Tomorrow's Non-Presidential Primaries

The corrupt Democratic establishment has been far more successful shutting down primaries than has the corrupt Republican establishment. Primaries are usually the only way it ever challenge entrenched incumbents in gerrymandered safe districts. All Americans actually owe the Tea Party a debt of gratitude for scaring the congressional Republicans and for cleaning out some trash, particularly Wall Street whore Eric Cantor. This cycle, the most comparable action on the Democratic side of the aisle is Tim Canova's challenge to a Democrat as vile and deserving of ignominious defeat as Cantor was: Debbie Wasserman Schultz, although head Blue Dog Kurt Schrader (OR) and So. Jersey machine corruptionist Donald Norcross are also being pounded, respectively, by reformers Dave McTeague and Alex Law.

Tomorrow, though, there aren't many primaries in either party against incumbents that are likely to yield surprises. The one exception might be in northeast Ohio-- (OH-14) between Cleveland's eastern suburbs and the Pennsylvania state line west of Erie-- where dull backbencher David Joyce is being challenged by a crackpot extremist again. In 2014, Joyce fended off the very same crackpot extremist, ex-state Rep. Matt Lynch, 27,547 (55%) to 22,546 (45%). This year though, election officials in Lake, Cuyahoga, Geauga and Summit counties are expecting much, much larger turnouts because of the simultaneous presidential primary. Lynch is counting on Trump and Cruz voters figuring out that he's their man, while Joyce is counting on Kaisich backers voting for him. Lynch has been spending money on tarring Joyce as a compromiser afraid to shut down the government while making it clear that the radicals and extremists back his race against Joyce.

Unfortunately for Lynch, by the Feb. 24 reporting deadline Joyce had already spent $1,058,471 and had another $549,665 ready to deploy, while all he had managed it raise was $173,406. He's getting free airtime on Hate Talk Radio (especially on Beck's show) but will it be enough? Few think so and the establishment and all the newspapers in the area have endorsed Joyce. The DCCC is once again ignoring the race although, presumably, if Lynch wins tomorrow, they'd jump in to try to bolster Michael Wager, the progressive who ran against Joyce in 2014 and is on the ballot again. With Bernie-- or even Hillary-- at the top of the Democratic ticket in November, particularly against Trump, Wager would likely be a shoo-in.



There's also a far right extremist running against John Shimkus in the sprawling, empty southeastern district (IL-15) that skirts all cities and big towns that might have a library. It was Obama's worst-performing district in the state and the last Democrat who ran for the congressional seat, spent $24,243 and won 25% of the vote. This cycle there isn't even a Democrat running at all. Instead, Shimkus, the congressman who repeatedly allowed Mark Foley access to the underage pages he molested for years, is facing far right state Sen. Kyle McCarter, who's being supported-- to the tune of $345,650) by Club for Growth. This is the completely deceptive-- and probably ineffective-- ad they're running in the district:



Shimkus had spent $1,764,009 by Feb. 24 and reported another $995,864 in the bank, while McCarter had spent $245,018 and was getting ready to spend $106,985. American Action Network-- a Chamber of Commerce establishment group run by notorious anti-Semite Fred Malek and ex-Jew Norm Coleman-- spent $200,485 helping Shimkus. Shimkus doesn't appear to be in any real trouble.

The races where there actually could be upsets are both Democratic primaries, a Senate race in Ohio and a House race in Illinois' 10th district. The DSCC and DCCC had each mandated a candidate, the elderly and feeble conservative Ted Strickland in Ohio and the corrupt conservative New Dem Brad Schneider in Illinois. Schneider and his DCCC backers appear to be about to lose to Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering, who is strongly backed by Se. Dick Durbin and endorsed by all the local newspapers.

The Ohio race is a much bigger longshot and Blue America has strongly backed challenger PG Sittenfeld against the NRA's top Democrat, Ted Strickland. Paul Rosenberg covered the primary in great detail forSalon over the weekend. He noted that "when 78-year-old former Ohio governor Dick Celeste endorsed Sittenfeld recently, he directly invoked what was happening in the presidential race. 'What we’re seeing in the presidential campaigns across the country is a growing level of discontent with party leadership in both parties. And I think it was a mistake for the Democratic Party of Ohio, for example, to make an early endorsement in the Senate race,' Celeste said. 'PG Sittenfeld represents a fresh way of moving forward,' he said, pointing to Sittenfeld’s hands-on engagement in dealing with a multitude of urban issues. 'What we have here is a race between the future and the past,' Celeste continued. 'When I say the past, I’m talking about the Democratic Party itself. It is trying to operate in an old way. And that old way was insiders who tried to make decisions and insiders who tried to call the shots. And that’s not what people want.'"

At the most obvious level, this race pits an aging, backward-looking insider against a young, forward-thinking outsider. As Celeste said, it’s “a race between the future and the past.” But the past also means an aging candidate significantly at odds with his party’s voting base-- though with varying degrees of obfuscation-- who has repeatedly refused to debate his opponent… for good reason, it would seem.

On guns, Strickland bragged to a radio caller last year, “As a Congressman I had A and most of the time an A+ rating with the National Rifle Association.” He went on to brag that he voted against the 1994 assault weapons ban that Ohio Gov. John Kasich voted for. As governor, he signed a so-called “castle doctrine” law  that was opposed by Ohio prosecutors and police chiefs associations, who said it would provide legal cover for bad guys hurting folks who had no intention of harming them. He also supported a bill that would allow firearms in family restaurants and bars-- a measure opposed by police groups, which was blocked by the speaker of the state assembly at the end of the 2010 session. He now claims to have undergone a conversion, but even so he admitted, “My record is mixed and spotty and I could be criticized for that.”

On the environment, Strickland got a 100 percent rating from the League of Conservation Voters just one year out of 12 he spent in Congress, as opposed to seven years with scores in the 60s and 70s, and four in the 80s. He voted repeatedly for coal and fossil fuel subsidies (1993, 1994, 1997, 2001), against higher fuel economy standards (2001, 2003, 2005), and against protecting public forest lands (1999, 2000, 2003), along with a range of other anti-environmental votes.

Although Strickland calls himself “pro-choice,” his record is more multiple-choice. He did score 100 percent twice on NARAL’s scorecard, but also scored in the 30s twice, and 60 or lower five times. He cast multiple votes that would restrict abortion rights, including a 1998 vote to override a Clinton veto. As governor, he signed an abortion-ultrasound bill that drew anti-choice activists’ praise.

