Looks like there are lots of extremists on this site, and that remark is specifically antisemitic. Most of us haven't forgotten all the vital legislation Pelosi got through Congress. The ACA and the accompanying Medicaid expansion have certainly been important to me!
I remember DKE calculation had Biden lost it by about 32K votes.
That was a substantial shift, almost like doubling the losing margin. Cannot be explained away as a more R leaning migration into Yavapai voter pool. The county level she only lost Yavapai by a margin some 8k-9k votes larger than 2020.
How did Gallego fare? Would expect there he ran around or slightly worse than Biden 2020, given his statewide margin with more R leaning migration there.
In the initial vote in CA Senate 36, the noxious R Tony Strickland has 51% of the vote. Hopefully this number falls below 50%, or the runoff will be cancelled.
While this district runs the coast of OC with a small finger into LA county, Strickland is from Huntington Beach which usually produces the worst of the worst of OC Republicans.
Tony Strickland is not "from" Huntington Beach. He is from Ventura County, where both he and his ex-wife were elected to the CA Assembly. (Her name is Audra, not Lurleen.) Now that Ventura is less inclined to elect Repubs, he moved to Surf City a few years ago and got elected to the H.B. city council. Now he will go to the State Senate, where he will be limited to one term (because of his previous time in the Legislature.) Last night his numbers were under 50% but later counted returns now have him at 51%.
He opts for the latter, he'll go in with the loser tag on him. History has - FDR notwithstanding - been unkind to losing VP candidates. And that's all I'm going to say about that.
Lynch has gone past his expiration date. But he expresses what I’m diuretic is a significant attitude among congressional Democrats.
Hakeem Jeffries complains that "the extreme left protest me more than they protest Donald Trump...I think because I've chosen not to bend the knee to either people on the far left and certainly not to Donald Trump and the far right."
ive been fighting against this electoral losing 'strategy' for 45 years; each district is different; Bernie Sanders is NOT a viable candidate for US Senate in WV; no matter what some naive thing is posted here; your post should be repeated over and over and over
Nah. If you think he could run a Senatorial campaign in West Virginia without addressing social issues, you're only fooling yourself. The fact that the Mountain State is now a so called "right to work" state speaks volumes over how much West Virginia has changed. He won the West Virginia primary in 2016 for the same reason Hillary Rodham Clinton won it in 2008. They weren't voting for him. They were voting against the Democratic Party.
Leaving aside the fact that no Democrat is a viable candidate for the House or Senate in WV, I agree that Sanders certainly wouldn't be, but what losing strategy are you talking about? Supporting socialist primary candidates where they can't win a general election? Yeah, that wouldn't be smart. Is that a major issue nowadays?
i actually think every district and race should have a strategy based on that district or state; cookie cutter strategy is a definite loser imo; i think Bernie and AOC fit where they run but in my district and state they would bring down the entire local ticket(it is hard enough on a local level here in florida to obtain viability)
How are these protests now from the far left? Are we asserting by default that anyone who is pushing Democrats in the House and Senate to do more is on the far left? Would the same be said about the Iraq War protestors back in 2006?
There are Trump voters who are protesting against House Republicans as well.
It's all about timing. Now that we are the out party, we can get away with protesting as opposed to two years ago when as the incumbent party, we had to make the case of keeping the White House and the government in general.
I agree with you. Elected Dems have a clear disdain for their own voters who expect more out of them. I say we send a good majority of those who believe that way, home.
If this is what ends up making Stephen Lynch be overly defensive and not as receptive to his own voters, well, then he could lose to a primary challenge next year. That is not out of the realm of possibilities.
On the other hand, I am not one who wants to get in a purity fight with fellow Democrats.
I don't think it's about purity, per say. I personally believe the battlefield has changed. Norms are being stripped away daily and people don't want to return to a system that doesn't work for them. I just don't believe elected officials who could vote on the Iraq War are ready for the challenge ahead and it's well past time to pass the torch to people who are ready for the fight/challenge.
I agree with what you’re saying. Fighting against Trump is not about purity at all.
Putting aside this issue for a moment, I don’t want the conversation to go beyond the issue to the extent where it’s about fighting over who is more liberal than each other. That crap pisses me off.
