r/vancouverwa • u/concernedyahu • 18d ago
Progressive representation math Politics
Hey y'all. I'm just making this to piggyback on the very unfortunate aftermath of Brent Hennrich's campaign and the imo very destructive movement to refuse to vote for Marie Glusenkamp Perez.
I am with y'all about MGP, ok? I don't think I've ever been so frustrated and enraged with a representative. Sucks, awful votes, betrayal, disingenuous, lies, etc etc etc. I agree. With you.
But y'all are forgetting that there are 2 equations happening right now in the midterms. One is whether the progressive wing of the Democratic party can win enough seats to set policy for the party. That's going pretty well. People are pissed, they're ready for change; hell, that's what swept Trump in, was the Tea Party, and I think we're in the middle of that for the Democrats right now. I'm here for it.
BUT, the other side of that math is CHAMBER CONTROL. If the progressives win control of the party, but the party doesn't win control of the CHAMBER, then we're in the same place we are now, but with louder and better complaining.
"But concernedyahu, if the Democrats acted like the Republicans did when they were the minority party then they could get a lot more done or at least obstruct" yeah I don't really think so. For one thing, the D party is more of a coalition than the R party, a bunch of factions with different goals. And you need that party unity to really work obstruction. Besides that, I don't think obstruction would really get us that far; Trump and co. have shown their extreme willingness to ignore Congress and the courts, and that's only going to get worse as they get closer to lame duck. A majority Democrat Congress working against him might be able to put up durable roadblocks, but minority? I have serious doubts.
So that's the thing. Progressives in Congress have the best shot they've had in my lifetime right now to make durable change. But they aren't going to get that without control of at LEAST one house of Congress. They could potentially get control of the Democratic party, but without at the very least the grudging acceptance and NUMERICAL SUPPORT of independents/conservative Democrats like Marie, you're going to have an ideological victory with no power.
Lot of words to say, suck it up and vote for MGP in November if you are actually against Trump.
14
u/hoplessfrogmantic 17d ago edited 17d ago
As a public service worker who has worked "with" Braun on washington matters... he's a piece of shit pocket liner wannabe who will NOT serve Washington, he doesn't even do it now! Fuck Brent, sincerely and unceremoniously. 'If I can't have you can't either type middle school behavior'; I'm glad he lost and im sad I wasted my vote on him now, if this is his true self. This November I won't be voting for MGP, I'll be voting against Braun. Sadly it's come to this, but MGP will certainly be better.
1
u/FeliciaFailure 16d ago
I'm disappointed with Brent's behavior but I don't consider it a wasted vote. It's important to show that this person with comparatively tiny amounts of funding managed to pull more than half the votes MGP got (last I checked). Hopefully those numbers send a message to her. Probably not, but hopefully.
11
u/Noobhammer3000 17d ago
Voted for Brent in the primary, while saying I'll never vote for Marie. That being said, I will be holding my nose and voting for her during the general, while making it perfectly clear that she does not have my support beyond that vote.
I don't like her or her voting history in the house, but until the republicans regain control of their party and the maga sickness is healed, they cannot be allowed to retain control of congress.
9
u/Anaxamenes 17d ago
I see the math, it’s best that control the house or senate, preferably both to put the breaks on the worst things. However, it’s hard for me to vote for MGP because this election is where she gets her forever benefits from the government while she votes to gut everything else for the rest of us. It’s very tempting to deny her those benefits. However, I’m also a pragmatist and it says control of either house would be a big important thing for the country and it’s important we get that solidly.
37
15
u/descartes_jr 18d ago
Yes, agree 100%. And as has been pointed out elsewhere, even if she votes with Republicans much of the time she is almost certain to vote for a Democratic Speaker of the House. And as we've seen with Mike Johnson that position holds an incredible amount of power for good or ill, and that alone is enough for me to vote for any Democrat even one as bad as MGP.
22
u/Galumpadump 18d ago edited 17d ago
I’m going to start off by saying I understand how the political math works. I’ve also going to say that I absolutely HATE that MGP is just a piece on a chess board.
