least four Pennsylvania Democratic state legislators lost their seats in last week's primary. Two of the winning challengers in the Philadelphia area scored endorsements from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). In Pittsburgh, Emily Kinkead, a progressive making her first run for office, ousted state Rep. Adam Ravenstahl (D), the brother of the city's former mayor.

Two other Democratic incumbents trail their rivals by margins narrow enough that they could be reversed as more ballots are counted.

"I consider myself to be a proud progressive," said Amanda Cappelletti, who beat a sitting state senator to claim the Democratic nomination in a Philadelphia-area district. "I wanted to figure out the best way that I could serve and help people, and this would be a good opportunity to use my skills."

She beat Daylin Leach, the Pennsylvania legislature's "liberal lion" and I'll be happy to see if she's half as good a state senator as Leach has been. I hope so. Because his legislative record is pretty amazing.

In New Mexico, insurgent progressive challengers ousted five moderate and conservative Democrats, including state Senate President Pro Tem Mary Kay Papen and state Sen. John Arthur Smith, the chairman of the Finance Committee.

...Advances in technology have allowed progressive candidates to make inroads in big cities once dominated by party bosses, said Waleed Shahid, who directs communications for Justice Democrats, a progressive group that backs insurgent challengers.

"The internet is defeating these political machines. Where 20 years ago you would have to have the blessing of local party leaders just to get on the ballot, now you can have a good social media operation and leapfrog the party leadership and establishment networks," Shahid said.

This year, another progressive, marketing consultant Marie Newman ousted Rep. Dan Lipinski in Illinois's Democratic primary in March.

More surprises are likely ahead. After Ocasio-Cortez upset Rep. Joe Crowley (D) in 2018, progressives have made a point to go after Engel and Clarke.

He wrote that José Serrano (D-NY) and Nita Lowey (D-NY) "opted to retire rather than face what would have been almost certain primary challenges," without mentioning that Serrano is one of the most far left members of Congress and may well be followed by either a Republican pretending to be a Democrat or a garden variety middle-of-the-road Democratic hack. There's also a chance a real progressive like Serrano could win, say Tomas Ramos-- but that will be tough. Lowey's time was up and if Mondaire Jones wins a crowded primary, there will be a real improvement... but that will be no cakewalk either.

"In September, Rep. Richard Neal (D-MA) will face off against Holyoke Mayor Alex Morse (D), who has proved an adept fundraiser," wrote. Fingers crossed. "The primary challenges are coming as a younger, more progressive millennial generation becomes a potent force in politics." I'm certain Wilson doesn't pay attention at all, but progressive stars who lost so far are almost too numerous to mention, from Jessica Cisneros (TX), Rachel Ventura (IL), Kim Williams (CA), Mark Gamba (OR), Jennifer Christie (IN) and Jim Harper (IN) to Mckayla Wilkes (MD), Nabilah Islam (GA), Michael Owens (GA), Robert Emmons (IL) and Tom Winter (MT), all of whom lost to much more conservative candidates. And that doesn't include the dozens of sad cases who thought copying Bernie's platform, finding a couple of like-minded idealists and then playing on social media all day meant you could win a congressional seat.

"Though Ocasio-Cortez has become the symbol of the rising generation of progressive officeholders," wrote Wilson, "the movement is increasingly looking to down-ballot races both as an avenue for making policy changes at the state level and as a way to build a bench for the future. 'You can feel a change in the focus that grassroots progressives have put on some of these local races, really since 2016. I think part of it came from a recognizing, waking up from the Obama years just how much Democrats had lost,' said Neil Sroka, who directs communications for Democracy for America and also won a city council seat himself. 'The Trump moment exposed the ways in which cities and local offices could be a real buttress against a government that was 100 percent in the control of right-wing Republicans. I think that there has been a real awakening.'"

I don't discount this-- and entirely encourage it all I can-- but Congress is where power to stand up to conservatives like Trump and Biden rests, not on the city council. Yesterday, the American Prospect published an essay by Alexander Sammon, Chuck Schumer’s Very Bad Week-- Corporate Democrats for Senate limp to the finish line. I doubt Schumer is crying; he won his races and we won't hear him whining unless his milquetoast establishment picks lose in Colorado and Kentucky. But so far, he's won them all with the worst slate of Democrats I can ever remember up for Senate. Sammon correctly stated that "Early on in this election cycle, things were going great for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. In nearly every contested Democratic Senate primary, Schumer and his caucus’s campaign arm, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), got the desired result, either clearing the field of competitors to his hand-picked preference before voting even began or winning comfortable victories. Bloodless centrist Cal Cunningham triumphed in North Carolina over progressive State Sen. Erica Smith to take on shaky Republican Sen. Thom Tillis; Smith had been leading in polls before Schumer made his endorsement. Real-estate developer Theresa Greenfield triumphed easily in Iowa; the Schumer-aligned Senate Majority PAC spent $6.7 million on her behalf in the primary. Schumer selection M.J. Hegar also cruised over multiple progressives in the Senate primary to take on Republican John Cornyn, though she still must finish the job in a run-off in July. Other races in Arizona and New Mexico saw the Schumer-backed candidate chase out all competition. When Schumer stamps a candidate with DSCC approval, he also marshals big money in support of them. In other words, Schumer doesn’t just get what he wants because he’s good at picking moderates with broad appeal. He just picks people who are inoffensive to the DSCC donor base, and then uses their money to stack the deck in their favor. Bob Moser documented this highly dubious and clearly anti-democratic practice, in great detail, in a recent issue of The Prospect." And now for the speculation and hopefulness we share with Sammon:

[S]everal of Schumer’s high-profile picks are starting to falter, rapidly losing ground to underfunded progressive upstarts just ahead of election day.

The most prominent instance comes from Kentucky, where Schumer intervened in the primary early. Back in February 2019, Schumer was already actively stumping for former fighter pilot Amy McGrath to challenge Mitch McConnell, the case for her candidacy predicated almost entirely on a popular TV ad last cycle that propelled her within 3 points of winning a swing House seat in Lexington.