On all three of these  issues, Sittenfeld’s progressive positions signal a clear-cut break with Strickland. He’s pledged that he will only support a Supreme Court nominee who pledges to uphold Roe v. Wade. He’s got a comprehensive agenda to reduce gun violence: first, by closing loopholes to make background checks truly mandatory; second, by holding gun manufacturers and dealers accountable; and third, by keeping violent weapons out of dangerous hands. On the environment, Sittenfeld has a proven leadership record on the city council, chairing the committee overseeing all environmental issues. When a GOP plan was launched to defund the city’s Office of Environmental Quality (OEQ) as part of a cost-cutting plan, he alerted local activists to fight back, pointing out that “OEQ saves tax-payers more money each year than the Department costs-- so axing it would represent broken fiscal management and in no way be productive for our budget situation.” Regarding global warming, he supports Obama’s Clean Power Plan, opposes the Keystone Pipeline, and says “the need to act has never been more urgent or more important.”

But beyond these key issue positions, reflecting the vast majority of Ohio’s Democratic base, Sittenfeld has a mature sense of how intricately different issues and ideas interweave and synergize with one another, based on his own lived experience. Before being elected to city council, Sittenfeld served as the assistant director of the Community Learning Center Institute, which played a key role in dramatically transforming the city’s public schools. He described the result in a speech laying out his urban agenda last year:

Virtually all of our schools are new. But instead of using them only during the school day-- and then shooing the kids out of the building and into the streets-- we’ve turned them into bustling, round-the-clock community centers.

Co-located health and dental facilities…. adult education programs… and enhanced cultural and recreational opportunities have removed barriers to student learning, boosted academic achievement, and sparked broader neighborhood revitalization.

Rather than seeing education through the narrow lens of high-stakes testing of individual students, destroying neighborhood schools in the process, as has happened in Chicago and other major cities, Cincinnati’s approach was the complete opposite, seeing education as the process of a whole community creating a better future by investing in its children holistically, synergizing different support systems that had previously been disconnected, or even absent. Similarly, a careful reading of his issue agenda shows a constant awareness of how different pieces of the progressive policy puzzle fit together.

Under the heading of “rebuilding the middle class,” he says he will “fight for a livable minimum wage, expanded overtime pay, better child care assistance, family leave, and paid sick days,” and “reject bad trade deals that create an uneven playing field for American workers,” pledging to “always be steadfast in standing up for workers’ rights, including collective bargaining,” which Ohio Republicans have fiercely attacked since 2010. At the same time, he won’t be pigeonholed as defending dying industries of the past, saying, “We won’t rebuild the middle class by yearning for yesterday or clinging to a past that will never return. We must embrace innovation, champion change, and understand the tools of tomorrow, including ensuring fast, affordable internet for all Americans.”

His positive stance toward innovation is reflected in other issue areas he stresses as well-- most notably education and the environment. And he has a detailed urban policy agenda, encompassing four major components: ending mass incarceration, improving police-community relations and better gun safety, jobs and economic opportunity, and improving urban schools and making college affordable. This is not a laundry list of issues in his view, but a tightly interrelated set of concerns. Being grounded in the reality of that interrelation is arguably Sittenfeld’s greatest strength-- and given the nature of the Democratic Party’s diverse constituency, it’s just the sort of leadership strength the party desperately needs. “All of us want our best selves represented by who we cast a vote for,” Celeste said. “And I believe PG Sittenfeld represents the best of us.”

But the party also needs leaders who can bring people together in different ways. And that’s precisely where the outsiders excel over the anointed insiders in the other three states as well.

The state's newspapers are all disgusted with Strickland for ducking debates and have almost all endorsed Sittenfeld. Hillary Clinton, who makes believe she opposes the NRA and cares about families, is strongly behind Strickland despite his very Republican record that spans decades. Summing up months of coverage, the Columbus Dispatch closed Saturday by noting that "Ted Strickland, a 74-year-old veteran politician, has been employing a rope-a-dope strategy ... Meanwhile, Sittenfeld, a 31-year-old Cincinnati councilman, has pressed for debates, held news conferences and traveled the state." And the final Toledo Blade editorial reported that "Strickland...has largely limited his campaign appearances to friendly audiences, and even other Democrats have noted his overall lack of visibility... In a year in which voters are turning to insurgent candidates at every level, in search of new voices and fresh faces, such a contrast could work in Mr. Sittenfeld’s favor."

But Chuck Schumer doesn't want energetic and committed independent thinkers like Sittenfeld in the Senate. He wants tired old conservative hacks like Strickland who will just do what they're told. Schumer has no realistic hope that a doddering and incoherent Strickland could actually beat Republican incumbent Rob Portman and he and Tester are just gambling that November will see a battle between Hillary and Trump and that she will be seen as the lesser evil and have the coattails needed to drag Strickland's NRA carcass across the finish line. Ohio Democratic primary voters should give Chuck Schumer the finger tomorrow and nominate PG Sittenfeld. Beyond tomorrow's primaries... in Illinois and Ohio:

Why Pelosi's DCCC Has Lost Several Dozen House Seats In Recent Cycles

Schneider (New Dem) & Dold (R)-- same gray flannel suit garbage

It shouldn't surprise anyone that DCCC Chair Ben Ray Luján endorsed Hillary Clinton yesterday. Corrupt conservatives stick together-- and who cares who Luján endorses anyway? His silly statement claimed that "Hillary embodies New Mexico values. She puts people first and will roll up her sleeves to change their lives for the better." Yeah... More impactful is how Luján continues to put his fat finger on the scale to advantage Republican-lite candidates over progressives. The DCCC used to keep out of tightly contested primary races, or at least they claimed they did, so that local Democrats could make their own choices. Now they don't even pretend to be neutral. In Illinois' 10th district, for example, where conservative and much-disliked New Dem Brad Schneider-- defeated in 2014 when Democratic base voters stayed home in droves to protest his backing for the Boehner agenda-- the DCCC kicked the more progressive candidate, Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering, to the curb to line up behind Schneider. If the idiot Luján has his way, Schneider will once again face Republican Robert Dold, the guy who beat him in 2014, and either lose to him again or win on Bernie's or Hillary's coattails and then lose the seat in 2016.

"Brad Schneider," mouthed Luján insipidly, "is a proven leader on progressive issues that matter to Illinois voters: fighting for common sense gun violence reform, standing up for a woman's right to choose and protecting seniors' health care. As a former member of Congress, Brad has the track record, relationships and resources to proudly take back Illinois' 10th district in 2016." As a former member with a track record, voters can clearly see that Luján is flat-out lying about Schneider who is the opposite of progressive. Progressive and the opposite of progressive are not the same (as we discussed the other day)-- but, then again, no one ever accused Luján of having a functioning IQ.

