Home | About | Donate

Booker's Loss Was Devastating. But We Can't Lose Sight of Defeating McConnell

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/07/01/bookers-loss-was-devastating-we-cant-lose-sight-defeating-mcconnell

“…a hard month for progressives, who will have to vote for disappointing centrists…”

Um, no, we don’t, Carl. And at age 25, if you’re enamored of holding your nose to vote, you’re part of the problem. Summon up some courage, imagine better options, stop settling for crumbs.

Because if you don’t, you’re thinking about next election instead of next decade.


McGrath is a stealth candidate much like Sen. Sinema in Arizona. A running lackey dog in politics is not only a 1%ers’ dog, it’s a very bad dog.
McGrath, Sinema and Chilling Hilary are merely the outward manifestation of the unique American disease known as American Exceptionalism. There are more elected women Democratic legislators than those three non-symptomatic disease spreaders, but they’re classic examples. Which, incidentally, inflicts both sexes and some of the LGBTQ Community, as well. They grab the flag, run it up the hill and, then kill innocent women children and gays in foreign lands with impunity. And never, apparently, without giving a second thought about how hypocritical and whorish they appear to many people just trying to live on this planet.
They’re all auditioning for the chance to play Katherine the Great of Russia, pretty much.
Just like their CBC compatriots, who have to ruthlessly murder many innocent black and brown folks abroad, to prove they’re on board with being, both American, and so very Exceptional.
What a sorrowful choice we are being offered in 2020, with these candidates from The Duopoly. All this looks like is something will be exceptionally rotten in our future. Yikes!!!


From the article:

"November of 2020 will undoubtedly be a hard month for progressives, who will have to vote for disappointing centrists like Amy McGrath in Kentucky, John Hickenlooper in Colorado, Steve Bullock in Montana, Jon Ossoff in Georgia, and Theresa Greenfield in Iowa, "

Flipping the Senate by filling it with Joe Manchin clones will delight Chuck Schumer, and it won’t bother Trump much.

The Senate needs a Green Party member to offset - by even a little bit - the DP establishment. That’s why progressives need to support Lisa Savage’s campaign for the US Senate seat now occupied by Republican Susan Collins in Maine. Ranked choice voting is used in Maine, and it gives third parties a real chance to win - if they get wide support from progressives across the country .

You can help at ~www.LisaforMaine.org


I’m not McConnell vote for me. Where have we heard that campaign slogan before?


“And only by ousting obstructionists like McConnell and freeing the Senate from Republican control can that vision be achieved.”
Hmmm, I seem to remember the Senate being freed from Republican control a while back. Come to think of it, the House and Potus too. Don’t think much visioning was achieved though…


As mrsannhitts describes above, McGrath is actually further to the right than Trump on most issues.


But if she were to replace mcconnell she wouldn’t be as entrenched and should feel more vulnerable and would not have his power by longevity and as Speaker.
And possibly be amenable to pressure of she wanted to stay in the Senate.

Angela Davis,

“[I]n our electoral system as it exists, neither party represents the future that we need in this country. Both parties remain connected to corporate capitalism. But the election will not be so much about who gets to lead the country to a better future, but rather how we can support ourselves and our own ability to continue to organize and place pressure on those in power. And I don’t think there’s a question about which candidate would allow that process to unfold… [T]he electoral arena is not the best place for the expression of radical politics. But if we want to continue this work, we certainly need a person in office who will be more amenable to our mass pressure.”

“… [T]he electoral arena is not the best place for the expression of radical politics. But if we want to continue this work, we certainly need a person in office who will be more amenable to our mass pressure.”

The problem is that “mass pressure” dissipates when the person in office has a D next to their names. Liberals, and the media they consume, tend to sit home and shut up once Democrats get elected, and “we” get written off as fringe. Case in point: Obama ran as an antiwar president. As soon as he got elected, a vibrant, innovative antiwar movement fizzled out, even though Obama went on to start more wars and murder many more innocent people with drones.

Democrats have dozens of ready-made excuses for why they don’t need to listen to the Left once they’re in office. They need to look tough, you’re undermining them against Republicans, the Republicans will never agree to it, etc. Republicans, on the other hand, can look like utter fools and be completely unprepared for pressure from the Left, especially when that pressure has popular support. Case in point: Trump, who has taken a political drubbing for his position on police violence and his reaction to the uprisings.

This is a predictable problem, and it is up to us to develop better strategies for building movements when Democrats are in office… and stop assuming that the “D” means an elected is either more amenable to pressure or more easily pressured by the Left.

Frankly, I think Zinn had it right: Spend two minutes checking off the box for your favored candidate, and spend all of the rest of your time building a movement powerful enough to win - no matter who happens to be in office.

1 Like

If right-wing democrats can’t win enough republican votes to replace their left-wing losses, right-wing democrats shouldn’t have gotten their nominations in the first place.


I agree with your points about McGrath, and it would remove McConnell. My point is, how and why would the dnc support a candidate that’s further to the right than Trump, when we could have had Booker?

1 Like

How and why do Chuck and Nancy and Dump retain their jobs and continue to make it easy for their corporate friends and deny that “the people” have rights ?
We are fooked without a mass uprising to force those shitheads to do their jobs and stop obstructing justice. Plus we need to remove these “&^%*$$$$$$” every election and replace and replace until we find elected official do do their jobs to work for us and not them

1 Like

McGrath is not exactly a steadfast democrat (never mind progressive), but this isn’t really about McGrath. This is about trying to get rid of McConnell, dark lord of the senate. Opportunists are opportunists, but they always have their uses.

It’s a longshot race anyway, and I think it would still be a longshot if Booker (who is a more charismatic candidate but lacks McGraths’s $$$ raising ability) had won.

1 Like

I don’t like the options, but it seems to me that an interim goal could be removing McConnell. (It’s kind of like cleaning the floor of a stable that has gotten too far out of hand. If you can’t get rid of all the horse manure in one day, you at least take of the top layer – and try again later.)


It is significant that Mr. Booker did well especially since it seems that he entered the race late or was that in fact due to his of exposure related low funding?

Totally! It reaffirms my belief that the future does not belong to old fuddie-duddies like me, but rather a newer, more progressive and idealistic generation. And my tentative hunch is that it might just be for the better, if you’ve seen my comments…

1 Like

all of us, even those who are seniors, need to continue to fight for what is right for our citizens lives, all of us deserve better that what those who occupy “the government” are dishing out and that requires voting out the shittiest of them all and any who what been doing destructive deeds for too long !