McGrath is exactly the sort of moderate that only a Schumer could love. Her sales pitch so far has been her willingness to work with Trump once in office, which, if you believe in the Joe Biden campaign, or the Democratic Party at all, is an extremely confounding message. Of course, thanks to Schumer’s minting, McGrath was the immediate beneficiary of an incomparable torrent of cash, which initially prevented any meaningful primary challenge. She’s raised over $41 million, and spent $21.8 million to date. But last November, Charles Booker, a first-term progressive state senator from Louisville, announced a late bid for the seat.

Booker, despite having spent barely $500,000, is now ascending, racking up endorsements from national politicians like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, as well as popular eastern Kentucky sports radio host Matt Jones (an important figure in the state who almost ran for the seat himself) and the Louisville Courier-Journal, Kentucky’s highest circulation newspaper. Despite McGrath outspending him an astonishing 40 to 1, the race is somehow closer than ever, with recent polling showing him within a handful of percentage points. That certainly doesn’t bode well for McGrath’s attractiveness as a candidate.

Booker has assumed newfound national prominence with his participation in Louisville’s Black Lives Matter demonstrations, repeatedly taking to the streets to protest the death of Breonna Taylor at the hands of Louisville PD, and Louisville restaurateur David McAtee by the Kentucky National Guard. McGrath, meanwhile, hasn’t turned out to a single protest. She’s instead training the DSCC’s funding firehose on television buys, hoping to extinguish the flames that are lapping up her campaign ahead of this month’s primary.

Meanwhile, another Schumer pick, former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, finds himself embroiled in a new corruption scandal. A local news investigation just uncovered millions of dollars in off-the-books donations from corporations and private foundations to Hickenlooper’s office, dating back almost two decades. The startling revelation shows that during his eight years as governor, Hickenlooper expanded the “public-private partnership” program, which took corporate donations and used them to fund departments and positions in his administration with no oversight.

The donations ran in the millions of dollars during his two terms as governor. Among the biggest donors was Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, one of Colorado’s biggest fracking operators. In one instance in 2017, the company donated $25,000 to the governor’s office, just days after a deadly explosion in the state, caused by a leaky underground pipeline owned by the company. Over the course of four years, Anadarko gave Hickenlooper’s office more than $330,000, money that was then used for government activities, but of which there is little accounting.

Hickenlooper, who already bears the handle “Frackenlooper” for his role in expanding fracking as governor, is taking on Andrew Romanoff for the chance to do battle with Republican Sen. Cory Gardner in November, in what is almost certainly the most flippable Senate seat in the country. Hickenlooper, briefly a presidential candidate, was considered a prized recruit when Schumer talked him into running for Senate. (He’d previously said, “I’m not cut out to be a senator.”) But his reputation on environmental issues, along with this new corruption scandal, has imperiled his chances. Romanoff, former speaker of the Colorado State House, won April’s Democratic Assembly vote in dominant fashion, securing top-line designation in the June 30 primary. Schumer and the DSCC knew that Hickenlooper was weak as far back as August, when they began pressuring consultants from at least five firms not to work with Romanoff, according to The Intercept. If Hickenlooper pulls it off, it will only be because of the fundraising advantage bestowed on him by the DSCC.

Want to help? The 2020 non-Schumer Senate candidates thermometer is just above. Click on it and if you see a name you like, chip in a few dollars. And the House candidates still in there, still fighting to make the House Democratic more-- not less-- progressive, which is clearly the intention of Blue Dog Cheri Bustos and the DCCC. On the right is the 2020 Blue America congressional thermometer. Here's where you'll find the candidates like Jamaal Bowman (NY), Keeda Haynes (TN), Shan Chowdhury (NY), Eva Putzova (AZ), Tom Guild (OK), Hector Oseguera (NJ), Robin Wilt (NY) still working to replace establishment hacks and conservatives in primaries-- as well as progressives like Marie Newman (IL), Jon Hoadley (MI), Audrey Denney (CA), Cathy Kunkel (WV), Kara Eastman (NE), Julie Oliver (TX), and Liam O'Mara (CA), who have already won their primaries and are up against right-wing Republican incumbents.

Only One Thing Can Keep The Colorado Senate Seat From Flipping Blue-- Frackenlooper's Sordid History Of Taking Bribes

Polling has told us a generic Democrat would beat Colorado's doomed Republican Trump enabler, Cory Gardner. Polling also tells us that Frackenlooper would beat Gardner-- or at least that he would have before he got busted and fined for taking bribes. What about the progressive in the race, Andrew Romanoff? No one knows because Chuck Schumer has leaned on all the polling firms to leave Romanoff out of the polls-- or at least not to report their findings. That's Schumer; it's how he hopes to fill the Senate with as many Kyrsten Sinemas as he can.

Watch how Inside-the-Beltway Washington Post reporter conflates the Democratic Party with Schumer and his corrupt machine: Former governor John Hickenlooper’s ethics woes have unsettled a Colorado Senate race that Democrats consider one of their best chances of flipping a Republican-held seat, with the quirky brewery owner’s reputation taking a hit with voters within days of the state’s primary. The two-term governor and former Denver mayor is on the defensive after the Independent Ethics Commission found he violated a state gift ban in 2018 when he accepted a ride in a Maserati limousine at a conference in Turin, Italy, and traveled on a private jet owned by a home builder to Connecticut for the commissioning of the USS Colorado submarine... After his short-lived run for president last year, Hickenlooper was considered an ideal Senate recruit for the Democratic Party-- a well-- known candidate who had won statewide twice and a former small-business owner who opened the first brewpub in Colorado. In his recent ads, Hickenlooper emphasizes how as governor he took the state from 40th in job creation to first."

He's not well-liked. Well, he is well-liked in DC, but not in Denver. And the ethics scandal is just making it worse.

Facing ethics complaints, Hickenlooper, 68, refused to testify at the video conference and only appeared last week after the commission, some of whom he appointed while governor, held him in contempt of a subpoena.