Both Chicago dailies endorsed Rotering this week, the Sun-Times editors announcing that it is time to move on from the see-saw battle between the two conservatives, Dold and Schneider. "Our endorsement goes to Nancy Rotering, the mayor of Highland Park, who took a terrific stand against gun violence by pushing through a municipal ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. A federal appellate court upheld the ban-- an important symbolic step toward sanity in our nation’s gun laws-- and the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a challenge to the law. Now Rotering is pushing a similar statewide ban in Illinois. This is leadership. Schneider, for his part, disappointed many supporters-- now former supporters-- when he unwisely opposed President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. Whatever enthusiasm we had for Schneider’s candidacy waned as well."

The more conservative, and historically pro-Schneider paper, the very corporate Chicago Tribune, decided to abandon him this time around. "Rotering," they wrote, "who says her No. 1 legislative priority would be combating gun violence, impressed us with the passion she would bring to that perennial lost cause. As mayor of the North Shore suburb, she passed an assault weapons ban meant to invite a lawsuit from the firearms lobby. The measure survived legal challenges all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and has become a model for other municipalities, she says. She's spoiling for a fight at the federal level... Both say changes are needed to preserve the Affordable Care Act, but Rotering-- who has a master's degree in health services management, worked in benefits analysis for General Motors and has practiced health care law-- would likely bring more to those discussions. Our endorsement goes to Rotering."

The DCCC isn't just getting it wrong--and jeopardizing Democratic wins-- in Chicagoland. Their Rahm Emanuel/Chris Van Hollen/Steve Israel-inspired policy of butting into local primaries on behalf of conservative candidates has been devastating to the Democrats, who have lost dozens and dozens on House seats since the DCCC started undermining progressives. And this cycle, under a vapid moron as chairman, it's worst than ever. A few weeks ago we told you about Luján's primitive racism in central Florida. In fact... let's go over it again... it's that stunning:

This week the East Orlando Post reported that FL-10 voters are furious that the DCCC is interfering in their congressional primary on behalf of the incompetent conservative candidate, Val Demings to the detriment of beloved civil rights heroine Geraldine Thompson and highly-respected former Florida Democratic Party chairman Bob Poe. Demings may be seen as an easily-controlled shill by DC powermingers but she is not well-liked by many central Florida Democrats. Jacob Engels reported that Demings "suffered a tough loss to Republican Dan Webster in 2012 [and] angered many local Democratic voters and activists when she dropped out of the Orange County mayoral race at the last minute in 2014, leaving the party with no one to challenge long-term incumbent Republican Mayor Teresa Jacobs."

Regardless, an insider close to the DCCC told us that Demings earned the respect from running a campaign in a tough race against Republican statesman Daniel Webster. Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Ben Ray Lujan recently held an event for Demings in Central Florida, signalling DC insiders determination to hand the crown to the former police chief.

"We are not handpicking a candidate, but Chief Demings has earned the respect of Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and others on capitol hill. She seems to have the support locally."

Former Florida Democratic Party Chairman and serial entrepreneur Bob Poe, who is one of the candidates challenging Demings for the nomination, grew up in Florida's 10th district as a teen working at a gas station.

"This race is ultimately going to be decided by the voters in the 10th Congressional District and not a small group of power brokers in Washington," said Poe.

He continued by pointing to the fact that the party has far too many other "too close to call" races on their hands that have no contested primaries, and should be focusing their efforts there instead of in Florida 10.

"The DCCC should be spending their limited resources to defeat Republicans, not fellow Democrats."

Mr. Poe has spent the past three decades as an entrepreneur in the marketing and communications industry-- a sought after show-runner and ideas man. He has raised nearly $300k in the three weeks since he announced his bid.

A Democratic aide, who once worked in the office of Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi told the East Orlando Post that Poe does not have the right racial makeup for the district.

"Simply put, Poe can't buy this race. The hill has decided that we want Chief Demings, come hell or high-water. Thompson and Fahmy are not options either. They should wait their turn."

State Senator Geraldine Thompson, an African American civil rights icon, is also a candidate seeking the Democratic nomination. Thompson has served in elected office for 10 years in the area, and like Poe, she is determined to not let Washington dysfunction determine who the candidate ultimately is.

"This type of behavior signals a total disregard for the people in our district. To not allow a level playing field by openly supporting one candidate over the other three is flat out wrong. The Democratic party is supposed to be a big tent. I have been breaking down barriers and obstacles my whole life.

"While the open bias with which they are treating me and the other candidates is disappointing, I am not deterred. In this race is an openly gay man, a proud Latina woman and a veteran African American female elected leader. We are insistent that the people in the District will decide... not the Washington elite." Thompson told us on break from committee meetings in the Florida Capitol.

A donor familiar with the endorsement process and patterns of the DCCC told us that there is not really any rules against the committee supporting one candidate over another, but admitted that most of the time it is preferable to let the people decide.

"It is a little perplexing to see how they are handling this. Endorsements and support from Washington are in large part meaningless to the majority of voters. We have races that have no primaries and are extremely tough roads to victory against Republicans in the general election... why not focus on those?," the top bundler for Democrat candidates confided via text message, echoing Bob Poe's sentiment about smart allocation of precious party resources.

Fatima Rita Fahmy, a lawyer and former stockbroker who moved to Central Florida from Brazil when she was just five years old, is another Democrat making a run for congress in Florida's 10th district. Fahmy calls the DCCC's behavior "next level arrogance."

"They want to impose their will and I will push back hard against those movements. I am in total agreement with Mr. Poe and Senator Thompson, it shows a horrible disconnect between the power-brokers and everyday people."

Fahmy crashed a Demings event Monday morning where DCCC Chairman Ben Ray Luján was in attendance and publicly called attention to the committees unusual financial and structural support for a candidate who is facing a primary from other credible choices.

So, the DCCC claims that Poe, who is white and gay, "does not have the right racial makeup for the district" so they're stepping on a progressive African-American state senator and a Latina so they can support a conservative religious nut who also happens to be African-American. The district is 27.1% voting age African-American, 22.8% voting Hispanic, 44.3% voting age white and I was unaware Pelosi countenanced this kind of racial game-playing. The DCCC press secretary for the Southeast, Jermaine House, actually said, "We will never support Poe because he's white." I'd like to hear Pelosi defend that like DCCC statement. On top of that, the DCCC is complaining Poe "can't buy this election" when the hallmark of the DCCC in the last decade has been to always favor wealthy candidates over middle class candidates. The hypocrisy is overwhelming.

And Luján's disgraceful perfidy doesn't stop there. Right now the DCCC is working to guarantee another term for Tea Party Republican Steve Knight, but steamrolling the local Democrats in Santa Clarita, Simi Valley and the Antelope Valley and working to install some random self-funding candidate from Orange County in place of local progressive Lou Vince, an Agua Dulce councilman and a policeman. The biggest local newspaper in the district, The Signal ran this OpEd last week from David Barlavi, a local Democrat, disgusted with the DCCC's shenanigans.