Not really since polling shows a growing majority of the Dem base wants the Dems to be more forceful in opposing Trump. The fact the house dem leader attempts to obfuscate the broader dem base like this is instructive to his limitations as a leader.
I don’t have naive opinions I’ve been working on ‘state, local, and national’ campaigns since i was 10 years old, but some of us aren’t obsessed with being yesterday’s man. Tell your neighbor your old war stories don’t tell em to me.
And I've been a bit critical too, I apologize. And you definitely aren't a Trumper, it's unfortunate you've been called that. Again, thanks for the work that you've done, Jonathan.
not what is being argued here; pretty sure you know those of us here that are grounded on winning elections(you included)agree with you on many points; maybe just not this one
No he doesn't, because he IS "bending the knee to Donald Trump." It's not the far left that want him to stand up to these fascists, it's all Democrats. In normal times, he can worry about the "far left" pushing him to, I don't know, vote for Single Payer. But that's not what Democrats are asking him to do.
Less Hakeem Jeffries, more Jasmine Crocketts. That's what we want.
no one is bending any knee; Jeffries is trying to keep his caucus together long enough for the Republicans to start eating their own; give Trump some time and Jeffries strategy will win out
Jeffries' response would make sense if they were telling him to support Medicare for All or whatever part of the progressive policy agenda. Except they aren't. They're telling him to oppose republicans.
In what world is "oppose republicans" equal to "extreme left" ? The complacency from some parts of our leadership and their internal allies is utterly baffling at times. Right now I don't care about progressive vs moderate. We need leadership that wants to do their job and protect our country and its people as best they can. Seeking comity with their republican colleagues — who will never, ever, ever return the favor — is a proven failed strategy and they need to dig their heads out of the sand and act accordingly. There are people in the party of all ideological stripes that can do this right.
Jeffries' language use comes across as tailor made to make people see the group he speaks of as their enemy. Except that group is a major part of his base. We can see the results in the replies right here; democrats going into an insulting intraparty ideological slugfest.
Lynch is actually the ideal candidate to primary from the Left. District Vote share of 70%, in office for 20+ years, 70+ years old. I think the time is right to send him back home.
I'm sure people said the same thing about a bartender taking on the Speaker in waiting. I think that's been a huge upgrade and whoever takes on Lynch would be too.
What word was "diuretic" meant to be? I hadn't realized Jeffries had been making what on the face of it are such terrible statements. Leftist activists are not calling for dictatorship, corruption and impunity.
The only member of Congress who did not vote on the terrible GOP budget bill was Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), who is being treated for lung cancer and is retiring. Even if he had joined every other Democrat in opposing the bill, it still would have passed by one vote. However, Reps. Kevin Mullin (D-CA.), who recently suffered an infection following knee surgery, and Brittany Pettersen (D-CO), who recently gave birth to her second child, both missed an earlier procedural vote yet managed to make it to the House chamber to vote against the bill.
This guy is what is called a "DINO". This means, like a "RINO" on the Republican side, as Democrat In Name Only. How can ANYONE who calls themselves "Pro-life" (which in actuality means what it really is as "forced-birth") and be against the ACA (both Obama and I like the term "Obamacare") call himself a Democrat? Vote for the progressive attorney, if he runs, or anyone else, as the "TRUE" Democrat. We Progressives should seriously consider splitting off from the Democratic Party. We should form our own Progressive Party, maybe with AOC as our standard bearer, and force our requirements on what remains of the Democratic Party.
If you're referring to pademocrat, no that would be me. And I called myself that because at the time I joined DKE, I lived in Western Pennsylvania (in Greensburg). I've called seven states - New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Vermont, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Delaware plus DC - home during my lifetime.