His taxpayer-funded attorney, Mark Grueskin, argued in a legal filing in May that the video conferencing format denied the candidate's due process rights to consult in person with counsel and asked for a delay.

On Friday, Grueskin asked the commission to purge the contempt charge. The panel refused.

With mail ballots arriving this week, the backlash from what one commissioner termed the former governor's "disrespect for the rule of law" is causing some voters to reconsider their preferred candidate.

"I thought he was a good governor, and he did good things for the state," said Anne Holton, 72, a retired assistant attorney general and registered Democrat who planned to vote for Hickenlooper.

"But if there were more to come out from the ethics commission, and if there were something I just thought 'I can't live with that,' I would vote for Romanoff," added the former state employee. "I always drop my ballot off at the last minute."





Hickenlooper's ethics issues burst onto the national stage on June 5 when President Donald Trump tweeted about the commission holding the former governor in contempt saying he, "Got caught big time with his hand in the cookie jar. Should be the end of his Colorado Senate bid. Makes no difference, we already have a GREAT SENATOR."

Gardner's unabashed embrace of Trump's policies on immigration and the environment is widely considered a liability in a state where Democrats swept the 2018 midterms, winning the governorship and both houses of the General Assembly. Polls over the past eight months consistently showed Hickenlooper beating the 45-year-old Yuma Republican by double digits in a state Hillary Clinton carried by five percentage points in 2016.

"Republicans are going to be tied to the president whether they like it or not," said Jessica Taylor, Senate and governors editor for the Cook Political Report, which rated the race a toss-up.

"I think Cory Gardner can run ahead of Trump, but can he run ahead of him enough to win?" she asked, saying Hickenlooper's ethics issues "have given Gardner an opening."

Another good reason to vote for Romanoff, the better candidate-- by far, in any case. "Like Sanders," wrote Oldham, "Romanoff supports Medicare-for-all and the Green New Deal, making him a favorite among Colorado's growing number of millennials. Hickenlooper favors strengthening the Affordable Care Act and supports a plan to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Young people are phone banking for Romanoff, calling thousands of voters each week, seeking to boost the momentum provided by the ethics controversy... Romanoff called on Hickenlooper to drop out of the race, saying that his questionable conduct endangered Democrat's chances of beating Gardner. 'He represents a threat we cannot afford,' said Romanoff, who lost two statewide races in 2010 and 2014 after he served eight years in the state House from 2000 to 2008. Even though he won the state caucuses and emerged from the state assembly with top billing on the primary ballot, Romanoff trails Hickenlooper in fundraising." You can contribute to Romanoff's campaign by clicking on the Blue America 2020 Senate thermometer on the right.

And this is not the first time Frackenlooper has been caught taking bribes. He's a total Schumer kind of candidate-- as corrupt as the day is long. Over the weekend, John Frank and Shaun Boyd reported in the Colorado Sun that "Hickenlooper accepted millions of dollars from corporations and nonprofits to fund initiatives and positions in his office-- an arrangement that came with limited oversight and public disclosure despite the potential conflicts of interest. The most significant corporate donations came from the oil and gas industry, where Anadarko Petroleum and Noble Energy gave at least $325,000 to Hickenlooper’s office in his second term alone, according to a months-long analysis of state records conducted by the Colorado Sun and CBS4 Denver. At least one donation from Anadarko came in May 2017, weeks after the deadly Firestone explosion that investigators traced back to a well owned by the company... His ties to corporate interests are facing renewed scrutiny as he seeks the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate in the June 30 primary. His campaign rival, Andrew Romanoff, the former state House speaker, is highlighting Hickenlooper’s close relationship with the oil and gas industry and past campaign contributions from energy executives. Most of the entities that made the gifts, grants or donations worked on issues in front of state regulators or legislators, but the governor’s office did not have a written policy to prevent conflicts of interest. The analysis found no evidence that the donations were connected to official action taken by Hickenlooper’s administration."

Over The Weekend, Colorado Democrats Told Schumer To Keep His Nose Out Of Their Senate Race

Colorado Democrats will pick their Senate candidate in a primary on June 30. But the party had caucuses on Saturday, caucuses that were swept by the progressive in the race, Andrew Romanoff. I'll get into Andrew's big win in a moment but first let's take a look at an explanation of what the caucuses were all about aside from a popularity contest free of DSCC interference. Jay Bouchard wrote it up a few days ago for a local newspaper. He explained that at the over 3,000 precinct caucuses, registered Democrats elect committee members who will go to the county, district, and state assemblies to decide which candidates make the ballot. Candidates decide if they want to participate in the caucuses or not. If they don't, they can still get on the ballot by collecting at least 10,500 signatures statewide, including 1,500 from each of the state’s seven congressional districts. If a candidate gets 15% they move on to the county and state assemblies and if they get at least 30% of the vote at the state assembly, they make the June ballot. Candidates can gather signatures and go through the caucus process. However, there is some risk to doing that. If a candidate gathers enough valid signatures but fails to get at least 10 percent of the vote at the state assembly, he or she will not make the ballot. Aside from Romanoff-- Saturday's big winner, the other candidates who opted to participate in the caucuses was Schumer's candidate Frackenlooper, plus Stephany Rose Spaulding, Erik Underwood, and Trish Zornio. Diana Bray, Lorena Garcia, David Goldfisher, and Michelle Ferrigno Warren are only gathering signatures. Both Frackenlooper and Underwood decided to gather signatures and caucus.

No one but Romanoff and Frackenlooper hit the needed 15% to move forward. These were the results, with Alamosa, Hinsdale, Costilla, Yuma, Adams, Larimer and Custer counties still counting. No one showed up for the Cheyenne County caucuses.