Lou Vince has been fighting for progressive values here in the 25th Congressional District for years. Lou ran for L.A. County Sheriff in 2014 on a progressive platform. Over the last year, Lou has been fighting as our strong, local, progressive candidate for Congress. Lou has been phone-banking and door-knocking for a year.

Lou has attended countless Democratic meetings and been pounding the pavement for a year. He has earned the endorsements and support of every Democratic Club in the 25th District-- some unanimously.

He’s earned the endorsement of our state’s California Democratic Party with the vote of more than 80 percent of our Democratic delegates. Lou has the endorsements of many prominent Democrats, both locally and state wide.

But most importantly, Lou has earned the support and confidence of local residents in the 25th. Lou is a Marine, an LAPD lieutenant with 21 years of service, a local town council member and a wonderful family man and father of four great kids.

Lou has lived in the 25th for over a decade, knows our issues, and cares deeply about our/his community.

Why, then, would the Washington elites parachute in a Johnny Come Lately, unknown carpetbagger into our district to jeopardize the Lou Vince campaign?

Here’s why:

Remember when the DCCC political elite in Washington did not support Lee Rogers for Congress? The DCCC didn’t support Lee in 2012 when he raised good money, and they didn’t support Lee in 2014 when he raised nearly $400,000.

Therefore, it’s logical to conclude that the DCCC supports issues, not as they contend, “fundraising ability.”

So why did the DCCC abandon the 25th in those last two elections and not support Lee Rogers? It is clear to me that it’s because the DCCC opposes progressive politics.

So let’s be honest witch each other here in the 25th. When the DCCC comes out of nowhere and parachutes in a wealthy, unknown, inexperienced lawyer from outside of our district, the message is clear.

The DCCC is not concerned about Lou Vince’s fundraising ability; they are opposed to Lou’s progressive politics.

The second important question is whether the DCCC is concerned about Lou Vince losing the general elections in November. Absolutely not. We all know 2016 is the year Democrats can defeat the Republicans and turn the 25th blue.

Democrats will have record turn-outs in June and November. The DCCC has not parachuted in a carpetbagger because they fear Republicans; they have forced a carpetbagger on us because they fear Lou Vince’s progressive politics.

Finally, why this particular out-of-towner? Well, to put it bluntly, he’s rich, with rich friends outside of our district. Now, there is nothing wrong with being rich, but those rich out-of-district friends have funded this out-of-town campaign.

Yes, he has raised a lot of out-of-town money all at once, but his well in the district is dry. He has little support from local Dems.

Lou Vince has raised campaign funds from more than 600 local contributors. That is a strong grass-roots campaign.

The carpetbagger has come in with bags of outside money, rented a place in Valencia, and proceeded to try to make us think he cares about our local issues and concerns. Absurd!

We need to nip this issue in the bud. It goes against our Democratic values in the 25th to parachute an unknown, out-of-town candidate into our district to undermine the already-existing, strong, year-long grass-roots Democratic campaign of Lou Vince for Congress.

A carpetbagging campaign itself is an affront to Democrats in the 25th. Add to that the big money bags thrown on us from outside the district, and the urgency becomes clear.

Make no mistake about it; this is a slap in the face of Democrats in the 25th.

Let’s not find out the dark truth in July when it’s too late. Let’s not unnecessarily sacrifice a real and local progressive. An honest-to-goodness, home-grown, 25th district Democrat, Lou Vince.

Please write to the DCCC and ask them to withdraw their candidate from our district and put their support behind Lou Vince for Congress. Their address is:

430 S. Capitol St. SE
Washington, D.C. 20003
Phone: (202) 863-1500

If Pelosi had any interest in winning back the House, all it would take is a competent, uncorrupted staff. Too much to ask for? Nope. Banish people like Steve Israel, Chris Van Hollen and Ben Ray Luján from the building and appoint someone who knows how to win and wants to win-- a Keith Ellison or a Mark Pocan or Ted Lieu or Matt Cartwright, not another loser crony from her own circle. Enough of this loser bullshit!

Big Shakeup In An Illinois House Race-- Durbin Endorses Nancy Rotering, Not The DCCC Hack Candidate

When it comes to recruiting, the DCCC is always attracted to conservative ex-colleagues who have already lost to Republicans. We've talked about how Steve Israel and his crew of incompetents managed to lose the D+5 district centered around Syracuse, New York last cycle by running Republican-lite New Dem Dan Maffei after he had already been beaten in 2010. He road back into office on Obama's strong 2012 coattails, only to be thoroughly thrashed by the voters again in 2014 after 2 years of proving, again, he's not in the least bit progressive. Obama won NY-24 171,502 (57%) to 123,534 (41%) in 2014 while Maffei took 130,969 (48%) to beat Tea Party incumbent Ann Marie Buerkle's 118,578 (44%). Two years later, predictably, Democrats stayed away from the polls in droves and Maffei only managed to get 80,304 votes (40%) and lost to John Katko's 118,474 (60%). This is a blue district and its only the DCCC's ideological, anti-progressive interference that has saddled it with a Republican congressman again.

The story in IL-10 is similar-- except this is a D+8 district, the bluest district in the country with a Republican congressman. In 2012 Republican incumbent Mark Kirk gave up the seat to run for the Senate. The Democrats ran a conservative Democrat, Brad Schneider and, like Maffei in NY, he got into office on Obama's coattails. Obama beat Romney there 157,400 (58%) to 112,552 (41%) and Schneider-- after the DCCC helped him defeat progressive champion Ilya Sheyman in a close primary-- beat Bob Dold much more narrowly-- 130,941 (50%) to 128,423 (50%). And of course, again, quite predictably, Democratic voters saw Schneider in action and just didn't show up at the polls in 2014. Dold beat him 95,992 (51%) to 91,136 (49%).

So now Schneider wants back in again-- and, of course, the DCCC is trying to help him win, which is very possible since either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders could be expected to do very well in the north Chicagoland district. And, then it would be time for a Republican to beat Schneider again in 2016. Seems silly, huh? In NY-24 the likely nominee is a progressive Eric Kingson, who will break that cycle.

I've been worried about IL-10, where the DCCC is making every effort to disadvantage the more progressive primary challenger Nancy Rotering in order to bolster their New Dem loser, Brad Schneider, who used to throw fundraising events at his hold for Mark Kirk. High profile Democrats have been pealing away from Schneider in recent weeks. Jan Schakowsky had endorsed him and withdrew her endorsement after he backed the Republican move to undermine President Obama's deal with Iran. Adlai Stevenson III and Abner Mikva also withdrew their endorsements and then each endorsed Nancy. But yesterday there was an even bigger break in the DCCC pattern of inevitable failure. Illinois' senior senator, Dick Durbin, very publicly announced that he was on team Rotering. "Nancy, a working mom and skilled attorney, has the courage, leadership and determination to return the 10th Congressional District to the Democratic fold," he said.