I was born in Chestnut Hill Hospital in 1954. Chestnut Hill is part of the GREAT City of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania. I grew up and lived in Montgomery County from birth to 1977. That year, my family and I moved to Quakertown in northern Bucks County, Pennsylvania. I lived there from 1977 to 1987. I relocated to the Mainline area, near City Avenue in west Philly, to the town of Narberth, which is also in Montgomery County in Pennsylvania. I lived there for over a year until I moved to Indiana in 1988 when I got married. So, 34 years as a Pennsylvanian living in three different parts of greater Philly. I think this has earned me my place as a PROUD Pennsylvania Progressive and, for now anyway, Democrat. Why should we Progressives NOT form our own "Progressive Party"? Oh course, we would align ourselves with the moderate Democrats. What better way to get our priorities taken seriously by them? They need us. Without our support, they would have NO CHANCE against the MAGA Republicans. This guy above is NOT a moderate Democrat.
Around the time ACA was being built and voted on, Lynch was definitely a pain to hear about, and I remember him wanting to be primaried so badly. For some reason, the past several years he's been out of the news and I forgot he was still in congress! But yeah, these latest comments of his are well in his character. Ideally the primary threat might just make him decide to retire, but with the attitude he has, I'm not so sure.
Rightly or wrongly he has a stronger base than we wish. He managed to obtain nearly 42.5 per cent in 2013 when running in the US Senate primary against Ed Markey.
He's a "Democrat" in the mold of "Dapper" O'Neil and James Kelly. Two former prominent Boston politicians who were "Democrats" both for the same reason Tulsi Gabbard and Rod Blagojevich were "Democrats", political necessity and because for the longest time, the Democratic Party in Massachusetts was considered the "Irish Party." And that was NOT meant as a compliment. Lynch stays in office only due to longevity and the fact that he has a genuine "rages to riches" story that makes him look more "reasonable" than he actually is.
There's already a progressive party. It's called the Green Party. Another one is the Peace & Freedom Party.
Also, aside from Lynch having a more mixed, anti-choice record prior to the Dobbs decision, he actually is far from being a DINO. In fact, he fought for accountability towards the Iraq War and even supported investigating President Bush about lying about the war.
MA-08 voted for Harris 62-35 and Warren 60-40 in 2024. In 2022 it was Healey 64-35. In 2020 it was Biden 67-31, Markey 67-33. The district covers south Boston and major suburbs south of the city like Quincy. It's a D+15 district and in fact the third bluest in the state of Massachusetts, a state well known for how deeply and reliably democratic it votes.
Lynch winning that district is so fundamentally unremarkable that bringing it up calls the whole argument that it's made in support of into doubt. Are we going to brag about how Nancy Pelosi is a democrat that "WINS elections" because she got reelected in San Francisco?
Daily Kos has a rule against third party advocacy; doesn't the Downballot as well?
Anyhow, there are a number of things we can do to try to push Dems to the left (though we should be careful about where we choose to do it.) Calling for a new "Progressive" third party is just stupid, as it would almost ensure a lot of Republican wins in states and districts where a majority of voters don't want that.
I don’t think pushing Democrats to take more action than they already are against Trump is exactly moving to the left. That’s like saying Liz Cheney is a liberal for fighting against Trump even though she’s a staunch neocon like her father.
Besides, Andrew Yang has already been failing in trying to elect politicians in his Forward party which he argues represents the “radical middle.” It takes no genius to figure out that the “Forward” brand name was actually Obama’s re-election catch phrase.
Back in 2020, Yang originally lent his support to the lesser known but more liberal Democratic Senate Candidate in the KY-SEN primary race, Charles Booker.
Then later after he lost the NYC Mayoral Race to Eric Adams in 2023 he says he was trying to get more centrists in the Democratic Party and apparently being unsuccessful at doing so led him to start the Forward Party.
FAIL. The Democratic Party ALWAYS has centrists and moderates. When have we never had plenty of them?
You can't be serious with this statement: "We Progressives should seriously consider splitting off from the Democratic Party. We should form our own Progressive Party, maybe with AOC as our standard bearer, and force our requirements on what remains of the Democratic Party." Even putting the silliness of this idea aside, AOC is actually a pretty standard Democrat at this point...
