Home | About | Donate

'A Network of Alternative Campaign Infrastructure': Progressives Reject DCCC Threats on Primary Challengers

#1

'A Network of Alternative Campaign Infrastructure': Progressives Reject DCCC Threats on Primary Challengers

Eoin Higgins, staff writer

As tensions escalate in an internal battle between the centrist and left wings of the Democratic Party, a group of progressives is making a move to begin a new left wing party apparatus.

A decision by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee late last month to blacklist vendors that support primary challengers over party incumbents drew a line in the sand against the potential progressive overthrow of the party's established order.

1 Like

#2

A schism in the Democrat party? Could this be the harbinger of total collapse? Is Brand D going the way of the Whigs at long last?

I would urge those Ds who have rightly rejected neoliberalism to abandon that sinking ship and join the Greens. The Green platform is anti-war, anti-racist, anti-misogynist and anti-corporate; it’s pro-environment, pro-economic justice, pro-worker and pro-internationalism.

Brand D is every bit as corrupt, venal and contemptuous of small-d democracy as Brand R, if marginally better at hiding it. The duopoly’s days are numbered, and anything that serves to further that eventuality is to be applauded.

9 Likes

#3

“We reject the DCCC’s attempt to hoard power”

Excellent. Hold your ground and keep your powder dry. It takes a long time to wrest democracy back from the Corporatists.

We need more like Bernie, and AOC,

7 Likes

#4

And this is the lie on the DCCC website … Dims need to do some introspection.

OUR CAMPAIGN IS POWERED BY

GRASSROOTS SUPPORTERS LIKE YOU

2 Likes

#5

The Democratic Party is at a crossroads and establishment party politics are not going to successfully lead us into the future," said Franco. “We need new voices and bold ideas from people who represent the diversity of the country and are willing to lead the new American majority that is built by movements for social justice.”

Hear, Hear!

3 Likes

#6

You have to deserve to be re-elected.

This protectionist policy is UN-Democratic and UN-American.

It makes no sense to re-elect a Conservative Democrat that has been an obstacle to Progressive Legislation.

Ladies, stand your ground and continue to fight for the People who voted for you, not the Corporate Masters handing out tempting Bribes.

7 Likes

#7

We’ve got a policy that the caucus supports, the leadership supports, and it plays the long game," said Bustos.

Playing Games, while the People Starve, live in Homelessness and Insecurity.
Course ol’ Bustos’s Money keeps Rolling In.

Pretty bad when one has to remind the Leaders that this is not a game, This is People’s Lives.

The aspect of caving to a Corrupt Tom DeLay or a Corrupt Mitch McConnell or a Corrupt Nancy Pelosi or a Corrupt Steny Hoyer, it’s all the SAME.

This is NOT A GAME.
The MONEY that keeps these People in Power needs to be stopped

Our Lives and the Future of a Collapsing Ecosystem Depends on Stopping the Corruption and this is how it is done.

From the Grassroots Up.

See you Jackasses in the Primaries, cause my MONEY is going to the People who CARE

8 Likes

#8

LOL !
didn’t know that they considered Corporations, lobbyists, 1% “Grass Roots”

Send Money directly to Candidates, not the DCCC, or DNC

3 Likes

#9

keep the heat on the plastic astro turf… it will melt like honey in the mid-day sunlight of mid summer.

2 Likes

#10

I could be wrong, but something tells me that the D institutional twists are attempts at a number of gambits. First and foremost to keep the leverage for and by highly centralized economic interests -this is where D or R matters not. BUT, the duopoly is also looking at ten years of running down the clock on the FED money printing ponzi scheme - its is now a dead parrot. What does that mean for the corporateers? As many have noted - you cannot taper a ponzi scheme. They have been scrambling like eggs under a whisk in a frying pan to CENTRALIZE their centralizing’s centralization. In the political context - that is the definition of facism. It is what capitalism does EVERY TIME it runs out the clock in order to do major capture and prevent change at its weak points. Hence TRILLIONS into military by other [corporate] names.

Bozo, I mean Bezos and the F#!ing around with state tax base for a “headquarters” to the tune of billions is a “prime” example. Look at pharmaceuticals, look at the hoispital system being washed down the drain by F()$$#! “medical insurance industry” other wise known by more concise expletives. Look at agriculture - weaponized by the major chemical corporations. Extractive mining on a scale that exceeds all concepts of scale itself.

we are in the age of EXTRACTION running over the cliff into the abyss

Civilization? Its in your heart, soul and everyday activities. Tune in, turn on and drop out. Make your every action an affirmation of healthy civil life. Make this nightmare of parasites irrelevant. It might take a couple of generations - but us boomers have to put the entirety of the remainders of lives into this.