Nancy brings to this race an extraordinary record for a first-time Congressional candidate. As Mayor of Highland Park she successfully confronted ComEd when local families were suffering from unreliable service, balanced the City budget five consecutive years and enacted real reforms. Her most noteworthy achievement gained national attention when she passed one of the nation's first local assault weapons ban and successfully defended the ordinance against an onslaught of gun lobby attacks all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. While the Republican-led Congress refused to respond to the nation's gun violence, Nancy Rotering and her City of Highland Park showed real leadership. Nancy combines fiscal responsibility with true progressive values.

The primary is March 15 and Durbin's endorsement must have shocked the DCCC hacks, not enough to make them up from their incompetence or corruption. But enough to discomfort them. This is a race Nancy can win-- both against Schneider and against Dold, two conservatives who shouldn't be presenting an area like IL10.

Wall Street Has A Batch Of Very Unsavory Favorite Candidates

Bill Maher has told people that this Alan Grayson response to GOP hacks Nicolle Wallace and P.J. O'Rourke is the only instance of his Real Time audience ever giving one of his guests a standing ovation. And now there's a pretty good song based on it! Not a song, though, that the Senator from Wall Street, Chuck Schumer ($23,059,037), is likely to play at the next fundraising event he or one of his allies throws for Wall Street's pick for the open Florida senate seat, Patrick Murphy ($2,260,848). What are those number amounts next to their names? It's the amount of legalized bribery that each legislator has accepted from the Finance Sector in their careers. Schumer's had a long career-- as a congressional Wall Street lackey-- so he's got a huge amount, more, in fact, than any other Member of Congress in history with the exception of few candidates who ran for president. Murphy is relatively new but no one in Congress-- not ever-- has been given as much Wall Street loot as Murphy is such a short amount of time. So why is that?

I'll answer that question with another question. How do you know who carries water for Wall Street? Easy: Wall Street pays them-- and pays them a lot. Of the top 10 recipients of legalized bribes from the Financial Sector so far this election cycle, 8 are Republicans and 2 are Democrats. Let's take a look-see at who the corrupt culprits are and how much cash they've gotten and then we'll try to figure out why. Remember this is just for the House (not the Senate) and just for this one election cycle, which has over a year to run:

• John Boehner (R-OH)- $1,133,340
• Kevin McCarthy (R-CA)- $768,500
• Patrick Murphy (D-FL)- $659,600
• Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)- $521,715
• Paul Ryan (R-WI)- $490,875
• Bob Dold (R-IL)- $431,593
• Patrick McHenry (R-NC)- $425,900
• Steve Stivers (R-OH)- $384,102
• Bruce Poliquin (R-ME)- $353,033
• Chris Van Hollen (D-MD)- $340,807

The two biggest recipients need no explanation. Boehner and McCarthy, respectively Speaker and Majority Leader, control the House's agenda. They decide what gets on the floor and what doesn't and who gets on which committees and who doesn't. Whomever holds those positions is who Wall Street wants to own. Simple. We'll come back to Murphy (#3) in a moment and discuss his special case when we look at the only other Democrat on the list, Maryland Establishment shill Chris Van Hollen. But first, the rest of the Republicrooks.

Hensarling's $521,715 (and his career-long $6,610,960 from the banksters) is easy to explain. He's not just a loud opponent to any consumer protects for banking and insurance customers, he's the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, the guy who is dismantling, piece by piece, Dodd Frank on behalf of Wall Street's worst criminals.

Paul Ryan's contributions from Wall Street (#5) are about to shoot up into the stratosphere. He's about to replace Boehner as Speaker and he just hired David Hoppe, a shady lobbyist adept at extorting money from banksters, as his chief of staff. They've already given Ryan $5,420,978 since he was first elected in 1998 and have been thrilled with his work on their behalf, first as the Budget Committee chairman and now as the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. That was the best $5,420,978 they ever invested!

#6, Bob Dold from Illinois is an interesting case-- $431,593 so far this year, for a very tough reelection battle against another Wall Street shill, grotesquely corrupt New Dem Brad Schneider who he beat last year. Now, keep in mind that the financial sector showered Schneider with $1,123,544 in his short career and has given him another $135,381 this cycle, not as much as Dold, but far from nothing. Old is a Wall Street-supporting conservative on Ryan's House Ways and Means Committee and they're loathe to lose his services, but if he loses to Schneider... they don't lose much. Schneider was always helpful with Wall Street's agenda and is one of the few Democrats who openly admits-- as do Murphy and Van Hollen-- that he is open to cuts in entitlements (i.e., gutting Social Security and Medicare). The only nightmare for the banksters would be if Schneider loses the primary to a far more progressive Democrat, Nancy Rotering, and that she beats Dold, a likely scenario. That's why this year's bankster contributions in IL-10 look like this:

• Bob Dold (R)- $431,593
• Brad Schneider (New Dem)- $135,381
• Nancy Rotering (D)- $68,298

Rotering understands-- as the banksters do-- that there's not much difference between Dold and Schneider on the issues most important to them. The other day she told us, "Both of my opponents, Brad Schneider and Bob Dold are part of the Washington establishment that has failed our families by stacking the economic deck against them. Both Scheinder and Dold have taken hundreds of thousands from the financial industry (450k for Schneider and over 800k for Dold) and then used their power to do the financial industry's bidding. Our families will not catch the economic break they need if we continue sending the same old people to Washington to do the same old thing. I will be new progressive voice watching out for families not the financial industry."

And that brings us to North Carolina Republican closet case Patrick McHenry, who's in a safely gerrymandered red district (R+11) and doesn't face any serious opposition. Yet... the Financial Sector has given him $2,966,186 since he was first elected in 2004 (and already $425,900 this year). It's not just because they like diminutive closet cases ready to go to any lengths in a quest for power. McHenry is an up-and-comer in the dysfunctional GOP House Leadership, the Chief Deputy Whip since last year and, perhaps more importantly, a Member of the House Financial Services Committee, always eager to do Wall Street's bidding (like act as an attack dog against Elizabeth Warren) and the chairman of the TARP, Financial Services and Bailouts of Public and Private Programs subcommittee of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Next up: former Bank One/Bank of America lobbyist Steve Stivers. Again, safely gerrymandered and ethnically-cleansed red district that carefully skirts Columbus (R+6) and is designed not just to prevent a Democrat from winning, but to also make sure no non-Franklin County teababgger can ever cobble together a natural majority. Stivers has no opposition so far this cycle. He wasn't elected until 2010 but Wall Street has showered him with legalistic bribery, $3,411,738 in his first 4 years in Congress and now this keel $384,102 chunk. And he's earned it, working diligently against his own constituents and for the banksters from his little perchs at the Financial Services Committee and on the Capital Markets and on the Insurance subcommittees.