But are you both Pennsylvanians? I was born in Chestnut Hill Hospital in 1954. Chestnut Hill is part of the GREAT City of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania. I grew up and lived in Montgomery County from birth to 1977. That year, my family and I moved to Quakertown in northern Bucks County, Pennsylvania. I lived there from 1977 to 1987. I relocated to the Mainline area, near City Avenue in west Philly, to the town of Narberth, which is also in Montgomery County in Pennsylvania. I lived there for over a year until I moved to Indiana in 1988 when I got married. So, 34 years as a Pennsylvanian living in three different parts of greater Philly. I think this has earned me my place as a PROUD Pennsylvania Progressive and, for now anyway, Democrat. Why should we Progressives NOT form our own "Progressive Party"? Oh course, we would align ourselves with the moderate Democrats. What better way to get our priorities taken seriously by them? They need us. Without our support, they would have NO CHANCE against the MAGA Republicans. This guy above is NOT a moderate Democrat.
Are you seriously suggesting running a third party candidate against Democratic candidates? You were born in 1954, yet you still suggest that? Have you ever looked into why Woodrow Wilson won the 1914 election? Why the 2000 election was close enough for the Supreme Court to fuck around with it? Why Hillary Clinton "lost" in 2016? We really don't need this kind of talk here, and I'd like it to be banned here just as it was on DKE and SSP.
I can't believe I'm even replying to this nonsense, but here goes. You'd be willing to cede elections to MAGA crazies in order to get your way? It's also unclear what your being from PA has to do with anything.
Boy, you guys just do NOT get it, do you? When did I ever say that we in a new "Progressive Party" would run a third party candidate? That is a known recipe for disaster. Yes, I DO remember Ross Perot way back in 1992. He is the reason that Bill Clinton won. He was correct about that "giant sucking sound". So you see, it can go both ways. We have a Progressive Caucus currently that is chaired by a very good lady from Washington State named Pramila Jayapal. She is doing a great job. But, it is only a "caucus", and is part of a greater Democratic Party. That means the moderates and DINO Dems, like this guy above, can stymie us. If we had our own "Progressive Party", then the moderates and DINO's would be FORCED to deal with us as they NEED our support against the, as you say, MAGA crazies. What I am talking about here is what Trump is doing on his side. It is called hardball leverage negotiating. Also, your comments are more MAGA Republican than you realize. You cannot "ban" this kind of talk, as that is NOT free speech. Banning speech is what dictators like Putin do, and is what Trump longs to do also. And, unless the two or more of you are actually current or former Pennsylvanians, as I am, then you have less of a leg to stand on. As for 2016 with Hillary (whom I did vote for) if it had been Bernie Sanders instead, then Trump would most likely not have won. Bernie is now too old and frail. The logical replacement would be AOC.
Frankly I wouldn't mind an annual Democratic Party conference where the stars and rising stars of the Democratic Party gather. The major parties in our brethren Anglosphere nations do this on an annual basis.
Tim Walz is not running for MN-Senate. Still considering a third term for gov.
This is good, we don't need a handful of Dem heavyweights slugging it out until August then turning around and trying to win inside a 2 month general election window. I'd like to see this race coalesce around one Democrat.
Praying to God Keith Ellison does not run now. Or Omar.
Continuing a trend of weak numbers for the Dem incumbent governor recently. Hochul, Healy, and Hobbs in mid to low 40's. But it's very early as well. Still not where I'd want to be as an incumbent in an ultra swing state.
Agree but it would be helpful if some Democratic incumbents were popular in their states to stand on their own. I think Healy will be fine and Hochul will still win even after a bloody primary but I am not pleased with GOP strength in the North East last year.
Is there anything in particular with Governor Katie Hobbs that would contribute to these polling numbers other than being a Governor in a state where Trump won again but Ruben Gallego also won election to the Senate?
She's another governor that has had the "weak" label on her ever since she eeked out a win in 2022 despite running a terrible campaign.
I'm not sure she's done anything specific but Democrats in particular love to cannibalize their own. She's been hounded by speculation she could be primaried by the Democratic SoS, and though he declined, it still helped fuel the belief that she is a weak incumbent.
My Governor Kathy Hochul of NY has had the same issue of being perceived as weak that she has been unable to shake, although she has done more to herself to deserve it than Hobbs seemingly has.
Nothing of what you have described suggests this is evidence that Hobbs should get a primary challenge. If anything, she should be commended for being the first Democrat being elected as Governor of Arizona since Janet Napolitano back in 2002 (who was re-elected in 2006).