• Andrew Romanoff- 7,450 (54.70%)
• Frackenlooper- 4,166 (30.59%)
• Trish Zorino- 894 (6.56%)
• Stephany Rose Spaulding- 723 (5.30%)
• Erik Underwood- 31 (0.22%)

Frackenlooper lost decisively in all the big blue counties that elect Democrats statewide-- and was especially embarrassed by the walloping he took in Denver, where he served as mayor for two terms:

• Arapahoe- Romanoff 56.42%, Frackenlooper 27.54%
• Boulder- Romanoff 64.11%, Frackenlooper 20.54%
• Denver- Romanoff 60.50%, Frackenlooper 22.30%
• Jefferson- Romanoff 61.88%, Frackenlooper 24.64%

As of the December 31 FEC reporting deadline, Frackenlooper had raised $4,882,372 and Romanoff had raised $1,744,993. None of the other 8 Democrats still running had raised any significant money. The two who managed to win delegates, Trish Zornio and Stephany Rose Spaulding are both credible progressives who now should realize that neither has any kind of a path to victory and should team up with Romanoff now to stop the DSCC and Frackenlooper.

Frackenlooper, the decidedly anti-progressive candidate told reporters that it didn't matter that he did so badly. "It’s mostly the very progressive part of the party, but you get to hear what their concerns are… I’ll join a long line of successful Democratic primary (winners) who didn’t do well in the caucuses." He was at the Denver caucuses begging voters to back him. They didn't.

Please consider contributing to Romanoff's campaign by clicking on the Blue America 2020 Senate thermometer above. He'll never raise the kind of money the DSCC is directing towards Frackenlooper, but he doesn't have to-- just as long as he has enough to get his progressive message out to Democratic voters.

This morning, Romanoff sent out a message to his supporters, reminding them that "The party bosses and powerbrokers in Washington who are bankrolling Hick’s campaign bragged about 'kicking some serious butt' a few days ago. Now that they ended up on the receiving end, the DC crowd is dismissing their defeat and doubling down on a losing hand. Can they buy the Democratic nomination for a candidate who ducks the press and dodges debates? That’s a risky bet-- especially when the Republicans have all the footage they need to undermine his candidacy. Telling voters you’d hate the job and aren’t cut out for it, as Hick did, is bad enough. Doing so on camera for months on end makes the opposition’s task too easy."

Romanoff is best-equipped to beat Gardner. Frackenlooper is a very risky bet-- and one with no real reason to take.

Colorado Was A Political Bright Spot On Tuesday-- Will It Be On Saturday As Well?

Tuesday night was pretty good for progressives in Colorado. Bernie won a lion's share of delegates and had the most votes. He and Elizabeth together had a majority from Coloradans:

• Bernie- 273,677 (36.3%)
• Status Quo Joe- 175,820 (23.2%)
• Bloomberg- 157,755 (20.8%)
• Elizabeth- 130,380 (17.2%)
• Tulsi- 8,586 (1.1%)

Voters wanted Health care for all, an economy that works for everyone and the Green New Deal. Wednesday morning the progressive in the Senate race, Andrew Romanoff, noted that "Exit polls found Democratic voters favored single-payer health care and major economic reform. In a poll released last week, a huge majority-- 93%-- also backed the Green New Deal. " That's especially important for Romanoff since Chuck Schumer is running Frackenlooper-- who is a status quo/anti-change candidate and way to the right of where Colorado voters are-- against him.

Andrew, who has been endorsed by Blue America sent an e-mail out to Colorado voters pointing out that all that progressive policy adhesion in his state is " good news not just for our campaign but for every American who wants to see real change in Washington" and pointing out that his bold progressive platform was "crafted not in the Senate cloakroom but here in Colorado. Last night’s results show our message is resonating."

Colorado's Senate primary is June 30 but this coming Saturday, March 7, Colorado Democrats will caucus to determine which of the 10 candidates will be on the ballot. Voters elect delegates to go to an April 18 assembly, determining who makes the primary ballot. Candidates need the backing of 30% of the delegates to get on the ballot.




What kind of a senator would Frackenlooper be? A really bad one-- like one of the worst, on a par with Trump-friendly right-wingers Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) and Joe Manchin (D-WV). Watch the video of him backing down on backing-- and signing-- a bill to ban high-capacity magazines. He told the sheriffs he never expected the bill to pass-- and suggested he might not have signed it if he’d known it would cause so much "commotion." He blamed members of his own his staff for making him do it! Is that what Frackenlooper means by leadership? No wonder he's so scared to debate Andrew Romanoff!

Tuesday night, Chuck Schumer got his pick for the North Carolina Senate pick, repeat loser, Cal Cunningham, who is likely to lose again in November. North Carolina voters also decided to vote against Medicare-for-All, the Green New Deal and free state colleges by picking Status Quo Joe over Bernie. Coloradans are a savvier bunch and are less likely to let Chuck Schumer saddle them with a loser. Please consider contributing to Andrew Romanoff's campaign by clicking on the Blue America 2020 Senate thermometer on the right and giving what you can.

Friends of mine in Montana tell me that Governor Steve Bullock may be overly cautious sometimes but that he's way more progressive than he came across as on his disastrous and short-lived presidential run-- kind of the opposite of Frackenlooper, who's even worse than he appeared when he was on the national stage. So... despite Schumer popping a boner when he heard that Bullock's going to run after all, the country may well have just gotten a potential boon. One old friend in Bozeman told me not to worry about him being terrible in DC. "There's no way he'll ever be anything like Sinema or Machin or even Chris Coons... Did you know he was formerly a labor lawyer?

Obama seems to have persuaded him to do it-- and none too soon. The filing deadline is Monday. The state isn't as red as its prohibitive R+11 PVI would suggest. Last cycle Democrat Jon Testa beat multimillionaire Matt Rosendale 253,876 (50.3%) to 235,963 (48.8%) and even an unimaginably horrible, unelectable Democrat for the state's one congressional seat, Kathleen Williams managed to take 233,284 votes (46.2%) against Republican Greg Gianforte. In 2016, though Montanans sensibly wanted nothing to do with Hillary Clinton-- Trump beat her 274,120 (56.5%) to 174,521 (36.0%)-- Bullock himself was reelected governor 250,846 (50.2%) to 232,080 (46.4%). So, like in so many states, Hillary was a drag on the ticket but Bullock managed to win around 80,000 voters who refused to vote for her against Greg Gianforte.

