"Progressives" Win Big Over Establishment Democrats

[Brainster]

Are they overreaching?

The biggest — and most surprising — news of the night was nonprofit executive Kara Eastman’s nomination in Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District. Although former U.S. Rep. Brad Ashford had both the money and the backing of national Democrats, Eastman defeated him 51 percent to 49 percent. Like many of Tuesday’s victorious Democrats, Eastman won by throwing red (blue?) meat to the liberal base: Where Ashford touted his ability to build consensus in Congress, Eastman promised confrontation and, well, resistance to President Trump.

The potential problem for Democrats is that Eastman’s outspoken liberalism may turn off general-election voters in Nebraska’s 2nd District, which, while not ruby red, is still red.

Some of these folks are really, really progressive:

Two openly socialist candidates — as in, dues-paying members of Pittsburgh’s chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America — won Democratic primaries for the Pennsylvania state House of Representatives last night.

My take? If this turns out to be a wave election in favor of the Democrats, they can go for the gusto. But if it turns out to be closer, then they may regret not going for the establishment candidates.

 

[BStrong]

Our local SF candidates across the democratic field are identifying themselves as "Progressives," not "Democrats."

Another interesting development at the local and state level is the number of democrats running against Trump or the NRA instead of the other candidates for the office in question.

 

[theprestige]

Our local SF candidates across the democratic field are identifying themselves as "Progressives," not "Democrats."

Another interesting development at the local and state level is the number of democrats running against Trump or the NRA instead of the other candidates for the office in question.

This seems like a weird strategy, especially in SF, where that's the progressive baseline. The only way the candidates can set themselves apart is either by differentiating on the issues, or by being even more vehement in their anti-trumpism.

 

[Upchurch]

Some of these folks are really, really progressive:

Two openly socialist candidates — as in, dues-paying members of Pittsburgh’s chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America — won Democratic primaries for the Pennsylvania state House of Representatives last night.

My understanding is that democratic socialism and socialism are two different things. It appears the National Review is drawing a false equivalency.

 

[BStrong]

This seems like a weird strategy, especially in SF, where that's the progressive baseline. The only way the candidates can set themselves apart is either by differentiating on the issues, or by being even more vehement in their anti-trumpism.

You're correct.

The democrats in S.F. have gotten to the point where they distance themselves from any possible connection to our former Mayor Willie Brown - probably the smartest politician that ever held that office and arguably the best Mayors the city has seen because he isn't "progressive" enough.

Willie Brown is so smart that a review of his tenure in California politics in comparison to Bill Clinton exposes Clinton as the hillbilly hick he really is.

If he could run for Mayor again I'd vote for him early and often.

Our current crop of candidates for almost every office is ridiculous. Usually you can sift through the candidates for one or two that wouldn't turn your stomach to vote for, but not this election season.

 

[Trakar]

Our local SF candidates across the democratic field are identifying themselves as "Progressives," not "Democrats."

Another interesting development at the local and state level is the number of democrats running against Trump or the NRA instead of the other candidates for the office in question.

While I see a similar set of characteristics, at least throughout the western coastal states, and I applaud those who are correctly using and winning with the label Progressive, I hope this "resistance" (or "nay-sayer") cadre is limited to the mid-terms as I don't see rigid opposition to all things Trump, GOP, or conservidiot (social and economic foolishness) as productive to generating large scale, enthusiastic support among the general population.

 

[theprestige]

... Or even on this forum.

"Conservidiot".

You know there are conservatives on this forum. And you know that kind of rhetoric doesn't help you with them. But you can't. Resist. Going there. Anyway.

Do you think the general public will forget how you really feel? Do you think a cynical change of rhetoric will fool them about the extent of your disdain for them?

 

[Dr. Keith]

Are they overreaching?



Some of these folks are really, really progressive:



My take? If this turns out to be a wave election in favor of the Democrats, they can go for the gusto. But if it turns out to be closer, then they may regret not going for the establishment candidates.

There are progressive voters who believe that the Democratic Party shares some of the blame for Trump. Even if you don't share that view, and I really don't care to debate it, the Party did not come out of the last election looking great. Distancing from the party is good for those voters.

 

[Brainster]

My understanding is that democratic socialism and socialism are two different things. It appears the National Review is drawing a false equivalency.

On their website they claim to be carrying in the tradition of Eugene Debs and Mother Jones, and they were founded by Michael Harrington.

 

[Trebuchet]

Some of these folks are really, really progressive:

Ahh, modern conservatism, where progress and democracy are bad things.

 

[logger]

Ahh, modern conservatism, where progress and democracy are bad things.

There isn’t any progress or any semblance to democracy with liberals of today.

The ideas are on the right or right of center.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

The DSA, like Bernie Sanders, is usually more "social democrat" than "democratic socialist", in spite of any self-identification. Looking at these candidates' websites, you see the usual healthcare for all, free education, anti-incarceration, $15 minimum wage, etc. Not exactly seizing the means of production. They want to call themselves socialist, because they are ironically buying into the conservative rhetoric that the current free market ideology==capitalism, and that the Scandinavian countries==socialism.

 

[Brainster]

Here's another Dem (grandson of Henry Wallace, no less), who's got some 'splaining to do:

The foundation run by the newly minted Democratic candidate for Congress in one of the most heavily Jewish congressional districts in the country has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to organizations that promote the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign against Israel.

Scott Wallace, a multimillionaire philanthropist and the grandson of former vice president Henry Wallace, won the party primary in Pennsylvania’s Bucks County outside Philadelphia on Tuesday night, earning him the right to face off against first-term incumbent Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Here's another Dem (grandson of Henry Wallace, no less), who's got some 'splaining to do:

Of the ones detailed, only the one to "Jewish Voice for Peace" seems to be directly related to BDS. Code Pink, Haymarket Books, etc. look like reaching.

 

[Brainster]

Of the ones detailed, only the one to "Jewish Voice for Peace" seems to be directly related to BDS. Code Pink, Haymarket Books, etc. look like reaching.

And Galloway?

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

And Galloway?

Eh, still in the question of, "Is it a pattern of support for anti-Israeli people, or is it supporting the left that has a pattern of anti-Israeli belief?"

 

[BrooklynBaby]

How much does Kara Eastman make working for the non-profit? What is her net worth?

 

[Venom]

What they espouse strikes me as the old red rose social democracy,

not scary Socialism.

Which is great, because they are just bringing back a very American tradition in the spirit of TR, FDR, JFK, LBJ, even Nixon, an underrated US President.

I like em and I hope they succeed.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Indeed.
This is a return to the norm; it only seems extreme because the pendulum has swung so far to the right.

 

[Brainster]

How much does Kara Eastman make working for the non-profit? What is her net worth?

Not sure about net worth, but Guidestar says her salary was 115K in 2016 and 100K in 2015. She's the only paid officer at the Omaha Healthy Kids Alliance, which apparently is aimed at removing or abating mold and lead-based paint in Omaha dwellings. Travel seems a little high for such a local charity at $34K in 2016. Overall it looks like about 14.5% ($92,000) of their donations ($635,000) actually went to "Grants and Other Assistance" and the remainder was eaten up in overhead.

My guess is that their donor list is a select few of the trial lawyers of Omaha. This is the kind of thing that accident lawyers have set up--where they have a network of chiropractors and auto-repair shops that all feed each other.

BTW, the really interesting candidate in terms of net worth is Scott Wallace. According to the article I linked, he would be the third wealthiest member of Congress (either branch).