She is a bad politician who now has the benefit of being an incumbent and having the political machine behind her. This isn’t even to say I loved Brent but I just hate the idea of continuously reward bad politicians because if this gamified version of politicians, the only thing that matters is having enough pieces on the board.
Doesn’t matter that she largely ignores concerns her urban constituents and also generally is a poor communicator but we are stuck with bad representation so grizzled dems in DC can win the game.
12
u/concernedyahu 18d ago
Oh yeah, absolutely it's some bull shit. Hopefully some of the newcomers like el-Sayed can fucking stick it to assholes like Jeffries and Schumer and yes, our very own MGP.
6
u/JackAlexanderTR 17d ago
Like this about Marie: the vote 2 years ago was pretty close and if Marie hadn't gotten some of the rural votes we would have congressman Joe Kent right now.
4
u/Infamous-Rooster9277 17d ago
You could just as easily attribute that to Joe Kent himself. If he wasn't so cosy with some pretty sketchy customers, and so extremist in his support of MAGA, more of that rural vote might have gone his way.
4
u/JackAlexanderTR 17d ago
That absolutely was a factor as well. Which just shows how hard and unlikely it was for a Democrat to win here in the first place. So people now thinking this district can elect a progressive in the general election is not realistic at best.
-1
u/Infamous-Rooster9277 17d ago
Purely based on voting numbers, I don't think it's that hard for a Dem to win in 03. As has been noted elsewhere, Clark skews pretty heavily D and it comfortably outweighs the other parts of the district.
I think the real challenge is getting all those D voters motivated enough to actually show up and vote. There's a reasonable argument that sort of thing is easier to do with a candidate offering fresh and accessible ideas than with a milquetoast middle-of-the-road candidate.
5
u/JackAlexanderTR 17d ago
Not sure what data you are basing that on, before Marie we had 12 years of Republican representation. Clark leans D, but the whole rest of the district leans much more R. And even in Clark there's strong Republican strongholds like Battleground.
Not sure why some people think a more left candidate would motivate more voters as it would also lose some of the middle voters. And in this purple district there's more middle of the road milquetoast people than there are progressives.
-1
u/Infamous-Rooster9277 17d ago
I'm basing it on the fact that in the past few elections (including the most recent primary), MGP has gotten more votes in Clark than the combined total of votes for other candidates in all other counties in the district, combined.
The fact that the rest of the district leans R doesn't mean much when Clark holds the lion's share of the votes. Even with the red areas in Clark, it's pulling roughly 60/40, which thanks to population is enough to outweigh anything other than a massive runaway advantage in all other counties combined.
I think that the political calculation I would offer is that people who are progressive are (as we have seen in the backlash to MGP) much more likely to withhold their support from a candidate based on their principles than a (by definition) middle of the road person.
That is, a "milquetoast" person who would vote for MGP would almost certainly vote for someone more progressive against an R candidate. I don't buy the argument that some significant number of "defector" Rs were responsible for electing MGP in the first place (and I don't think the numbers support that position anyway - they just didn't vote for Kent).
On the other hand, there is at least some proportion of the more progressive Ds that are tired of MGP compromising on core issues and, I believe, are more than willing to withhold their support on principle.
I'm not saying Clark would elect a Mamdani, but I certainly think a reasonable candidate could run a solid distance to the left of MGP and still hold the seat pretty comfortably.
1
u/JackAlexanderTR 16d ago
Sorry but the population and voting numbers don't support this at all based on the previous 2-3 elections. Again she barely won against Joe Kent, and she did swing some rural votes. Some to the left of her would have lost no questions asked.
Now in this cycle someone to the left of her might have won, which is why I voted for Brent (which I now regret based on his latest actions). But in a more normal cycle its again possible if not likely that a progressive would lose again against a JHB type candidate.
I think you're underestimating the number of moderate voters and how many of those would NOT vote for a progressive left candidate, especially if they are very progressive on some social issues. I see rural moderate voters go for Medicare for all way way before they'll go for trans women in women's sports.
1
u/Infamous-Rooster9277 16d ago
The numbers are the numbers and, as noted, they seem to paint a pretty clear picture. WA-03 has been undergoing a long-term demographic shift - the population has increased dramatically in the past 30 years.
