If You Had To Pick One Democratic Congressman To Lose To The GOP In 2020, Who Would It Be? I have A Suggestion

Collin Peterson: DRECK!

Minnesota's 7th district is as red as it gets. The PVI is R+12 and Obama lost it both times he ran. Trump beat Hillary here-- 62 to 31%. It's about 95% of western Minnesota and borders on North and South Dakota. Folks there gave uo on the corrupted DC corporate Democrats long ago. In the 2016 primary, folks there went crazy for Bernie's populist, progressive reform message. Bernie didn't just beat Hillary in a landslide-- 63.2% to 36.8%-- more than double the number of voters came out to caucus for him than for Trump!

• Bernie- 6,608
• Trump- 3,017

When the general election came along, though, Hillary was the nominee and she lost every single county in MN-07. The biggest county in the district in terms of population, is Otter Tail. The only Democratic presidential candidates to win the county since Minnesota was granted statehood (1858 were the two most like Bernie: FDR and William Jennings Bryan).

Many MN-07 voters live across the Red Rver from North Dakota cities Fargo and Grand Forks (Clay and Polk counties) and get their news from North Dakota media. (The only states redder than North Dakota are Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, West Virginia and Idaho.)

The congressman from MN-07, since 1991, is Collin Peterson. He's an anti-Choice fanatic, has one of the most homophobic voting records in Congress, opposes healthcare (voted against Obamacare and voted to repeal it), votes to abolish the estate tax, is anti-environment, opposes consumer protection legislation, votes for deregulation of just about everything and is one of the most pro-NRA members of Congress. He has preemptively declared that "I will not support any kind of climate change bill." And he's a war-monger. Sounds like a pretty typical Republican, right? Yes, right... but he's a Blue Dog "Democrat" and the DCCC is about to drop as much as $4 million of defending his seat next year.

Peterson famously said he "doesn't know a damn thing about the Yemen civil war" but was one of only 5 Democrats to vote with the GOP to allow Trump to keep selling weapons to the Saudis for their genocide policy there. He was the only Democrat to vote against the Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act. He voted against the Violence Against Women Act and against the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act. He opposes Medicare-for-All but he was one of the only Democrats to vote for Republican Medicare (Bush's bill to bilk consumers on prescription drugs while enriching the pharmaceutical companies). Pelosi has repeatedly made him chair of the House Agricultural Committee, which he has turned into a virtual meeting for corrupt Blue Dogs eager to take bribes from corporate agriculture and do their bidding.

The NRCC recognizes an ally when they see one and rarely support any local Republicans opposing him. Last cycle Republican Dave Hughes nearly beat him, 52 to 48%, with the NRCC spending exactly zero on his behalf-- and after being outspent by Peterson $1,494,741 to $229,418. (Hughes had run against him in 2016 as well with almost identical results and with no support from the NRCC.) Hughes is running against in 2020... but this time the Republican Party plans to get serious about this race-- although not on Hughes' behalf. Yesterday, David Wasserman, reporting for the Cook Report, wrote that they moved MN-07 from "lean Democrat" to "toss up."

That's because former Lt. Gov. Michelle Fischbach (R) announced that she's running against Peterson. "In an era defined by sky-high polarization and straight-ticket voting," wrote Wasserman, "Peterson is an extreme outlier. No one else in the House represents a seat where the opposite party's presidential candidate received more than 55 percent of the vote in 2016, but Peterson-- first elected in 1990-- has managed to defy political gravity a sprawling, rural district that voted for President Trump by a landslide 61 percent to 31 percent. The reason? Peterson, 75, is serving his second stint as chair of the Ag Committee, where his policy expertise is widely respected across the aisle and his farm bill-crafting clout is prized by farmers in his sugar beet and corn-rich district. Moreover, his personal style-- including flying his own plane around the sprawling district and showing up to events unstaffed in jeans and cowboy boots-- holds undeniable local appeal."

Then Wasserman goes off the rails in a direction all DC pundits go: the extreme conservative Blue Dogs, he claims, absurdly, are "moderate" and the right-wing psychopath Peterson (who refused to vote for Hillary against Trump) has "never been regarded as an ideologue."

