Home | About | Donate

Primary Day: Lessons for Democrats


Primary Day: Lessons for Democrats

Richard Eskow

Pundits should avoid, at all costs, the sin of “premature evaluation.” The May 7 primaries did not send a simple or unambiguous message. One thing remains clear, however: In November, the Democrats’ fate depends largely on turnout.

Dems have a good chance of retaking the House of Representatives this fall, but that’s by no means certain, and the Senate is more of a stretch. With Democratic support reportedly falling among millennials and turnout a lingering problem for voters of color, complacency may be the party’s biggest threat.


What have the Democrats done in the last year and a half, to deserve a large turnout in November?



Lessons for the Democrats? What lessons? As if the Democrat establishment even gives a damn. The party establishment still blames everyone else for the party’s failures and that includes progressives who continue to upset the party’s corporate and big money donors with their populist and commoner ideas. How dare they! The Democratic party isn’t even a real party, anymore. It no longer has an identity or a message beyond raising ever more money. It’s a squirrel running around in the corporate forest looking for more money to stash.


Have you gone to hear any local candidates?


Just moved to a new state, a Red State, two weeks ago.

However, did move to a Democratic stronghold.

Not fully unpacked yet.


Welcome to a red area!


Please prove your last assertion. Since Correct the Record is a Clintonista-affiliated organization, you’re implying a couple of things which aren’t actually true. Funny your use of the term thug, considering the biggest and most dangerous thug in memory, is now POTUS.
Also, there’s very little support at CD for the ACA. However, there’s even less support for adding more snakes to the wood pile.


I would be wary of any article of this type suggesting the possibility of “progressive Victories” under the banner of the Democrats.

The election of Doug Jones In Alabama was cheered as a “Progressive Victory” and this guy has been voting with the Republicans since he got in office.

What in fact is happening here is the term “Progressive” is being redefined. As long as a candidate is deemed “to the left” of the most extreme members of the Republicans , s/he is being labled a moderate or “progressive”.

The word is being hijacked.


Them there Dems sure know politics.


If they do it, they do it without me. I have no party to vote for.

It seems like the only real choice we have is between a quick slide into anarchy and revolution, or slow slide into perpetual Corporate Fascist rule.

If that is the case…personally I choose anarchy and revolution. Get it over quick and those of us that survive can at least then start building something better.


Yes, there are a number of versions of progressive being used. On this site it basically refers to the views of Bernie Sanders or to the views of the Green Party. So that is two different versions right there. Establishment Democrats use it basically to describe any legislation they support. That makes three. Indivisible uses a version of progressive based on a short list of criteria which is not the same as same as the Sanders’ list and tends to be more general. So that make four versions of progressive. And then there are definitions from political scientists to distinguish progressive from liberal. Progressive has to be used by virtually all Democrats since the term liberal as so fiercely attacked by the Republicans. I think the context of what is being said makes it clear what version of progressive is being used. No group can take the term for itself in the political world. I would worry less about the term progressive and more about what is really being said. Jill Stein ran as a progressive, Bernie Sanders ran as a progressive, and Hillary Clinton ran as a “pragmatic” progressive. That about sums it up.


Thanks for the summary. Now, which pigeonhole do you fly into? The summary suggests your coop is located at Democratic Overpass, where they certainly know the differences among a Stein/Sanders progressive thinking voter and an Obama/Clinton third way thinking voter. ( The trash talking about the former is simplistic and siloed, sounding very much like you, actually. )
" Progressive " is being diluted by DNC bots to muddy the waters, where large green snakes ( constrictors ) lurk, ready to surround and squeeze the life out of the word and them. These bots know that for the Dimocratic Elites to survive, they must kill political reformers. Who are also rank-and-file party reformers. It won’t work, btw. That’s just sooooo 2016.
Currently, the Dimocratic Party is using ex-vets to try to win the patriotic and " god home and country " crowd back into their webs, woven from corporate and MIC cash. That is what makes them fight against a Trump foreign policy achievement regarding N. Korea/S.Korea. From a right wing perspective, no less. ( They are so fragile and worried here they hope it falls apart. ) But, oh brother, should Trump greenlight and join in with Netanyahu’s bunch, a Clintonista Cluster will form and support another obviously illegal and disastrous MENA war and quagmire.
There is a difference between a progressive and a third way liberal Democrat. The one has real crossover power with Independent and currently non-voting working stiffs. The other doesn’t, anymore. They just have old talking points and bots, apparently.


I can tell you right now that the Ohio Green Party candidate for Governor, Constance Gadell-Newton, will be hammering away at being the ONLY NRA A-rated non-member running for Governor, and will PROUDLY wear an F-rating for her (and our) support for the assault weapons ban. We also oppose the death penalty, support full reproductive rights, an end to private prisons, decriminalizing drugs and legalizing pot; treating the opioid epidemic as a public health problem and not a criminal justice problem; the fight for a $15/hr. minimum wage for all - immediately; free post-secondary education at state colleges and universities, and the rest of the very progressive agenda that corporate Dems oppose.

A note about the Ohio primary: The Green Party candidates for State Treasurer and U. S. Senator had to run as write-ins, even though they turned in three times the number of petition signatures required, being told that they failed to get enough valid ones! Then in Tuesday’s election they supposedly failed to get 500 write-in votes each to be on the Fall ballot, with many, many write-in votes disqualified for supposedly being misspelled or illegible. While we do have the right to review and challenge the rejected ballots, at least one county BoE tried to trick a local party official by telling him that he could come down and review the rejected ballots on May 30 - one day after the deadline for finalizing the vote count! Wonder why people don’t believe or trust elected officials?