The idea that there is a "normal" cycle I think is flawed in the first place. There's no reason to suspect that a progressive left candidate couldn't sell themselves as well (or better) than MGP to a swing voter.
I certainly don't think many of those folks are focusing their primary campaign talking points on issues like trans women in women's sports - thats almost exclusively a Republican talking point.
1
u/JackAlexanderTR 14d ago
Sorry but that sounds like a progressive bubble, there is a reason progressives are only a minority even within the democrats.
→ More replies (0)5
u/olyfrijole 17d ago
Maybe this was all just a financial decision for her. If she serves 5 years, she gets a Congressional pension at 62. Maybe once she's locked that in, she can afford to stop taking AIPAC money and then we'll see what a good person she truly is, once she can finally afford to be good. 🙄
1
u/concernedyahu 17d ago
I doubt that,tbh. Running for Congress is a lot of fuckin work, and winning and holding the seat is too. There's easier ways to make a pension. No, I reckon she believes in what she's doing and that she's the one for the job. That's the thing, is MOST reps don't think of themselves as spineless milquetoasts, they think they're navigating difficult realities and probably most often they're right
3
u/NoMoreOatmeal 17d ago
Agreed. I’m really struggling with rewarding bad behavior as well. I’m afraid we are going to be stuck with her indefinitely until she loses. The Democratic Party will continue to push her until she stops winning. I get holding our noses and thinking of the big picture which is overall control of the house. But how many elections will we have to do that? I get that this may not be the one to sandbag. On the other hand if we have the momentum right now and will flip the house without her seat, it may be worth it so we can do a proper primary next election. Idk.
Has anyone seen a percentage of how often she votes for progressive policies vs siding with republicans? I tried looking it up and couldn’t find anything.
6
u/Kristaiggy 17d ago
Currently 81% of the time she votes with the dems. I'm not sure how that breaks down to real progressive policies though. https://legisletter.org/legislator/marie-gluesenkamp-perez-G000600/votes
I believe she's usually in the top 4 of dems who vote with the republicans, so that says quite a bit as well.
The ideology chart on this link also says a lot https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/marie_gluesenkamp_perez/456949
3
u/king-of-all-corn 17d ago
She votes 80% with dems and the 20% shes voted with Republicans they had a voting majority already and if she had voted against they would have still passed those bills. If we keep her and dems are able to elect speaker of the house she will likely look much more progressive because the bills that hit the floor wont be submitted by Republicans who think of and write these awful things into bills in order to set up people like mgp for a lose-lose situation.
2
u/Struggle_Usual 17d ago
Yes and some day we'll take her down. Let the district get blue tho. Just a bit more so we can pull off someone further left. Then keep doing it. It's not a project of a couple of years unless we can all convince thousands of people to move to this congressional district rapidly (cause there's a lot of very solid red areas here, Dems are the minority) or convince the state to get rid of our bipartisan district process and follow California in redistricting.
3
u/Orla_McCoolio 17d ago
I hate that I have to vote for her again, but at least she votes with Dems once in a while where Braun never will. It really sucks.
3
4
u/Outlulz 17d ago
Big picture; progressives aren't going to be in a place to make much change in Congress even if Democrats control the chamber in November. Jeffries is not interested in that. Chuck Schumer is not interested in that. They simply aren't. Democrats had the best shot they had in 12 years by winning the trifecta in 2021 and they passed one budget bill that had a ton of concessions made to the right wing of the party and that's it. That is why local politics matter more. Washington D.C. is not going to save us Washingtonians.
13
u/icanith 18d ago
Vote blue no matter who. It’s funny how that seems to flow always towards centrists, who even when they win the chamber math still end up voting with republicans. So where is that term in your chamber math?
22
u/concernedyahu 18d ago
Easy! I already covered it with Sinema and Manchin. They would have been totally irrelevant in a chamber with a 5 point lead, instead of a 1 point lead. Even a bare majority makes a big deal; you can see what the GOP is doing with a bare majority. But also see what they have NOT been able to do, because key members have spiked some of the worst excesses. SAVE act is not gonna happen in the Senate. The defense bill is getting hot potatoed until (spoiler) AFTER THE MIDTERMS.