2 Likes

#11

The idea that a “centrist” is the best electoral choice, generally, in 2019 is absurd. Maybe it is in some high income areas, but in most places, DOA. First off, in many of these races, especially mid-term elections, turnout can be as low as 25-30%. Meaning, the winning enters office sometimes with support of 10-20% of the voting age population. How in the world can anyone claim that any one strategy is the only strategy when the overwhelming majority of people don’t even bother to vote? And this all isn’t about joining a team and then pretending that you win if your team wins. If a Democrat wins but that Democrat is like Dan Lipinski, what the hell good is his victory as far as policy? Being less bad might make sense on one single level, playing defense, but they don’t play good defense and you can’t play defense forever. Eventually, you need something to go on the offensive with. The problem for “centrists” (center of what?) is that they think the system is fine as is, maybe in need of some tinkering. Well, we live in a country where wages haven’t growth in decades, inequality is massive and growing, huge infrastructure gap, the costs of education, housing and healthcare have been far outpacing wage growth for a long time, we have an environmental crisis, etc. If the “centrists” are just fine with a healthcare system (they are) that kills tens of thousands a year, results in bankruptcies, job lock, a reliance on employers, and if they are okay with the most inefficient and costly (they are) healthcare system in the world, okay. That says a hell of a lot as far as what they offer. What they offer is horrific, and wouldn’t be acceptable in any other developed country. Shouldn’t be acceptable here. We have to progress not only on policy, but morally, and these people are obstacles in the end far more than the Republicans are. The Republicans are horrible, but entirely beatable. These rotten people rig the thing to stay in power, and so they and not the Republicans are key to beating back the left. In the end, that and further enriching and empowering their donors is about all they are good at.

2 Likes

#12

There are some principled individuals who don’t want to wait on the revolution, but who want to be in congress now, making an immediate difference. Until we have ranked choice voting and entirely public election financing, the only recourse they have is challenging the assholes currently in power. To do this, they feel, with much justification, they must run as Democrats. A progressive form of the DCCC, assisting such principled primary challenges/challengers, is most welcome.

2 Likes

#13

I have major problems with the Fed, I want it to go away and for the Treasury to be responsible for the entirety of money creation. But explain what you mean by a Ponzi scheme. I am interested, just want to hear what you mean by it.

Many boomers have voted, for decades now, for really, really bad politicians, and that continues. The data shows that older voters continue to vote for politicians that continue to make the system, the environment, our democracy, our economy, much worse. I don’t know exactly what happened with boomers, but your generation did benefit from a wide range of policies (including in many parts of the country, publicly financed higher education) that they over time voted to dismantle. And now, with our huge problems, with the infrastructure gap that those politicians fed into, with the environmental crisis that has gotten progressively worse, boomers in large numbers continue to vote for people that make it impossible to deal with these problems. Before you respond, I am not saying that every boomer is like that, I have family that is not like that, but the numbers and the voting records are clear on this. I only hope those decisions haven’t completely doomed the youth.

0 Likes

#14

WHAT??   The DamnocRatic Establishment telling a fib?  Why I never . . .

AMEN!!, Phred — and don’t forget to boycott the DSCC as well.

Right On!!  Primary P’Loser, and get that worn-out old witch OUT of There!!  (Note that “Primary” as used here is a verb.)   And the same goes for Dirty Debbie Duhbya-Ass – Krooked Shilliary’s right-hand stooge.)

2 Likes

#15

A curious fact of the DCCCs program is that it means it will not support any primary challenge to AOC or the other newly elected progressives she aligns herself with. The DCCC is the campaign arm of incumbent Democrats, period. The result true enough is to buttress the hunkered down, do the minimum, time servers.

0 Likes

#16

How is that any better? If AOC’s constituents want her to face a primary challenger, she should face a challenger. Period. It’s undemocratic to think otherwise. The DCCC has no right to stick its damn nose in it. It should let its rank and file figure out who it wants to emerge from their own primaries, THEN an organization like the DCCC steps in to try and get that person elected. The Democrats have deep, deep issues in regards to internal democracy, at the national level and the state level. If Bernie or someone else doesn’t emerge in the first round of the primaries, the superdelegates are back in the game, and given the amount of people running, that seems decently likely. If that happens, it will be a bloody, chaotic mess, as the opinions of the superdelegates and the base of the Democratic Party are often far, far apart. Look what they did in installing Bauman at the state level in California, and look at how he had to resign in disgrace. We are not in good hands if the superdelegates are back in the game. We can see with the taped Hoyer conversation what the actual reality is.

Also, given the ideological composition of Democrats in power and those recently elected, this clearly protects people closer to Hoyer and Pelosi ideologically far more than it does people like AOC. AOC is far outnumbered in that party. It’s obvious that they don’t want another AOC emerging. I seriously doubt they lose sleep over the thought of AOC losing to a Crowley like hack. They would lose sleep over the idea of there being two dozen AOCs.

1 Like

#17

“AOC is far outnumbered in that party. It’s obvious that they don’t want another AOC emerging. I seriously doubt they lose sleep over the thought of AOC losing to a Crowley like hack. They would lose sleep over the idea of there being two dozen AOCs.”

Exactly. I was going to reply simply: “It’s damage control. It’s cutting your losses, and moving on with a plan to keep it from getting any worse.”

The logic of the Mainstream Democrat is no better than that of any Republican.

“The party is a private organization, they can do whatever they want.” The DCCC is a group of incumbents formed to protect their interests. Why should they allow challenges to their members?"

My question for a long time has been "Why do they call themselves the “Democratic Party,” when they are anything but?

1 Like

#18

That party has been utterly destroyed by corruption and neoliberalism. Given how internally undemocratic it is, given how corrupt it is, I don’t know if it can be reformed. It doesn’t hurt to try, but it makes no sense to throw all the eggs in that basket just because building something else is really hard. I don’t see how any logical person can say at this point that it is easier to form a third party than to reform the Democratic Party. Both things are massive projects, one isn’t easier than the other. She is horrible though. Everything wrong with politics, similar to Ted Cruz and Trump.

0 Likes