The last Republicrook on the Top 10 list is Maine sociopath Bruce Poliquin, who represents a blue-leaning district (D+2) and would be likely to be defeated next year if not for the gross incompetence of the DCCC. (Obama beat McCain in this district 54-44% and then beat Romney 53-44%.) Before running for office Poliquin, a mutimillionaire Tea Party loon, was a bankster in Chicago. He was Maine's appointed Treasurer and used his office to further enrich himself. He's a freshman who won the seat in a 3-way race and immediately got onto the House Financial Services Committee, where he has endeared himself to Wall Street and, like Stivers, serves on the Capital Markets subcommittee. He's widely considered one of Congress' most corrupt members and the Finance Sector has been happy to give him checks amounting to $644,183 so far in his miserable congressional career.

And that brings to the two unsavory Democrats running for Senate, New Dem and Wall Street darling Patrick Murphy, an opportunistic "ex"-Republican who tends to always vote with the Republicans, especially at the House Financial Services Committee, where he is a low-ranking member but is widely regarded, along with Jim Himes and John Delaney to speak for the Wall Street banksters. He is the Democrat who most backs the banksters' agenda for complete dominance. And now they want him in the Senate, where he can do far more damage. A Goldman Sachs patsy, the Finance Sector has loaded him up with $2,260,848 during his brief tenure in Congress (part of which is the $659,600 they've given him so far this year). Getting Patrick Murphy into the Senate is Wall Street's top electoral priority for 2016. His $659,600 haul this year is a lot more than the Finance Sector gave Alan Grayson, a former economist-- $3,625. That should tell you something about who the banksters want in the Senate... and who they fear.

They are also extremely eager to get the only other Democrat on this List of Shame, Maryland Congressman Chris Van Hollen, into the Senate. Van Hollen, a hideously failed former chair of the DCCC, is the Ranking Democrat on the Budget Committee and is regarded as someone who never holds the banksters' feet to the fire. The banksters appreciate his friendliness and have given him $1,935,871 career-long (considerably more than they've given to Congresswoman Donna Edwards who he is trying to defeat for the open Senate seat. This cycle, just $65,290 compared to Van Hollen's hefty 2015 $340,807 payoff).

If you'd like to keep Wall Street allies like Patrick Murphy and Chris Van Hollen out of the Senate, you can help both Donna Edwards and Alan Grayson on this Blue America ActBlue page.

How The DCCC Keeps Undermining Progressive Candidates-- And Chances To Ever Win Back The House

This week the DCCC is having a series of meetings to introduce their favored candidates to incumbents, lobbyists and other DCCC supporters. Tonight they're throwing a big dinner at an event space for lobbyists and both political parties, the Oracle Townhouse on D Street. Most smart candidates are passing on the "opportunity" and staying in their districts to campaign.

In several districts the DCCC actually lived up to their "neutrality" promise, inviting more than one candidate. For example, they invited Ruben Kihuen, Lucy Flores and John Oceguera (as well as vanity candidate, wealthy socialite Susie Lee) all from Nevada's 4th district. But not in every district.

In the Syracuse-centered NY-24, there are-- as of yesterday when wealthy moderate self-funder Steve Williams tossed his hat into the ring-- 3 Democrats running. Originally the only candidate was Blue America-endorsed Eric Kingson, the co-founder of Social Security Works. But the DCCC didn't want him in the race. They want a conservaDem like Dan Maffei, the New Dem who won in 2008 when Obama first ran and did well in the D+5 district, beating McCain 57-41%; then lost in 2010 to a teabagger psycho, won it back in 2012 when Obama was at the top of the ticket again, holding Romney down to 42%; and then losing again last year to John Katko 59.9-40.1%.

Maffei lost because, like all DCCC-preferred and recruited candidates, he voted with the Republicans, He's a member of the Wall Street-owned New Dems and his voting record was what the DCCC and their boneheaded media allies call "moderate," but, for Democratic voters, is "conservative." So he lost twice... in a D+5 district. It's a district that is almost impossible for a Democrat to lose in-- unless voters sense the candidate isn't actually a Democrat.

So the DCCC set out to recruit this self-funding Williams person and he was tepid and on-and-off and on-and-off. And then Kirsten Gillibrand, a Wall Street darling ($7,535,820) and former Blue Dog, put up-- along with EMILY's List-- a staffer of hers, Colleen Deacon, to represent the "moderate" wing of the party. So the DCCC invited Deacon and Williams and very pointedly not Kingson, the one candidate who is in this for all the right reasons-- and none of the wrong ones.

Would you consider helping Blue America tell Steve Israel/Ben Ray Luján, New Dem recruitment chair Denny Heck and Blue Dog recruitment vice-chair Cheri Bustos to stop sabotaging progressive Democrats? All of the candidates on this page are progressives and none of them are DCCC favorites. But please concentrate on Eric Kingson today.

Similarly in IL-10, where the DCCC is pushing conservative New Dem retread Brad Schneider over a much better candidate-- Nancy Rotering-- he's in Washington today being introduced around to any crooked lobbyists he doesn't already know, where she wasn't even invited to their "candidates' week." (I guess Pelosi's malarkey about "when women win..." only goes so far.)

Now... for the opposite of the DCCC, take a look at this letter Alan Grayson sent out to his own supporters yesterday:

I was swapping e-mails with Blue America’s Howie Klein today, and the subject of a GOP Congressional seat in the Northeast came up. He knew both Democratic challengers. Knew all about them, in fact. And the same thing would be true of House candidates in the other 434 districts. Howie knows all about them, too.

There are people who actually are paid to know all about Congressional campaigns-- Stu Rothenberg, Charlie Cook, Larry Sabato, etc. I’ve read their stuff. Howie knows more than they do.

But Howie doesn’t sell what he knows. Instead, he uses that knowledge to cultivate and nurture progressive candidates all over the country. Blue America will not be supporting those two challengers that Howie knows in the Northeast, because-- because-- they’re not blue. But other candidates are true blue, and those are the ones who get Howie’s help. The only ones. With Howie in charge, Blue America PAC is the manager of the Progressive Farm Team.

Go Progs! Give me a “P”! Etc.

Join me and Howie Klein now in turning America blue in 2016, by contributing $9 or more to the Blue America PAC.

You might think that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) might be doing this. Mais non, as the French would say. Despite having $100 million a year to spend, they don’t know what Howie knows. And for sure, they don’t care the way that Howie cares. Ever since the Rahm Emanuel regime, the DCCC has had a strong built-in bias against progressive candidates. And the DSCC? Don’t get me started. They can’t find their derriere with deux mains. Just look at their record last year.

So progressives really need Blue America PAC. Which is why you should help.

Politics is a team sport. Show your support for progressives all over the country by donating $9 or more to the Blue America PAC.

