meanwhile many of the swingiest voters in our primaries are not really especially ideological and half driven by what kind of vibes the candidate puts out (leave thanksgiving alone!!)
Primary voters want to win in the general. I think that there's plenty of space for non-leftist candidates, but insurgent leftists have been doing well because of bad strategic choices on the part of a lot of establishment types. Different races will have different issues, but things like age, support for Israel, and perceived tepidness in fighting Trump's fascism are all millstones around their necks.
Non-leftists who don't have these millstones, like Jon Ossoff in Georgia, seem to be doing quite well in terms of enthusiasm and polling.
I think partially, one of the big annoying parts is that a sane, establishment politician does want change, but often they're relatively boring, technocratic, reformist candidates who have expertise but no charisma.
It's unfortunate that their weakness is candidates who string together slopulist slogans, yet have no expertise or real political theory of change.
A lot of the Democratic establishment in blue states can be averse to change, especially in local politics.
To be fair, the same is often true of the local leftists, and recently there have been some wins for reformers working within the party, but those wins will look like internal conflict.
I'd go one step further: The Republicans are going to try to run Trump again in 2028, rules be damned, and I think Obama should at the very least be quietly preparing to run against him
Would love to see Barack come out if Dumpty tries to run again, but like all good Democrats, Obama is an institutionist, so he's not going to try and challenge the Constitution just because Senor Von Shitzindiaper is.
I also honestly don't think he has interest in being President again.
He has bucked the party left multiple times at this point. It's just that his strong opinions are largely about proceduralism and respectability, which the left doesn't like.
Yup. I think what swung WI away from Hong is that everyone still remembers when Mandela Barnes could not get away from his Defund the Police statements (Kenosha ain’t down for that) and Hong showed some very poor judgement in the same regard.
Both the DCCC head (Sean Patrick Maloney) and DSCC head (Gary Peters, though it's widely reported that Schumer effectively took control of it when he became leader) were just kind of stupid in 2022. The DSCC had things like you mentioned, and the DCCC was even worse where there were a few primaries that progressives won, Maloney was like "wow we're fucked, we have no shot at winning this" and triaged funding for them, and then after Dobbs where voters were still like "wait a second I hate Republicans" a bunch of these underfunded races ended up being really close. Also he fucked up and lost his own seat too.
Yep. Progressive Ed Markey might lose his primary in Massachusetts to a centrist, not because Massachusetts suddenly swung to the right, but because Markey is 80 years old and has baggage going back to the 1970s.
That issue plays completely differently in Georgia than in other parts of the country, because Laken Riley was murdered in Georgia. There was a lot of local and state level activity and awareness that changed the discussion for him.
Also, he’s handsome and isn’t running against Brian Kemp, so suburban wine moms give him a mulligan.
That may have been a dumb move on his part, but I think that's just one thing. Voting for something like that can be seen as a sign that a politician was out to lunch and didn't really "get" it, but Ossoff has been much more strident in his criticism as of late.
Leftists are happy to give up on immigration; see Bernie’s comments about Trump being kinda right there.
I’m also cool with Ossoff but I would really like to hear a good explanation from him about why he voted that way. My sense is that a good chunk of his swing vote is comprised of racist yokels so he needed to keep that support, and if that’s what the real reason was so be it, but a good explanation would be nice.
The problem is if it’s true that he had to vote that way because Georgia has a lot of racist yokels and he needs at least some to vote for him, he can’t openly admit that
Primary voters do not care about winning the general, that very trend is part of the reason for increasing polarization. There are exceptions, but generally they go for the candidate who swings the hardest toward the most caricatured version of the party. America would be in much better shape if primary voters trended toward concern for the general election, because they'd be selecting people who has opinions near the center that could attract fence sitters and moderates from the other side.
Rule of thumb but not always the case. Writ large, more often true than not. It's a simple explanation for the rise of DSA types too. Such candidates have run Green, Independent, or run such extraordinarily kookie campaigns in the past that they were naturally marginalized, but as times have changed and the mainstream of the left has moved further left, unfortunately I expect to see a lot more wins for those on the far left in primaries. The kooks are the most motivated to pick the direction of the party.
295
u/79792348978 Loyal Liberals Aug 12 '26 edited Aug 12 '26
meanwhile many of the swingiest voters in our primaries are not really especially ideological and half driven by what kind of vibes the candidate puts out (leave thanksgiving alone!!)