Phish Tank wrote:
Yes, the list is random. I really propped a lot of big progressive names in the list though, not necessarily because they're similar, but rather convenience. And yes, grifters is probably rough, since that means they're lumped with the Candace Owens of the world, so I'll retract that word.
Yeah, outside of Dore who I think is just playing up outrage; grifters is a bridge too far. I'd steer clear of most of them myself. I like Rising because it usually has varied perspectives, so I'd leave Ball out. But I'm more into Majority Report, Michael Brooks, Hartmann, Goodman and Dixon than that list you've got...I can't stand Dore.
Phish Tank wrote:I know the Squad is highly popular and they're popular nationwide. But as I've mentioned before, being popular nationwide doesn't always translate to local victories. The Lipinski "upset" if we want to call it that is an interesting case study. He was already on the rocks heading into this election as he barely beat Newman in 2018. Then he got Booker, Castro, & Warren endorsing Newman and that really put her above the edge, though the margin of victory was lower than before.
I didn't call it an upset fam, but it is a progressive with a Justice Democrats endorsement coming through with a dub. The fact she was safe to endorse for a number of presidential candidates with her policy list is a positive sign.
As for the Squad, I bring up their national popularity because it speaks to "progressive energy" being real and not localized. The lack of infrastructure has meant that good candidates can lose, hell, Bernie's campaign strategy left plenty to be desired. But that's not the same as there being no movement toward progressive ideals. The policies they support have become a lot more normalized and the ones that have broken through, have been pretty successful.
Phish Tank wrote:The thing to remember with the DCCC/DNC is that their only purpose is to protect their seats. That's the only reason they support incumbents. They have no incentive to do otherwise unless the current incumbent is unsalvageable. Lipinski never reached that level apparently. The progressive arms won't have that infrastructure unless they find a way to raise a TON of money. It can work in case-by-case scenarios, but it's more TBD.
Yeah, I get that DCCC and DNC are supposed to shield seats. That doesn't change the fact that progressives have been at a handicap and have to build a different infrastructure to take seats though. I do agree that the progressive wing needs to raise a lot money and right now, I think they're better served making picking targets instead of going with a broader push. But that's why I think it's important to point out, they haven't won a ton but that kinda makes sense. They're new and facing embedded opponents, naturally the hit rate isn't going to be high. This was virtually non-existent 5 years ago. The energy is real, how much it can grow is the question.