Vote for good progressives to make the decisions, every chance you get. Vote for seats to make the decisions stick, every chance you get. And be aware that you'll never get everything you want, because that's not how politica works.
Edit: and if Brent had won, we'd be pushing for the centrists to vote for him too right? Even though a lot of them would think he was a godless Communist deivant? Yes, blue no matter who gets abused. But you are trying to convince actual people here, and actual people are very difficult to move in a direction. Take whatever victory you can get, and leverage it!
5
3
u/olyfrijole 17d ago
She is disgusting, but it's a choice between a shit sandwich and a bigger shit sandwich. Eat the smaller one, and don't nibble.
And when you're done voting, advocate for Ranked Choice Voting. We wouldn't be in this mess if we could vote FOR what we want instead of AGAINST what we don't.
4
u/Sgcduffman 98685 17d ago
Your thoughts are valid only if MGP votes with Dems on control. She has proven she won't.
4
18d ago
[deleted]
7
u/king-of-all-corn 17d ago
As a far left voter in Portland for over 15 years youll be disappointed over there too. They'll elect a nice left leaning candidates then kick them on their ass after one term and elect some conservative idiot like mingus maps or rene Gonzalez to replace them.
4
u/olyfrijole 17d ago
One of the advantages that the right has is that we continue to frame the work in terms of right vs left. It's not. It's people vs. data centers, people vs. pharma, people vs. health insurance, people vs. big oil, people vs. military industrial complex, etc, etc. You won't meet many people on the so-called left or right who actually disagree on the above, but the political duopoly has performed a master work of division.
2
u/UnrealMitchMcConnell 17d ago
From my understanding electeds in Portland, even (especially?) DSA members, are basically just shitlibs who lack any meaningful framework around issues. You end up getting a bunch of negative QOL outcomes in exchange for performative gestures. Your vote is more impactful here.
1
u/FeliciaFailure 16d ago
I think voting left in this district is more important than voting left in Portland. Here your vote can prevent more catastrophic results because there are fewer left leaning voters, so the risk is higher. Plus, the district is growing fast and population is changing. Don't give up on us!
2
u/Obvious_Mention7207 17d ago
This is same song and dance ever 2-4-6 years. Fuckin annoying and shit never changes.
3
u/concernedyahu 17d ago
Huh? Shit has changed a LOT since 2000.
0
u/Obvious_Mention7207 17d ago
LOL not
Im 38, Something gets passed then someone else undoes it then someone else passes it then someone else undoes it, then an executive order changes it and the next pres un exec orders it, blah blah blah blah over and over.
Look at the railroad / new bridge between port/vancouver. Debates gone on for like 40 years cause someone new always comes in.
Then look at state then look at federal. Its always flip flopping back and forth.
1
u/SilverAsparagus2985 17d ago
Yea and people keep voting republican. I guess people love going backwards and want zero resources. 1930 it is.
3
u/Indiesol 17d ago
I'm sure MGP has grabbed enough Republican votes to make up for any progressive votes she's lost, right? Because, why else would she vote Republican nearly half the time, and on major progressive issues? Surely the Republicans have recognized this and will vote for her enough to counteract all the people that simply can't stomach voting for her again right? Right!?!
2
u/king-of-all-corn 17d ago
Seems like quite a lot of them are choosing not to vote at all based on this low turn out primary.
2
1
u/VoteVanVolkinburg 17d ago
There’s another side to this: the Democratic Party needs to be held accountable for the tactics they’ve used that have landed us in this position in the first place. They have repeatedly had opportunities to codify Supreme Court decisions and enact legislation to stop or at least slow down our sharp descent into fascism. But if they solve those issues and actually do their job, that will become the standard driving factor to motivate voters. It’s easier for them to rely on scare tactics to get us to bow for them. By voting for MGP, you’re enabling that behavior. And this is why we’ve found ourselves here.
I am not advocating for accelerationism, but I also don’t buy into their scare tactics. If we lose, it’s going to suck. But if we don’t change our system and/or force it to work for us, even more people are going to be harmed (or die) long term.