Ironically, what may finally do Peterson in is something that Wasserman was singing his praises over: "just last month, Peterson hosted Trump-appointed Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue for a bipartisan discussion at the iconic Minnesota Farmfest at a time when China's retaliation against Trump's trade tariffs is putting serious stress on district farmers." Beltway pundits like Wasserman may soon have something to weep in their milk over. As he wrote himself, "there are signs Peterson's grasp on the 7th CD has been gradually slipping. As rural Minnesota has drifted towards the GOP, Peterson's margin of victory has shrunk in each of his past three elections. In 2016, he defeated Air Force veteran Dave Hughes by just 53 percent to 47 percent despite outspending Hughes $1.2 million to $19,000. In 2018, Peterson won a rematch by an even narrower 52 percent to 48 percent. Peterson could be even more vulnerable in 2020 with Trump atop the ballot. Given past patterns, it's likely 50,000 to 80,000 additional voters beyond the 281,000 who cast ballots here in 2018 will show up to vote. And, these casual, less politically engaged voters are less likely to be aware of or value Peterson's clout as Ag chair and independence from national Democrats. They're more likely to cast straight tickets." Ahhh... just when Democrats are getting sick of holding their noses and vote for Peterson. And it doesn't matter than Fischbach is virtually brain-dead, announcing her run by laughably "calling Peterson an enabler of 'the socialist agenda of Nancy Pelosi, Ilhan Omar and the rest of the squad.' Fischbach is married to the head of Minnesota's largest pro-life group and will have access to a large fundraising network of social conservatives. And unlike Hughes, whom she must first get past in a primary, she will have strong backing from the NRCC (which sat out the past two cycles)."

However, Fischbach isn't without vulnerabilities. In 2018, she created a minor maelstrom by trying to simultaneously keep her state Senate seat while filling the lieutenant governor vacancy (at the time, Republicans held a 34 to 33 seat majority in the chamber that depended on Fischbach's vote). Ultimately, Fischbach backed down and resigned, but the legal battle ended up costing taxpayers $146,000.

More fundamentally, Fischbach's 23-year tenure in St. Paul could give Democrats an avenue to call her a Twin Cities "career politician" and could rob Republicans of the line of attack that Peterson has been in office too long and it's time for change. Peterson and Democrats could also highlight Fischbach's movement conservatism and Twin Cities roots to cast her as a poor fit for a farm belt seat with populist roots.

The last time DC Republicans took serious interest here was in 2014, when they recruited state Sen. Torrey Westrom. Westrom, who is blind and had a good personal story, raised $1 million. But Democrats accused him of trying to shut down the state government and taking "more than $300,000 in reimbursements from taxpayers over his two decades in St. Paul." Peterson prevailed, 54 percent to 46 percent.

Look for Democrats to reprise those same attacks against Fischbach, who has an extensive St. Paul paper trail to litigate. Furthermore, they will seek to tie Fischbach to Trump's tariffs and make the case that with family farmers in distress, Peterson's clout and presence as a check are more essential than ever. For her part, Fischbach has praised Trump for taking on China for "sticking it to farmers for years."

Of course, the biggest question is whether Peterson decides to run again in 2020. On one hand, Peterson just regained his gavel and leaving a powerful post so soon after winning the majority would be atypical. But on the other, Peterson must decide whether he wants to wage a multi-million dollar campaign for what would likely be one final term, considering Minnesota is likely to lose a district after the 2020 Census.

If Peterson does run again (Minnesota's filing deadline isn't until next June), he'll have powerful allies seeking to ease his workload. American Crystal Sugar, a highly influential farmer-owned sugar cooperative based in the Red River Valley of Minnesota and North Dakota, has already created and funded a $300,000 SuperPAC, the Committee for Stronger Rural Committees, with the sole mission of reelecting Peterson.

Conventional wisdom, popular inside the Beltway, is certain that if Peterson retires, there is no Democrat who could possibly hold the seat, not even against so flawed a candidate as Fischbach. And a post-Peterson DCCC policy would be to either abandon the district entirely or to recruit and run another Republican-lite Blue Dog like Peterson... but never to try to get behind a populist, progressive Democrat who could take on the GOP form the perspective of MN-07 farming communities deep in recession because of the Trump Trade War and his knee-jerk congressional enablers. Remember, these people admire independents-- and admire Bernie-- and, wisely, hate Pelosi and the DCCC.