I wouldn't lump all those numbers together. Healey was polling stuff like 40-12 vs various opponents. That's not comparable with someone else polling 40-36. I wouldn't call any of the numbers weak specifically, since we're nearly two years out from election day and people don't like to truly admit to themselves how (and/or if) they are voting until August of election year.
Hobbs will have a serious campaign on her hands. Healey will not. Hochul might or might not, depending on if New York's recent statewide performances are reflective of where the state is going.
Does it really matter what this guy does. None of the Dems are really doing anything that personally makes them at risk. They all complain that they can't do anything because they have too few numbers. They have no imagination and the country is crumbling. Several Dems including John Fetterman have voted with the other side. What are they doing about them?
If LaRock gains traction, then it may require Sears to move further right to win the primary, thus harming if not killing her general election prospects.
Though LaRock to me is the latest in the long line of "where the hell does he think he's running?" candidates, in both parties. DOGE isn't popular nationally, but it's hard to think of a state where praising it is more harmful (at least with the general electorate) than VA, with the possible exception of MD.
I have mixed feelings about this remark, given what election results we actually had last year. These folks are a lot closer to the political reality in the U.S. than they ever should have been.
They are, in many senses. I do not think general policy is one of those. Social and media discourse of the 2024 election was absolutely bereft of policy.
The swingy-ish people that voted R weren't voting that way because they liked the republican policy proposals. If anything their ignorance — often willful ignorance — of republican policy proposals was crucial for their vote turning out the way it did.
Yes, but how many of them are the swingy-ish people that voted republican instead of die-hard consistent republican voters?
If 80% of 2024 republican voters support large scale deportations, and 20% oppose, that would mean that ten percentage points of their final support do not like that policy. Those ten points would have been less likely to support republicans if they knew of that policy.
The 2024 election had republicans pretty close to 50% of the vote, especially at the presidential level. Losing ten points of support would bring them to only 40% of the vote — that would be a crushing loss. Obviously that kind of swing would not be likely over a single policy item even if that group were voraciously opposed. Even a far more realistic two point swing away from them would be huge, and that would align with >95% of 2024 republican voters being pro-deportation and <5% being ardently opposed.
I think it's safe to assume that the parts of their voter composition that are least likely to support them on various policy grounds are that swingy-ish group.
Are you ignoring the percentage of Democratic voters who support large-scale deportations but voted for the Democrats, anyway, because of other factors?
Besides, whatever Republican voters theoretically claim to support or oppose in opinion polls, their decisions to vote for extremist authoritarian types mean that they effectively support them because they are Republican extremist authoritarian types, with whatever issues they supposedly disagree with being either disingenuous or not too important to a great majority of them. I mean, to the Nazi voters who weren't antisemitic or didn't support an attack on the Soviet Union, it was your fault.
Yeah, the recent polling showing Earle-Sears behind Spanberger by double digits is not a good sign for her.
It won’t be better though for a more DOGE friendly GOP candidate who defeats Earle-Sears in the primary. Doesn’t change how toxic Trump, Musk and DOGE are in VA right now.
If Mike Levin (D-CA) doesn't take a strong stand against that lithium battery storage facility in south OC (near homes) he will face a very strong backlash is the OC portion of his district. A statement he released seemed a bit wishy-washy.
Probably, but now and then, people like Eliot Engel get defeated for showing how little they care about their constituents. This district is traditionally quite socially conservative, though.
I do wonder how much that "traditionally" still applies. South Boston, Back Bay, Seaport, and Beacon Hill are not working class dominated areas. Seaport is a new development full of the wealthy. South Boston was the historically working class part of his district but it's been gentrifying over the years as people with higher income jobs move as close to the core city areas as they can, if they can afford it. Quincy is one of the least white cities in the area, with >30% of the city being Asian-American.
The district has changed a lot since the 90s and early 00s when Lynch first came around. If you made an ideological clone of Lynch but without his incumbency, name recognition, history, and connections, I think they'd end up struggling to break through in a primary without doing something to hide their more moderate ideology.
As-is he probably has the seat as long as he wants it, but as you note we do have recent examples of complacent and arrogant incumbents losing primaries.