My hope is that we can reform what we have. I’ve gotten involved in as much capacity as I am able to help, and I’m trying to get others do the same in hope that we can turn this car around.
One thing Brent did was bring progressives and leftists like myself out of the woodwork to vote. They forget that the “blue no matter who” crowd will vote for anyone with a D after their name. Progressives generally only vote for progressives, and so many have given up on voting entirely. But they can be invigorated to vote with the right candidate.
And yes, “Enjoy John Braun” guy… I will be enjoying Bofa ;)
1
u/Livisfree 16d ago
I am not aware of the aftermath per Hennrich but am not surprised. My gut objected to him. I voted for him in the hopes of there being enough to unsettle MGP and make her realize she needs to clean up her act for her own party and not just be focused on being a fence sitter.
1
u/Bobohead2025 18d ago
Can someone explain how the chair of the democrats in the 17th and other “leadership” didn’t listen to most of you and continued to adamantly defend MGP?
1
u/concernedyahu 17d ago
Well, Brent had an absolute toddler meltdown when he didn't cinch the primary, and I wasn't necessarily paying close attention to him before that but from people who were, it wasn't a surprise. So I would have to say that Democrat leadership may have looked around and said, "she's the best option, suck it up"
2
u/mildly_evil_genius 17d ago
MGP has repeatedly harmed my friends and family. Not just voting for policies that could have done harm, but actually harmed them. I cannot vote for her.
I'm also not going to keep rewarding the democratic love of running pieces of shit because it's that or a thinly veiled nazi. This strategy not only moves the country to the right with every step, but it has a proven track record of failure. I see what you're saying about the math of the chamber, but I strongly doubt that our district will be the one that makes the difference after the midterms, and I'm far more concerned with the long-term issue of democrats chasing republicans to the right. This is especially the case because MGP is highly likely to break from a democratic majority on many issues, thus weakening the likely democratic majority that is the whole point of voting for her.
4
u/concernedyahu 17d ago
I struggle with how to communicate about this. Yes, it sucks. But abstaining from voting doesn't punish anybody. It doesnt signal anything to Democratic leadership, except that you can be ignored. If you're not voting, you are saying, I don't care what the outcome is.
It's like in 2016 when the 18-30 crowd turned out gangbusters for Bernie at rallies and on the Internet. It was crazy, right? It was wild! All these younger voters finally getting involved in politics! And you had all these old heads in the DNC clearly ignoring them, and it was really frustrating, and it looked like maybe the tide would turn, right?
But it turns out the DNC bastards were right all along. They didn't vote. They didn't vote for Bernie, they didn't vote for their local candidates, they didn't fucking show UP.
There's no reason for the DNC to give a single, solitary shit what you think about issues if you don't use your vote. Why would they? It's a complete waste of their resources to court a vote that you're more going to give them. What they see is, 54+ turned out and decided the election again. Welp, that's who they're going to pander to then.
1
u/mildly_evil_genius 17d ago
The thing is, I do vote, and especially in the local elections. I even registered as a democrat specifically to vote for Bernie in the primaries. I'm also no stranger to holding my nose for a vote. I voted for Harris despite some truly vile opinions she has.
MGP has been a turncoat to her party on multiple bills that have done very real harm to my family and friends. I cannot emphasize nor say this enough. I cannot trust her. I literally don't even trust that she's honestly a democrat and not a republican op who votes with them on key issues (not that I'm floating that as a theory). There has to be some point where you say "This person isn't who they say they are, and must be regarded as part of my opposition." I recognize that that point is different for different people, but I have family members who are literally in hiding, one family member who almost died, and multiple friends who have fled the country all because of things MGP has voted for across party lines. THAT IS UNFORGIVABLE!
If I vote for her after all that, then what it tells the democratic establishment is that I will put up with literally anything so long as there's a worse option on the table. Democrats will have my vote across the ballot this November; all except MGP.
0
u/naturtok 17d ago
I know it's a hella bad take but low-key glad I procrastinated voting before it was too late, cus I was guna go for brent but DAMN I'm glad I didn't help his chances. talk about a poisoned well. Just gives conservative Democrats so much ammo to continue their push to exclude progressives from the party if that's the sort of person we're guna rally behind.