At an earlier time in his life, Howie Klein was the Vice President of Warner Reprise records. He knows countless top performers (which is why he sometimes holds contests giving away great stuff like platinum records). He doesn’t have to work anymore. He helps progressives for one reason and one reason only: because he cares.

And if you contribute to Blue America PAC, you not only have Encyclopedia Howie working for you, but you also enlist the support of the pioneering blogger Digby, and John Amato of the website “Crooks and Liars” (dot-com, of course). Because they all share the Blue America dream of making America blue. Not purple. Blue.

Chip in $9 now, and Help Make America Blue.

Do Schumer And AIPAC Want To Make An Example Of Jerry Nadler For His Iran Vote?

Jerry Nadler, hero of peace

Although one Republican-- libertarian-leaning Thomas Massie (R-KY)-- abstained, all the rest of the House Republicans voted against the Iran nuclear deal. 86% of House Dems voted for it (162 out of 188)-- as had 91% of Senate Dems (42 of 46). Yesterday the House GOP warmongers were joined by 25 faithless Democrats, these 25 faithless Democrats:

Brad Ashford (Blue Dog-NE)
Brendan Boyle (PA)
Tony Cárdenas (New Dem-CA)
Ted Deutch (AIPAC-FL)
Eliot Engel (AIPAC-NY)
Lois Frankel (AIPAC-FL)
Gwen Graham (Blue Dog-FL)
Gene Green (TX)
Alcee Hastings (FL)
Steve Israel (AIPAC-NY)
Ted Lieu (CA)
Dan Lipinski (Blue Dog-IL)
Nita Lowey (AIPAC-NY)
Carolyn Maloney (AIPAC-NY)
Grace Meng (AIPAC-NY)
Grace Napolitano (CA)
Donald Norcross (AIPAC-NJ)
Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
Kathleen Rice (New Dem-NY)
David Scott (New Dem-GA)
Brad Sherman (AIPAC-CA)
Kirsten Sinema (Blue Dog-AZ)
Albio Sires (AIPAC-NJ)
Juan Vargas (New Dem-CA)
Filemon Vela (New Dem-TX)

Jerry Nadler's principled and well-reasoned position for the Iran nuclear deal helped make it "safe" for Jews and other Democrats representing Jewish districts to vote for it-- and the great majority of Jewish Democrats in the House and in the Senate did.

Chuck Schumer has been working, covertly of course, to drum up hatred against Nadler and to find a primary opponent to run against him, possibly right-wing nut Assemblyman Dov Hikind from Boro Park, although Hikind claims the anti-Nadler forces are looking for someone less right-wing who could possibly win the district-- something an out-and-out, across-the-board reactionary like Hikind could never do. He also claims that AIPAC fanatics will make sure the candidate is loaded with cash to deploy against Nadler.

Nadler's district runs from West 122nd Street in Morningside Heights on the Upper West Side north of Columbia University, down Riverside Drive and Broadway, over to Central Park West, through Hell's Kitchen, the Garment District, Chelsea, the West Village, Soho, Tribeca, and the Financial District and then, incongruously, across the East River to Brooklyn and south to Red Hook, Boro Park, Kensington as far east as Coney Island Avenue and Ocean Parkway, into Midwood and Bensonhurst and right it the front door of Lafayette High School. The district is one of the most Jewish in the country and includes enlightened liberals in the Manhattan part and extremely right-wing, racist and backward Hasidim in the Boro Park area. Normally the progressives outvote the reactionaries by wide margins-- Obama, despite the hatred of the lunatic fringe, beat McCain 76-23% and then beat Romney 74-25%-- but the primary is in June and unlikely to generate much turnout. So... Blue America just added Jerry to our "Worthy Incumbents" page. Please consider helping him fend off the right-wing warmongers.

The opposite is happening in Illinois's 10th District, north of Chicago (from Northbrook, Glencoe and Prospect Heights through Deerfield, Buffalo Grove and Waukegan up to the Wisconsin border), where DCCC incompetence and a dreadful Wall Street-owned New Dem incumbent, Brad Schneider, saw the victory of Republican nitwit Robert Dold in a deep blue (D+8) district that Obama won with 63% against McCain and 58% against Romney. Progressive Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering decided to take the district back from the conservative Dold, but soon after she started campaigning the New Dem idiot Schneider was back-- and campaigning by joining Dold in the fight against the Iran nuclear deal.

Abner Mikva, who's been an icon of Jewish and Democratic activism in Chicagoland since the late 1960s, originally endorsed Schneider but switched his endorsement when Schneider announced he was opposing the Iran deal. This is a big deal because New York warmonger Steve Israel has forced the DCCC to get behind Schneider. Mikva was one of 11 Jewish former congressmen who signed an ad in the NY Times backing the Iran deal.

The 10th district has a large Jewish vote, and support for Israel is a given. Indeed, candidates of both parties in the 10th for years have competed to outdo themselves as champions of Israel’s security.

In 2014, Schneider and Rep. Bob Dold, R-Ill., fought over who was the bigger hawk when it came to Israel.

The political landscape is different in 2016 for Schneider, who has to get through a primary. Rotering is going after Schneider from the left, looking to rally progressive Democrats to her side.

Rotering told me she called Mikva after Schneider proclaimed his opposition to the Iran deal in a Times of Israel column. Mikva is popular with progressives. He once represented the 10th-- and is a former federal judge, counsel to President Bill Clinton and member of the Illinois General Assembly.

As a result of the call, Mikva invited Rotering to lunch at the Cliff Dwellers Club of Chicago.

In an “open letter” to Schneider, Mikva wrote,”When you first asked for my support, you assured me that you would not be dominated by AIPAC’s and Benjamin Netanyahu’s view on Iran. I signed on to your campaign in good faith, but have since been compelled to reconsider. I was disappointed when you came out against the Iran agreement, opposing your president and your party.”

An anti-Nadler flyer from Boro Park

A Point Of Contention Between A Progressive And A DINO In IL-10: The Iran Deal

Brad Schneider and Nancy Rotering (IL-10)

When tepid New Dem Brad Schneider lost his House seat in 2014, it became the bluest district anywhere in the country with a Republican representative. The PVI is a daunting D+8. Obama beat McCain there 63-36% and beat Romney 58-41%. But with a Republican-lite voting record that discouraged Democratic base voters (in a midterm), Schneider was beaten by Republican Robert Dold 93,984 to 88,010, 51.6-48.4%. When Dold first won in 2012, 130,941 voters had pulled the lever for him. Almost 43,000 of his original voters just stayed home, many because they knew they were getting an unsatisfactory choice between a Republican and a Republican-lite DINO. 

There are millions of voters all over the country no longer playing the Beltway Democratic Establishment game of forcing them to pick between the lesser of two evils. Brad Schneider was, at best, the lesser of two evils. Now he's looking for another rematch against Dold. But... there is a better Democrat he first has to get through in the primary, Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering.