Indeed. The fact that Boston now has an Asian American Mayor speaks for itself. This is not the same city that was once run by hardline social conservative Ray Flynn. Interestingly, his son Ed Flynn is a Boston City Councilor, but just as Bob Casey Jr wasn't as militant a social conservative as his father, he's not as militant about social issues.
Beacon Hill has NEVER been a working class area. As long as my hometown has been around, it has ALWAYS been a bastion for the elite. We call them Boston Brahmins, wealthy English American Republicans who dominated the city until the Irish population came and in turn dominated until recent years.
Yeah, I didn't want to make my comment too long but I was pretty sure that Beacon Hill and Back Bay have never been working class areas. I know Back Bay was originally developed to attract more upper-middle class residents to the city for tax purposes.
Nowadays, if there's a business opening a location that appeals to that middle class and especially upper middle class demographic (e.g. Patagonia) it's almost always in one of: Back Bay, Harvard Square, or Seaport. Or, very frequently, multiple of those locations. Case in point: Patagonia has a store in Harvard Square and another in Back Bay.
I did say it was traditionally quite socially conservative. I didn't say anything about working-class people, a phrase that has been hijacked in the U.S. not to mean anything about working!
Lynch hasn't ever been at risk of losing re-election. The GOP has failed so hard trying to even run candidates to challenge Lynch that he ended up essentially winning re-election in 2018 and 2020 with no real opponents.
We'll have to see how this plays out come the Democratic Primary next year. Providing Lynch survives the primary, he won't be at risk of losing re-election.
totally agree with your post; i am fine with primarying any incumbent that shows the arrogance mentioned above(especially in districts that the eventual nominee is going to win); however, ive argued many times here that every district and state is different and calls on this site for third party's is just absolutely handing over future elections to the Republicans; i posted some things that i should not have(and it is no excuse) but being called a Trumper frankly pissed me off; apologies to the site owners and the posters
I'm glad I didn't see some of the deleted comments, but there are new comments that need to be policed. I don't want to see remarks about the Democrats serving only AIPAC and not the American people and calls for voting for 3rd parties. Anyway, I agree with your remarks here. Each district is indeed different, and a socialist can win in parts of Queens but not parts of Nebraska.
Looks like there are lots of extremists on this site, and that remark is specifically antisemitic. Most of us haven't forgotten all the vital legislation Pelosi got through Congress. The ACA and the accompanying Medicaid expansion have certainly been important to me!
The write-up on AZ02. Did you mean Trump over Harris by 15pt in 2024? He beat Biden by 8pt there in 2020.
You are right. Thank you for the catch, I've corrected!
I remember DKE calculation had Biden lost it by about 32K votes.
That was a substantial shift, almost like doubling the losing margin. Cannot be explained away as a more R leaning migration into Yavapai voter pool. The county level she only lost Yavapai by a margin some 8k-9k votes larger than 2020.
Might also be explained by Native American voters in the district swinging to the right.
How did Gallego fare? Would expect there he ran around or slightly worse than Biden 2020, given his statewide margin with more R leaning migration there.
In the initial vote in CA Senate 36, the noxious R Tony Strickland has 51% of the vote. Hopefully this number falls below 50%, or the runoff will be cancelled.
While this district runs the coast of OC with a small finger into LA county, Strickland is from Huntington Beach which usually produces the worst of the worst of OC Republicans.
Vote will be certified Mar 6.
If Strickland does fall below 50%, forcing a runoff, what are the chances that Jimmy Pham can beat him? District looks pretty Red.
Wasn’t it in Huntington Beach that an NFL punter recently was arrested for protesting the city council’s plan to put up a MAGA plaque?
Chances slim. Yes, HB voted to install the maga plaque, but they also challenge most state laws on housing, schools and spending.
Tony Strickland is not "from" Huntington Beach. He is from Ventura County, where both he and his ex-wife were elected to the CA Assembly. (Her name is Audra, not Lurleen.) Now that Ventura is less inclined to elect Repubs, he moved to Surf City a few years ago and got elected to the H.B. city council. Now he will go to the State Senate, where he will be limited to one term (because of his previous time in the Legislature.) Last night his numbers were under 50% but later counted returns now have him at 51%.