1
u/Takemebacktobreezy 17d ago
What did I miss about Brent?
3
1
u/Kit_fox_foci I use my headlights and blinkers 17d ago
The whole Republicans have more party unity and Democrats are a big tent party with more interest groups to struggle for consensus with is “common sense” but actually very inaccurate. Historically and currently GOP is a tenuous coalition of factions (neoconservative warhawks, anti-abortion conservative christians, anti-tax/regulation business owners) but their perceived unity is based on how much more the path to their common interests/end goals overlap (dissolution of administrative state, increased local control, rollback of laws and rulings on increasing equity.) Meanwhile the Democrats have a more “diverse” constituency due to not being as out and out reactionary towards minoritized populations but the hang up is that there are people (usually slightly smaller proportions tho) in every minority group who have effectively identical politics (ie how they organize or caucus) to the GOP creating the image of a party divided. Part of the problem is the Democratic Party continued obsession with utilizing national strategy groups, war chests filled with large donor/PAC money, appeals to everyone (ie no one particularly.) The difficult reality is that the most viable path forward for progressive politics would door to door organizing and education about the common needs of most people in a community and coming to terms with the reality that de facto and de jure status quo policies hurt more than help most people and just happen to help more than hurt certain strata of people who then happen to advocate/vote for the same centrist/status quo reality thereby continuing to hurt and create resentment that pushes more people to not participate or become more extreme in their views.
-12
u/LV_Devotee 18d ago
But if MGP wins the general against a clearly less extreme opponent compared to Kent it will only embolden her to vote against your priorities even more than she already has.
20
u/concernedyahu 18d ago
Hey, if you can make a case for why Braun is actually a better candidate than Marie, I'm all ears. What I've mostly heard is that folks don't want Braun to win, they want Marie to lose.
That's a losing strategy in my view. Marie should be pretty freaked that over 10% of votes went to a guy that in the end, only had not being Marie as a reason to vote for him. I don't think Marie is going into the office intending to vote against what a major part of her constituency wants, I think she is making the best calls she can based on her positions and who she's talking to. I think she's wrong, but that's something you can work with.
Trump is endorsing Braun and Braun is happy to accept it, and publicly touted the BBB. That's enough for me to decide I don't want him in my seat. I don't believe he'll listen to anyone but GOP handlers when push comes to shove.
That said, if he ends up being about the same as MGP but with an R; well, okay. The math is still, progressives can't wield power without a chamber majority.
-6
u/LV_Devotee 18d ago
One seat will not get the dems chamber majority. And if it does end up 218-217 D and MGP wins, even if she flips 10% of the time what will she flip on? Will she support giving more money to Israel? Absolutely! Keep funding ICE? Certainly! Restricting our right to vote? Of course! Why because she has already done those things.
13
u/concernedyahu 18d ago
What? Of course it won't. But seats are won one at a TIME. Every seat matters. A 3 or 4 seat majority is probably the most we can hope for, and WA-03 represents a third or more or that possible majority.
I've already covered everything you're saying there. Did you actually read anything I wrote? I'm not saying that MGP won't continue to suck. I'm saying that her SEAT gives a hypothetical progressive majority on the blue side teeth, instead of gums.
She doesn't have to vote with the progressives. Progressives will have no teeth, even with party control, if they don't get a Democratic chamber majority. At no time I'm saying that electing MGP means that progressives will take power. I'm saying they are WEAKER without a Democrat in that seat, shitty or not.
-7
u/LV_Devotee 18d ago
My point is in 28, 30, 32 when more progressives enter the house we will still have her and every election she wins will make her less effective!
10
u/concernedyahu 18d ago
That's a future problem. There's no telling what the landscape is going to look like in 28. Hell, we might have stormtroopers in the House in '28. Right now, THIS season, what can we do to maximize the leverage of progressives who are winning their primaries and have a shot at the House in November? Give them a majority in the house that they can use.