In March Rotering told me:

You can't change the gridlock in DC by electing the same people over andover again... The rate of poverty in the suburbs has been growing rapidly-- in this district and across the country-- and that's something that has to be addressed seriously on a national level... To expand the middle class we need to provide constant, sufficient education across the entire district. Fair wages are critical. 81% of SNAP recipients have at least one full time employee in the family. What does that say about wages?

It doesn't matter what Schneider says about this or any other issue-- those are just words crafted to win an election. He has a record for his one miserable term in Congress, a record during which he sided with Big Business and Wall Street against his own constituents... which is why he lost in such a deep blue district just north of Chicago (from Glencoe, Northbrook and Buffalo Grove up through Deerfield, Niles, Highland Park and Lake Forest to Fox Lake, Waukegan and the Wisconsin border).

Yesterday Kimberly Railey, writing for National Journal, contrasted Rotering and Schneider based on one issue: the Iran deal. Both candidates-- and many of their constituents-- are Jewish. Schneider, predictably, is with the Republicans on this. Rotering is sticking with keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of Iran through the deal. AIPAC is already on the warpath to make sure Schneider wins the March primary.

“The people in the dis­trict are as split as people are in the na­tion,” Roter­ing said in an in­ter­view. “People are in­ter­ested in the con­trast between the two of us be­cause they them­selves prob­ably have dif­fer­ent po­s­i­tions on the top­ic.”

In Roter­ing and Schneider’s dis­trict, voters are closely watch­ing the is­sue.

“It’s something the people in the dis­trict are keenly aware of,” Schneider told Na­tion­al Journ­al. “They study it, they fol­low it. We have fam­ily that lives in Is­rael, we have neigh­bors. Our kids spend sum­mers in Is­rael.”

...She has com­pany among Chica­go Jew­ish Demo­crats back­ing the Ir­an deal, too. Chica­go May­or Rahm Emanuel has en­dorsed it, while Demo­crat­ic Rep. Jan Schakowsky, who is the only Jew­ish mem­ber of Illinois con­gres­sion­al del­eg­a­tion, is also back­ing the agree­ment.

Some Demo­crats sug­ges­ted that Roter­ing’s en­dorse­ment of the deal could en­dear her to more pro­gress­ive Demo­crats in the dis­trict. The can­did­ate who ran closest to Schneider in his 2012 Demo­crat­ic primary was pro­gress­ive act­iv­ist Ilya Shey­man, now the ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of the lib­er­al group Mo­ve­On, which backs the Ir­an deal.

“[Roter­ing] is clearly go­ing to ali­en­ate some people with this po­s­i­tion,” said one Chica­go-area Demo­crat­ic strategist, who re­ques­ted an­onym­ity to speak can­didly about the situ­ation. “But she has the pos­sib­il­ity to at­tract a lot more.”

Oth­ers said that in a race where both can­did­ates are per­ceived as pro-Is­rael, the Ir­an deal won’t be a de­cis­ive factor among Demo­crat­ic voters. “I think there’s some ne­ces­sity for ob­vi­ously a new face and chal­lenger to try to take some risk on some po­s­i­tion­ing,” said Thomas Bowen, a Demo­crat­ic strategist in Chica­go. “But for­eign af­fairs isn’t usu­ally an is­sue that changes Demo­crat­ic primary out­comes.”

It is, however, the sharpest di­vid­ing line between Schneider and Roter­ing. And their dis­trict, which pays at­ten­tion to is­sues af­fect­ing Is­rael like few oth­ers, has be­come a mini­ature ver­sion of the na­tion­al fight over the Ir­an deal.

DSCC And DCCC Continue Searching For Conservative Candidates

IL-10 Dems Schneider & Rotering

Yesterday 4 generally conservative Democrats-- Heidi Heitkamp (ND), Bob Casey (PA), Joe Manchin (WV) and Joe Donnelly (IN)-- voted with the GOP to end the Senate Democrats' filibuster of an anti-human trafficking bill that includes anti-Choice provisions. Even with supposedly pro-Choice Maine Senator Susan Collins voting with her own party on this, the final vote, 55-43 wasn't enough to shut down the filibuster.

People wonder how we wind up with Democrats like these. It's easy enough to make excuses for conservaDems in red states like West Virginia and North Dakota, but Democrats could have/should have done a lot better in Pennsylvania, where progressives don't have pander to bigots, haters and anti-Choice fanatics to get elected. But the Democratic Beltway Establishment never learned that lesson and is always encouraging the worst Democrats to run for office. This year, the DSCC is encouraging horrible conservative candidates, like Patrick Murphy in Florida and Bill Foster in Illinois, to run for the Senate, after watching them vote with Republicans over and over and over for two terms. Florida and Illinois are not red states.

The DCCC is, if anything, even worse than the DSCC. With anti-family/pro-Big Business millionaire New Dem Denny Heck as chairman of the Recruitment Committee (which also includes Blue Dogs Steve Israel and Cheri Bustos and New Dems Ann Kuster and Terri Sewell), they've been doing a dreadful job all cycle, encouraging an especially wretched batch of horrible conservative candidates like "former" Republican Monica Vernon (IA), pro-business lobbyist tool Isidore Hall (CA) and defeated Blue Dog Pete Gallego (TX).

The DCCC especially loves conservative losers former colleagues who were defeated the cycle before. They're trying to recruit plenty of them. One, for example, is Wall Street shill New Dem Brad Schneider, who managed to lose a district gerrymandered by the Democratic legislature to elect Democrats. The PVI is D+8, the bluest district won by a Republican in 2014. In 2012, when Schneider beat incumbent Robert Dold-- the one who came back and beat him last November-- he only won, and just barely (50.6-49.4%), because Obama was at the top of the ticket. Out of 264,000 votes cast, Schneider only managed to win by around 3,000 votes. In 2014, Dold beat him 93,984 (51.6%) to 88.010 (48.4%), Schneider having catered to Republicans for 2 years and turned off the Democratic base, many of whom just stayed home. But the DCCC thinks it's smart to run him again-- even though a far better candidate, Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering, has already declared her candidacy.

I spoke with Nancy yesterday a few hours after he announced and her campaign seems to be all about her how her local experience working to expand and protect middle can translate on a national level. "You can't change the gridlock in DC," she told me, "by electing the same people over andover again... The rate of poverty in the suburbs has been growing rapidly-- in this district and across the country-- and that's something that has to be addressed seriously on a national level... To expand the middle class we need to provide constant, sufficient education across the entire district. Fair wages are critical. 81% of SNAP recipients have at least one full time employee in the family. What does that say about wages?" We'll be hearing more from Nancy as the primary unfolds.