Trump's approval rating has plummeted 18 points since he was inaugurated, so the Republicans' unremarkable incumbent, Steve Daines, isn't likely to be rescued by Trump. Daines, in fact, has been a real rubber stamp Trump-enabler.

Love Those #NeverTrumpers-- Except When They Interfere With The Democratic Party

The newest-- I guess-- #NeverTrumpster conservative group is the Lincoln Project, basically George Conway, Rick Wilson, Steve Schmidt, Reed Galen, Jennifer Horn, Mike Madrid, Ron Steslow, John Weaver, Sally Canfield, Chip Felkel, Molly Jong-Fast, Sophia Nelson, Tom Nichols, Tara Setmayer, and Chris Vance. They call themselves "advisors" to the Lincoln Project. And they define their mission as defeating Trump and Trumpism at the ballot box. "We do not undertake this task lightly nor from ideological preference," they wrote. "Our many policy differences with national Democrats remain. However, the priority for all patriotic Americans must be a shared fidelity to the Constitution and a commitment to defeat those candidates who have abandoned their constitutional oaths, regardless of party. Electing Democrats who support the Constitution over Republicans who do not is a worthy effort... Trump and those who sign onto Trumpism are a clear and present danger to the Constitution and our Republic. Only defeating so polarizing a character as Trump will allow the country to heal its political and psychological wounds and allow for a new, better path forward for all Americans."

OK, they want to defeat Trump... but also Trumpism. And that means Republicans in Congress. That's new for these #NeverTrumper groups. "Next fall’s elections will be about much more than just who controls one house of Congress or the White House. Next November, the American people will decide the path for America’s future. All of the prosperity and freedom we’ve come to take for granted depends on our public servants serving the Constitution first, last and always. Today, one party has abdicated that responsibility and instead pledged their loyalty to one person." And in the New York Times they wrote that:

Patriotism and the survival of our nation in the face of the crimes, corruption and corrosive nature of Donald Trump are a higher calling than mere politics. As Americans, we must stem the damage he and his followers are doing to the rule of law, the Constitution and the American character. . . . Over these next 11 months, our efforts will be dedicated to defeating President Trump and Trumpism at the ballot box and to elect those patriots who will hold the line... Congressional Republicans have embraced and copied Mr. Trump’s cruelty and defended and even adopted his corruption. Mr. Trump and his enablers have abandoned conservatism and longstanding Republican principles and replaced it with Trumpism, an empty faith led by a bogus prophet.

That video up top is theirs. This is what they had to say about it yesterday:

Cory Gardner is a prime example of the kind of weakness that Republicans show in the face of Donald Trump,” said Jennifer Horn, of the Lincoln Project. “As he faces an uphill battle for reelection this year, Senator Gardner has shown he’s willing to put the president before the Constitution and his responsibility to the people of Colorado.”

“Coloradans, and Americans, deserve leaders who will do what’s best for their constituents, who will keep their promises to voters and who will put country over party. So far, Senator Gardner has failed at each of those.”

Senator Cory Gardner was first elected in 2014. Statewide polls in Colorado show him down significantly to his likely General Election opponent.

The Lincoln Project is working to defeat Donald Trump and those candidates who have abandoned their constitutional oaths, regardless of party.

That Cory Gardner is their first congressional target makes perfect sense. He was a hard core conservative in the House but has been so fearful of Trump since he was elected to the Senate, that he has twisted himself into an ideological pretzel to support Trump's every crazy whim and his violence against the Constitution.

Unfortunately, the video highlights the conservative Democrat in the primary for the Democratic nomination, John Hickenlooper, rather than the progressive running, Andrew Romanoff. Clearly, Republicans like 100% of the people involved with the Lincoln Project prefer a conservative like Frackenlooper, who, you'll recall, said he didn’t want the job, wouldn’t be good at it, has skipped 10 debates, sued communities for trying to restrict fracking, literally drank the fracking fluid, refused to sign the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge, opposes the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, blamed a staff member for making him sign a gun-control law, and compared progressives to Karl Marx and Joseph Stalin. That's exactly what Republicans like to see in "Democrats."

Andrew, whose campaign you can support by clicking on the 2020 Blue America Senate thermometer on the right, offers this good news: "Cory Gardner’s approval rating has now fallen to 33 percent-- making him the most vulnerable Republican in the Senate and less popular here in Colorado than even Donald Trump. Gardner loses to a generic Democrat by 10 points-- but we should demand more than a generic Democrat. We should nominate a progressive champion. That means showing up, not dodging the press and ducking debates. It means standing up to special interests, not doing their bidding. And it means taking the courage of our convictions-- on the climate emergency and the health care crisis, among other key priorities-- to Washington."

In case you missed it last week, this was the Lincoln Project's first video. Jennifer Horn, their comms person, wrote that Trump has hijacked the GOP, the conservative movement and now, with the help of these charlatans, one of the largest faith communities in America. It is clear that in exchange for power and money these 'pastors' have been tasked with recasting Trump’s absurdities and moral failures as nothing short of prophetic divinity. President Trump’s corruption and dishonesty destroys every person and institution he touches. But with faith leaders like these, who spin vices as virtues, the President believes he is exempt from the wages of sin as long as he delivers power to those Evangelical leaders who so clearly crave it. Americans of faith, deserve leaders who want to make the world in which we live a better place through their belief. Those Evangelical leaders who lay their loyalty and faith on the altar of Donald Trump are betraying their congregants and their country."

Does Schumer Actually Want To Win Back The Senate? So Why Is He Behaving As If He Wants To Lose?

In the video above Frackenlooper explains over and over again why he shouldn't be running for the Senate. He was sure right when he said "I’m not cut out to be a senator... It’s awful hard to imagine that I could be successful in a Senate campaign or as a senator." If he's elected he'll be a disaster in Congress. No one really wants him there except Chuck Schumer who recognizes another corporate scumbag like himself. And to Frackenlooper it's a consolation prize after bombing in his "presidential" run-- his average approval when he dropped out being 0.3%.