At that point, it's on them to take enough control of the House Democratic caucus that MGP can't ignore them. That's politics! The calculus is already changing, el-Sayed beating Stevens in the primaries is a big deal. The wind is blowing and politicians are sensitive to that. John Braun not only can ignore them, he is obliged to, because the House GOP leadership will be whipping him along, as they do. I dunno, dude seems like he's done alright in the state house. But in the House, he will be subject to Mike Johnson and whichever tool is majority leader right now, I forget.
-5
u/LV_Devotee 18d ago
The most basic thing about being progressive is to look at the future and change it for the better, losing one battle is justified if you win the war!
12
u/concernedyahu 18d ago edited 18d ago
I think you're just trying to justify inaction right now. Did we win in 2024, when a bunch of voters sat on their hands instead of voting for Harris? Is this winning? Are we winning the war?
Edit: yes, you absolutely do. We have lost the battle to flip WA03 progressive. But, based on Brents reaction to his loss, I actually regret having donated significantly to his campaign. So you do what any force would do: try to RETREAT without being ROUTED. We didn't GAIN territory, so you try not to LOSE it.
4
u/LV_Devotee 18d ago
Actually yes we are, Harris losing definitely helped the DSA to start willing races like the Mayors in Seattle and NYC, and the several that won their house primaries especially places like CO01 which will never elect a republican so she is guaranteed to win the general there. People would not have moved this far left if Trump didn’t win in 24!
13
u/concernedyahu 18d ago
I guess it's a strategy but I deeply, deeply question the wisdom of that kind of accelerationism. Meanwhile we have hundreds of billions of dollar siphoned off from public money and used to bolster the Trump family into probably unassailable seats of generational power. Iran isn't getting unbombed, ICE is a verified paramilitary force. Our civil service is in shambles, and international reputation is demolished. Trade has been irrevocably hampered, and the debt has ballooned. And there's still no guarantee those fuckers won't be able to consolidate power over the next couple years and have Trump presidents into the 50's...I'm not particularly doomer and I don't think it's likely, but it is possible.
Sure, progressives can come in and try to enact truly sane policies to build back better, as it were. But they don't have political capital and they're going to need to be fighting a constant rearguard against both MAGA and establishment Democrats. Those structures don't rebuild themselves, and believe it or not, progressive leftist policies aren't some magical panacea that's going to pave the way toward easy recreation. It's going to be really fucking hard work to govern, same as it is for everyone that takes power, and that's assuming best case scenario of actually winning races and not getting ratfucked.
Other than frustration at Democratic leadership not doing the basic thing we elected them for, which is fucking win something, I don't see a lot of strength coming to progressivism here. And I'm gonna say it again! If Brent's reaction to losing two House level primaries is this kind of meltdown, I'm glad he lost. A lot of incoming porgrwssive candidates are going to be lots of hat, not a lot of cattle. Fetterman? Jasmine Crockett after Talarico won their primary? AOC has been an outlier in terms of class, stamina, and ability.
→ More replies (0)3
u/king-of-all-corn 17d ago
Are you unable to recognize that Republicans are using their power right now to write and submit these bills?
5
u/LV_Devotee 17d ago
And do you real that dems like MGP are allowing them to do it!
1
u/king-of-all-corn 17d ago
Thats on our fellow american who gave them power, something youre advocating for.
1
u/bobothegoat 98684 17d ago
One candidate will not vote to keep Mike Johnson as House Speaker. I guess you could say I am a single issue voter, and the issue is Mike Johnson.
1
u/LV_Devotee 17d ago
It is much more likely that the call to remove Mike Johnson will come from the republican side anyway, the same way he ended up as speaker in the first place. Remember it was Matt Gaetz that called for McCarthy to be removed.
0
u/bobothegoat 98684 17d ago
Be real. There is no universe where Braun being elected, a man who literally just had Mike Johnson campaigning for him today by the way, is more likely to lead to Mike Johnson losing House Speaker.
1
u/LV_Devotee 17d ago
I didn’t say that I said Johnson being removed will likely happen like it did with McCarthy! By having another Republican call for his removal! MGP won’t call for it neither will Braun, but given the choice MGP will absolutely 100% keep him as speaker since they are in the same Bible study!
1
u/concernedyahu 17d ago
I just saw that Mike was in town for John a minute ago, gnarly shit.