There will be NO run for the US Senate by Governor Tim Walz (DFL-MN). https://www.mprnews.org/story/2025/02/26/gov-tim-walz-officially-rules-out-a-run-for-us-senate
imo this a tell for 2 things; he is running for re-election OR The Office Which Shall Not Be Named; imo he does not run for both
He opts for the latter, he'll go in with the loser tag on him. History has - FDR notwithstanding - been unkind to losing VP candidates. And that's all I'm going to say about that.
good points and I tend to agree but I think Walz has a slim opening IF Trump is as bad in this second term as I think he might be
Yes, but let's also keep this comic in mind:
https://xkcd.com/1122/
Lynch has gone past his expiration date. But he expresses what I’m diuretic is a significant attitude among congressional Democrats.
Hakeem Jeffries complains that "the extreme left protest me more than they protest Donald Trump...I think because I've chosen not to bend the knee to either people on the far left and certainly not to Donald Trump and the far right."
https://x.com/kenklippenstein/status/1894463126763937802
imo Jeffries makes an important and valid point here
As usual, the far left did us no favors with their protests in 2024.
ive been fighting against this electoral losing 'strategy' for 45 years; each district is different; Bernie Sanders is NOT a viable candidate for US Senate in WV; no matter what some naive thing is posted here; your post should be repeated over and over and over
He’s more viable than anyone else not named Joe Manchin.
Nah. If you think he could run a Senatorial campaign in West Virginia without addressing social issues, you're only fooling yourself. The fact that the Mountain State is now a so called "right to work" state speaks volumes over how much West Virginia has changed. He won the West Virginia primary in 2016 for the same reason Hillary Rodham Clinton won it in 2008. They weren't voting for him. They were voting against the Democratic Party.
Sanders wouldnt break 40% in West Virginia on his best day; you know it, I know it, and Paleo knows it(thats why he mentioned Manchin by name)
you make my point; thank you
Leaving aside the fact that no Democrat is a viable candidate for the House or Senate in WV, I agree that Sanders certainly wouldn't be, but what losing strategy are you talking about? Supporting socialist primary candidates where they can't win a general election? Yeah, that wouldn't be smart. Is that a major issue nowadays?
i actually think every district and race should have a strategy based on that district or state; cookie cutter strategy is a definite loser imo; i think Bernie and AOC fit where they run but in my district and state they would bring down the entire local ticket(it is hard enough on a local level here in florida to obtain viability)
That's right, but is there any threat of a socialist winning a primary there?
lol; nope not in this lifetime; however, we should all keep an eye on Trump and FEMA; dismantling of FEMA could put Florida back into play
Maybe, but I doubt it. Trumpers are not rational in general or they wouldn't support anyone like that!
How are these protests now from the far left? Are we asserting by default that anyone who is pushing Democrats in the House and Senate to do more is on the far left? Would the same be said about the Iraq War protestors back in 2006?
There are Trump voters who are protesting against House Republicans as well.
It's all about timing. Now that we are the out party, we can get away with protesting as opposed to two years ago when as the incumbent party, we had to make the case of keeping the White House and the government in general.
Anyone who makes lawmakers uneasy is the "far left".
Yeah but I think Democrats in elected office need to watch it when it comes to labeling anyone “far left.”
It’s bad enough we have the GOP and Fox News labeling liberals the way they do as the far left.
We should show we have a higher attention than Republicans do.
I agree with you. Elected Dems have a clear disdain for their own voters who expect more out of them. I say we send a good majority of those who believe that way, home.
If this is what ends up making Stephen Lynch be overly defensive and not as receptive to his own voters, well, then he could lose to a primary challenge next year. That is not out of the realm of possibilities.
On the other hand, I am not one who wants to get in a purity fight with fellow Democrats.
I don't think it's about purity, per say. I personally believe the battlefield has changed. Norms are being stripped away daily and people don't want to return to a system that doesn't work for them. I just don't believe elected officials who could vote on the Iraq War are ready for the challenge ahead and it's well past time to pass the torch to people who are ready for the fight/challenge.