As you may know, Blue America has endorsed Andrew Romanoff, the former Colorado House speaker who has been leading in the polls and who is leading on every single important issue. Those issues, however, are not issues Schumer wants being pushed in the Senate. Yesterday, Romanoff e-mailed his followers and told them that two new stories had just broken about the Colorado Senate race. "One shows some of the nation’s most powerful corporate interests are bankrolling not only Cory Gardner’s campaign but also the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee." Don't be surprised. That's who Schumer has always been-- and will always be. (I knew him back in high school. That's the kind of piece of crap he was then too.)


Yesterday RL Miller, founder of Climate Hawks Vote, wrote something smilier to what most people are saying about this race: "The DSCC shouldn’t be putting its thumb on the scale. The Democratic primary voters of Colorado are the ones who ought to decide who represents them-- not DC insiders thousands of miles away." Her organization is not what you would call a big Frackenlooper support group. "His record is abysmal. He mothballed clean energy programs, actively promoted oil and gas interests with outright fabrications and lies (promoting regulatory capture and dysfunction in COGCC, CDPHE, Dept Natl Resources, Air Quality Commission), ignored climate realities, and moved our state backwards in terms of conservation of water, protection of air, water, soil, health and climate stability. His support for fracking is indicative of his lack of understanding (hopefully) or just lack of regard for the issues concerning climate change that are [affecting] us as we speak. Hickenlooper … has worked tirelessly to serve powerful special/ industrial interests at the cost of the constituency he purports to serve. John Hickenlooper fights against progressive values everyday. He has no interest in fixing the many problems we have, but only in maintaining the status quo. [Hickenlooper] sold us out to the oil and gas industry for fracking. He is in bed with big oil and gas. I want to see him gone from Colorado politics. He pretends that he brought Colorado into clean energy but the opposite is true. We can’t trust him to support the planet or the people of Colorado. That he drank the fracking fluid says it all. Climate Hawks Vote is not endorsing just yet, but better alternatives to pro-fracking John Hickenlooper exist. Although the field is fractured, Andrew Romanoff is beginning to emerge as the climate hawk alternative to Hickenlooper. We will be following this primary closely and look forward to engaging this fall as we continue our formal endorsement process."

A plurality of people polled want Romanoff and they really DON'T want Frackenlooper

"The second story," wrote Romanoff, "shows the DSCC has spent the past six months blackballing our campaign-- threatening to punish any firm that does business with us. Why? Because I’m fighting for a Green New Deal and Medicare for All-- priorities that don’t sit well with the party bosses and powerbrokers in DC."

Yesterday Aída Chávez and Akela Lacy were calling out Schumer's slimy DSCC in The Intercept. Even before Frackenlooper was driven out of his absurd presidential run Schumer was already pressuring consultants and vendors not to work for him on pressure of being blackballed by the DSCC.

“They’ve made it clear to a number of the firms and individuals we tried to hire that they wouldn’t get any business in Washington or with the DSCC if they worked with me,” Romanoff said. “It’s been a well-orchestrated operation to blackball ragtag grassroots teams.”

At least five firms and 25 prospective staff turned down working with his campaign, said Romanoff, who has raised more than $1 million in individual contributions so far. “I spoke to the firms, my campaign manager spoke to the staff prospects,” he said. “Pretty much everyone who checked in with the DSCC got the same warning: Helping us would cost them.”

A consultant who spoke to The Intercept on the condition of anonymity said that their firm had been far along in talks to work for Romanoff when they got word that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and the DSCC weren’t happy. The firm was told by a top DSCC staffer that they “absolutely under no circumstances could work for Andrew Romanoff, so we withdrew our offer to be his consulting firm.”

The DSCC is using an “unquestionably far more heavy-handed approach this year than they have in previous cycles,” the consultant said.

Earlier this year, the DSCC’s companion organization in the House, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, made it official policy to cut off funding and vendors to Democrats who challenged incumbent Democrats. Putting the policy in writing ratcheted up what had been more of an informal understanding in prior cycles. But if the DSCC’s intervention in Colorado is any indication, the Democrats’ Senate campaign arm is taking the blacklist one step further, by discouraging consultants from working not only for challengers to incumbent Democrats, but also for progressives running against the establishment’s preferred candidate in a seat currently held by the GOP. In Romanoff’s case, the DSCC did so before it had been clear whether Washington’s choice, Hickenlooper, even planned to run.

It’s still early in the cycle, and while some candidates are getting their Senate campaigns off the ground, others are still deciding whether to jump in. Individuals connected to a handful of campaigns across the country said they’ve heard about interventions by national Democrats, either in the form of the DSCC pressuring consultants not to work with progressive candidates, or Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer telling people not to run for office in the first place.

“First they came for the House candidates; now they’re gonna come for the Senate candidates,” said Heather Brewer, who is managing the Senate campaign of New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, a progressive who was snubbed by the DSCC, which made an early endorsement of Ben Ray Luján, a member of House Democratic leadership. “It’s not rocket science to see where this is heading.”

“They’re threatening people’s livelihoods, if people dare break with what the insiders in Washington want,” Brewer added. “It’s extortion.”

Schumer’s office directed questions to the DSCC, which is officially run by Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, but known to be controlled by Schumer, whose piloting of the committee in 2006 and 2008 reclaimed the Senate for Democrats and then gave them a brief filibuster-proof majority. “We do not have a policy of preventing firms from working with candidates,” a DSCC spokesperson told The Intercept in an email. “In our role as a campaign committee focused on winning Senate seats, we have ongoing conversations with strategists and advisers about battleground races.”

...In a Hill TV interview (below) with Krystal Ball, presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders echoed progressives’ frustration. “I think you let it play out,” he said of the DSCC’s endorsement of Hickenlooper. “This is obviously a major debate within the Democratic Party. Those who think that so-called centrist candidates backed by folks who have a lot of money may be able to win over some moderate Republicans-- that is the future. I disagree. The future of the Democratic Party is to greatly expand the base, increase voter turnout, especially with young people, speak to the needs of working people. I believe there are some people who voted for Trump who, in fact, if given the option of a progressive agenda, will vote with us.”