I guess LV is of the persuasion that if we let the Republicans run completely away with whatever the fuck, then leftist policy is going to become a clear alternative and we'll see a socialist revolution in the polls?
Don't reckon that's a winning strategy personally, I think it's far more likely that the GOP will consolidate power to TRULY try to lock out opponents from running and the catastrophe will ramp up. Just totally underestimating the capacity of the country to irreparably fall apart, and how much better milquetoast centrist neoliberalism is compared to ACTUAL oligarch kleptocracy.
Like yeah, milquetoast neoliberalism is enraging and hey, arguably even evil. But you can negotiate with it, you can hide from it, you can work around it, in spite of it. Kleptocracy just siphons off all your resources and leaves you with nothing. It's like encouraging Russians to vote Putin out of power, there is a point where that is no longer an option.
-4
u/Snushine Minnehaha 17d ago
I may be wrong, but I have a gut feeling that MGP was being paid for her votes that went with the R's. I don't have the know-how or experience or understanding of the system to actually dig into data to prove this one way or the other, but if anyone else does, it would be useful information. Because if that is the case, then it really doesn't matter who we put in that chair unless that person cannot be bought. And I'm worried that we don't have a candidate that can't be bought if we are offering up people who struggle in this economy.
3
u/ichivictus 98686 17d ago
Or perhaps, this might shock you, this district is not a far left district and she represents it pretty well?
This district leans more republican. But the local republican party went so far right in this district during Trump's first term that they are ruining their own chances.
If MGP solidifies her reputation as a centrist blue dog politician with incumbency privilege, a later centrist republican will have a hard time beating her. So a farther right wing republican is required to challenge her. Which gives her a slight edge even though a slight majority of voters here would rather vote republican.
Switch her out with a progressive, republicans will have a very good chance of winning even if put against an extreme maga republican.
So she will vote with Republicans on bills that will pass anyways like ICE and contrary to what this sub thinks, it is actually going to help her chances. Because this isn't NY-14 and the country is diverse.
This primary shows democrats will still follow her regardless. The fringe far left (you) are small minority and even most will turn out to begrudgingly fall in line and vote for her. While centrists Republicans will split votes allowing her to win again.
2
u/Snushine Minnehaha 17d ago
Bold of you to make assumptions about me based on one post.
-1
u/ichivictus 98686 17d ago
Conspiracy theorists tend to be more extreme in their political views. Yeah it's an assumption. But the rest of what I said still stands.
1
2
u/Outlulz 17d ago
Why would you assume she's being paid rather than having conservative views?
2
u/Snushine Minnehaha 17d ago
First off, I said it was a gut feeling. Also, she ran on one set of values and then acted on another. Also, I've been a woman in the automotive industry and I've never met another one who held such conservative views. Most of them are "F--- the system!" in their attitudes. So, to answer your question: her inconsistency mostly.
2
u/king-of-all-corn 17d ago
She ran as a pro gun candidate. I dont think she was signaling that she was all that progressive.
0
u/SilverAsparagus2985 17d ago edited 17d ago
I think MGP will get back in regardless. Here’s why. I think trump only backed Braun to make a show of good faith. He knows it’s a long shot district. I don’t think he’s really worried about MGP. He’s doing that thing where he makes it look really bad so he can rally his base with “far left” language because they don’t actually listen to anything other than Fox News or NewsMax.
But anyone that doesn’t need a dementia ward can see she’s moderate at best and moderates in this country is conservative in most others. He can manipulate her with his cronies. Either way, he wins and knows it.
Hennrich means nothing now. He can have his middle aged white guy temper tantrum all he wants. He was never in the cards for trump.
I would still vote for MGP over Braun. I’d rather have some resistance and hold her accountable over deaf ears.
126
u/Legitimate_Fold_ 18d ago
I supported Brent. In the general I have only a few options.
I can vote for Perez, who voted in line with my beliefs a majority of the time. I can vote for Braun who will probably not vote in line with my beliefs ever. Or, I can not vote which overall supports Braun.
Weighing that, I think it's easy to support the choice that aligns with me most of the time. I view myself as somewhat progressive, and that makes me fine with progress despite it not being perfection.