North Carolina state Sen. Erica Smith, who’s leading the latest polls in her bid against Republican Sen. Thom Tillis, said she has reason to believe that the DSCC is doing similar things in her race. The committee told her that it isn’t yet endorsing in that race, and that it’s not helping any candidates fundraise-- but there are whispers that the DSCC might support her potential primary opponent Cal Cunningham, whom it has backed in the past.

“It seems clear to me that there is a question of integrity or lack thereof,” Smith said. “This brings to question who’s telling the truth. And there’s an appearance to me that Senator Schumer is trying to purchase-- trying to buy a U.S. Senate seat in North Carolina. That is not going to go well for the constituents that I serve. And I am very much opposed to that. New York and North Carolina are extremely different.”

Smith’s campaign manager Jonathan Lucas said he had been directly pressured by people he described as veteran, well-connected establishment Democratic operatives in North Carolina not to work with Smith, and that he’s faced similar pressure in years past while working on other races in the state. Given the makeup of Cunningham’s donor base, Lucas believes that pressure originated from the DSCC and Schumer, because a significant portion of Cunningham’s donors have links to the Senate minority leader.

“I had a number of influential ‘establishment’ Democrats tell me it was a mistake to work for her, she will never be the nominee, etc.,” Lucas said in a statement, referring to Smith. “Well, I have never been an establishment consultant. I met her and I am not only convinced she will win, but that she is exactly the type of candidate that we need right now. One that Schumer and the establishment fear because her vote is not for sale.”

No matter what else, you can always count on Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to pick the corrupt corporate conservative in any primary anywhere. If he's behind Cunningham, it simply means Smith is the better candidate. In Iowa, he's pushing Theresa Greenfield, which automatically means Mike Franken is a better candidate. Franken is an admired 3-star admiral, who requested retirement in late 2017, and is more progressive on the issues, across the board, than Greenfield, who, you probably remember, was caught cheating and lying-- Schumer's kind of candidate-- last time she ran and could never beat Joni Ernst. We're just getting to know Mike now but you can contribute to Andrew Romanoff's campaign and Maggie Toulouse Oliver's campaign by clicking on the Blue America 2020 Senate thermometer on the right. I have a feeling, Mike Franken will be on that page pretty soon as well.

Only 2 People Like The New Schumer Policy Attacking Progressive Candidates: Cory Gardner & Ben Ray Luján

Andrew Romanoff: "I signed the Fossil Fuel Money Pledge-- rejecting contributions from the oil, gas, and coal industry. Our campaign doesn't take any PAC money at all."

No one liked Cheri Bustos' decision to blackball all consultants and vendors who work candidates running against incumbents. It has been a disaster for the DCCC which no longer has an executive director and saw it's entire executive level staffers either quit or be fired. The DCCC isn't in turmoil since it doesn't actually exist other than as a money vacuum. And Bustos herself has been forced to go to see a professional therapist to help her with her racism problems. Everyone I know has been repulsed by this whole episode. And then there's one asshole in Washington who looked at it and said... hold my beer.

It should be breaking widely in the media today that Chuck Schumer and his DSCC puppet Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) at the DSCC have decided to go a step further than Bustos did. They are blackballing consultants and vendors who work for candidates other than candidates they back. Let's take Colorado for example. While Schumer's candidate, John Frackenlooper, was pretending to be a presidential candidate-- and who had an average preference score of 0.3% and was booed by Democratic audiences for his conservative policy stances-- there was a Senate race in full swing. There are close to 20 candidates running serious campaigns, including top tier candidates like former Ambassador Dan Baer, ex-state Senator Mike Johnston, ex-House Majority Leader Alice Madden, ex-House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, state Senator Angela Williams, who had hired staffers. Now Schumer and Cortez Masto are trying to force them-- on pain of blacklisting-- to quit the campaigns that some have been working on for months-- after Frackenlooper admitted he would make a shitty senator and pledged to not run.

This is insane. One political operative who I know pretty well, went nuts on the phone today and told me that he had "received calls over the last few days from campaign managers who are running races (now) against the DSCC's preferred candidate. To say they are livid would be a gross understatement. One manager used the term 'disgusting creature' to describe Schumer just two hours ago. Another called the staff at the DSCC 'Nazi youth' after he received a call from one of them demanding he quit the race. I have a feeling these anecdotes will get even fiercer over the coming days." These are the kinds of shenanigans one would expect from the fascist party, not from the Democratic Party. Schumer and Cortez Masto should both be removed from their leadership positions before anyone gives a nickel more to the DSCC or to Hickenlooper who was boasting yesterday that money is flooding into his campaign from the exact sources that real Democrats prefer to not accept money from.

The 74% who want to see progressive legislation pass are going to be mighty disappointed if Schumer helps Frankenlooper worm his way into the Senate

Ernest Luning, writing for ColoradoPolitics.com, reported that on Monday 6 women running-- Angela Williams, Diana Bray, Lorena Garcia, Alice Madden, Stephany Rose Spaulding and Michelle Ferrigno Warren-- wrote a "strongly-worded letter" to Schumer and Cortez Masto telling them that their endorsement of Hickenlooper in the primary was "premature" and should be rescinded. "Washington insiders should watch the race develop and hear from all of the candidates before getting involved. To be clear, this race is not a coronation of any candidate. We hope the DSCC will give strong consideration to rescinding its endorsement, and allow Coloradans to decide the outcome of this primary campaign... What is more troubling is Hickenlooper’s rhetoric throughout his failed Presidential bid he derisively referred to progressives as 'socialist' and paternally lectured us on how our progressive values will 're-elect Donald Trump.' Let us not forget that it was progressives who fought for the rights of women and communities of color in the 1960s and 1970s that we still enjoy today. Governor Hickenlooper’s statements have offended and angered many of the voters in Colorado. Just like Senator Gardner, Governor Hickenlooper is utterly disrespectful and tone deaf to the contributions of activists and communities that make Colorado a leader on progressive values."

Conservative Democrats who oppose progressive values and polices-- like Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Michael Bennet and Time Kaine-- have also endorsed Frackenlooper.

Reporting for the Denver Post, Justin Wingerter wrote that Scumer's moronic decision has "sparked an intense email discussion among state Democratic Party officers over the weekend, with allusions to Nazism, criticisms of Hickenlooper and calls for formal opposition. The emails offer a window into an intraparty conflict that is sure to spill out in public for weeks and months to come as Democrats debate who should be their nominee to take on Republican Sen. Cory Gardner.

“Hickenlooper has made it clear that he neither understands nor cares about the true problems in our country,” wrote Dana Torpey-Newman, chair of the Douglas County Democratic Party, “and I object to being told that I, as a party chair, am unable to take sides in a primary, but the DSCC… is able to put a thumb on the scale and force out our candidates who actually comprehend the deeper roots of the societal problems we face.”

...“It is getting to the point that people feel, why bother showing up, as decisions have already been made by the higher-ups?” wrote Paula Ozzello, chair of the Las Animas County Democratic Party in southern Colorado. She called the DSCC’s endorsement of Hickenlooper a “slap in the face” to other candidates, some of whom are “damn good.”

...Democratic Party officials in Clear Creek and Custer counties defended the DSCC. Elliot Jackson, who is listed as a second vice chair in the Custer County Democratic Party, said she has zero patience for intraparty warfare. Democrats should focus on beating Gardner in 2020, she said.

“The absolute ONLY thing I admire about Republicans is their unwavering devotion to doing whatever is necessary to gain power,” Jackson wrote. “They can’t govern worth a damn, because they don’t care about that, but they are masterly at getting into power. Part of that strategy is rallying behind their candidates, and convincing the public that the enemy is Democrats."

Jackson advised her fellow Democrats to study Nazi Germany, saying she was “haunted by the image of German communists and socialists at each other’s throats in the concentration camps, as they were waiting to be put to death by the Nazis they couldn’t be bothered to stick together to oppose.”

Peter Monson, secretary of the Clear Creek County Democrats, agreed with Jackson, saying he also had no interest in intraparty squabbles.

“So the DSCC came out in support of Hick. So what?” Monson wrote. “Maybe I am naive, but I don’t think that will have much sway among primary voters and caucus-goers one way or another. Voters are the ones who will decide, and my only hope is that they pick candidates for president and Senate with the best chance of winning in the general election. That is, or should be, our overriding priority for 2020."

Monson confirmed Monday that he sent the email. Several others in the chain declined to comment.

Much of the emailed discussion centered on how the Colorado Democratic Party should respond to the DSCC’s endorsement. Vinson, the party’s executive director, said the state party will remain neutral in the primary election, which is a Colorado Democratic Party policy. But others wanted a strong statement from the state party denouncing the DSCC endorsement.

“We should not submit this to the media but should send it to all of the national party leaders, in my opinion,” Torpey-Newman, of Douglas County, wrote. “Merely saying that the people of Colorado will decide is not enough, in my opinion. They must be told explicitly why this is unacceptable and what the potential consequences of doing so are."

Susan Newcomer, chair of the Grand County Democratic Party, agreed. So did Sheena Kadi, a vice chair in the Adams County Democratic Party, who is also deputy director of One Colorado. Kadi said Hickenlooper had made Colorado proud but party apparatuses should not endorse.

"I have received dozens of calls, texts, emails, and asks from fellow Democrats wondering why the DSCC is ‘interfering/meddling/obstructing’ in our primary process,” Kadi wrote. She worried the endorsement would convince Democratic voters the race had already been decided and stifle engagement in the election. “And if they don’t show up, unaffiliated voters won’t be persuaded and will not turn out to vote, and we will have another six years of Senator Cory Gardner.”

Jackson, the Custer County party official, said she wouldn’t mind telling national Democratic groups to hold off on endorsing until 2020, but any statement must avoid “trashing another Democrat.”

Morgan Carroll, chair of the Colorado Democratic Party, briefly inserted herself into the email discussion to say the party’s response to the DSCC “needs to be that the people of Colorado will decide who their nominee will be.” As of Tuesday morning, no public response to the DSCC endorsement had been issued by the state party.

"The Colorado Democratic Party has a strict policy of neutrality in primaries and we will not change that policy,” Carroll said in a statement to The Post. “There’s a lot of grassroots energy to defeat Cory Gardner, which is why so many excellent candidates have stepped up to run. At the end of the day, the people of Colorado will be the ones to decide who will run against the most vulnerable Republican senator in the country, and it will be the people of Colorado who lead us to another blue wave in 2020."

Heather Brewer, the campaign manager for Maggie Toulouse Oliver's U.S. Senate campaign, told me early this morning that "While we haven't had any direct efforts (yet) to threaten our consultants or otherwise put the squeeze on us, I believe it is only a matter of time. We are ready to fight back against any DSCC attempts to bully their way to victory." Pelosi immediately endorsed Luján, who, of course, lists no policy on his lame cut-out DCCC website. She slammed the DSCC and the DCCC for "this disgusting un-democratic and un-Democratic practice... Washington insiders don't get to decide who becomes the next U.S. Senator from New Mexico, the voters do. Washington is broken and desperate attempts to circumvent the democratic process to consolidate power with the D.C. elite aren't going to fix it. Only with new leaders, like Maggie Toulouse Oliver, who are beholden only to those they represent, can we begin to repair the damage and implement much-needed progressive policies like the Green New Deal and Medicare for All."

Help Colorado progressives defeat Frackenlooper-- and New Mewxico progressives defeat Ben Ray Luján-- by contributing to Andrew Romanoff's campaign and Maggie Oliver's campaign at the 2020 Senate thermometer above. Schumer has demanded that the big "progressive affiliated organizations and the in-the-pocket unions (like the firefighters, who are practically part of the Democratic Party establishment and always go for the worst candidates, be in Biden or Luján) and other institutional Democratic sources of campaign contributions, immediately stop giving contributions to Andrew Romanoff, Maggie Oliver and any of the other candidates other than the handpicked Frackenlooper and Ben Ray Luján.