I agree with what you’re saying. Fighting against Trump is not about purity at all.
Putting aside this issue for a moment, I don’t want the conversation to go beyond the issue to the extent where it’s about fighting over who is more liberal than each other. That crap pisses me off.
Not really since polling shows a growing majority of the Dem base wants the Dems to be more forceful in opposing Trump. The fact the house dem leader attempts to obfuscate the broader dem base like this is instructive to his limitations as a leader.
Posting isn’t politics, but it’s a great hobby for folks not built for the current political moment. Enjoy your keyboarding mate.
I don’t have naive opinions I’ve been working on ‘state, local, and national’ campaigns since i was 10 years old, but some of us aren’t obsessed with being yesterday’s man. Tell your neighbor your old war stories don’t tell em to me.
my record as a campaign manager for the Democratic Party is 15-0 ..I am real curious about your winning percentage, mate..
That's really impressive!
Thank you for your work... but about your attitude, a little modesty might suit you better.
could be; could be not; i must admit that being called a Trumper maybe set me off a tad; I now apologize for some of my posts today
And I've been a bit critical too, I apologize. And you definitely aren't a Trumper, it's unfortunate you've been called that. Again, thanks for the work that you've done, Jonathan.
Deleted some absolutely unacceptable comments on here. Attacks on other users are never okay. Don't do that again.
apologies; you have a valuable site; i would never intentionally disrespect you or your work
Yes, the “far left,” anyone who rocks the boat, is the same as the Republicans.
not what is being argued here; pretty sure you know those of us here that are grounded on winning elections(you included)agree with you on many points; maybe just not this one
No he doesn't, because he IS "bending the knee to Donald Trump." It's not the far left that want him to stand up to these fascists, it's all Democrats. In normal times, he can worry about the "far left" pushing him to, I don't know, vote for Single Payer. But that's not what Democrats are asking him to do.
Less Hakeem Jeffries, more Jasmine Crocketts. That's what we want.
no one is bending any knee; Jeffries is trying to keep his caucus together long enough for the Republicans to start eating their own; give Trump some time and Jeffries strategy will win out
Jeffries' response would make sense if they were telling him to support Medicare for All or whatever part of the progressive policy agenda. Except they aren't. They're telling him to oppose republicans.
In what world is "oppose republicans" equal to "extreme left" ? The complacency from some parts of our leadership and their internal allies is utterly baffling at times. Right now I don't care about progressive vs moderate. We need leadership that wants to do their job and protect our country and its people as best they can. Seeking comity with their republican colleagues — who will never, ever, ever return the favor — is a proven failed strategy and they need to dig their heads out of the sand and act accordingly. There are people in the party of all ideological stripes that can do this right.
Jeffries' language use comes across as tailor made to make people see the group he speaks of as their enemy. Except that group is a major part of his base. We can see the results in the replies right here; democrats going into an insulting intraparty ideological slugfest.
Lynch is actually the ideal candidate to primary from the Left. District Vote share of 70%, in office for 20+ years, 70+ years old. I think the time is right to send him back home.
I dont disagree with this, but I think Lynch will easily win that primary; we shall see
I'm sure people said the same thing about a bartender taking on the Speaker in waiting. I think that's been a huge upgrade and whoever takes on Lynch would be too.
Leadership doesn’t want anyone tampering with their strategy that has brought us Republican control of the White House and both houses of congress.
this is hyperbole; certainly our strategy has been flawed(I have argued your point on this site from the start); but your post is overboard imo
What word was "diuretic" meant to be? I hadn't realized Jeffries had been making what on the face of it are such terrible statements. Leftist activists are not calling for dictatorship, corruption and impunity.
Spellcheck screwup
I too was perplexed, but figured typo.
The only member of Congress who did not vote on the terrible GOP budget bill was Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), who is being treated for lung cancer and is retiring. Even if he had joined every other Democrat in opposing the bill, it still would have passed by one vote. However, Reps. Kevin Mullin (D-CA.), who recently suffered an infection following knee surgery, and Brittany Pettersen (D-CO), who recently gave birth to her second child, both missed an earlier procedural vote yet managed to make it to the House chamber to vote against the bill.
good on them; this vote is campaign messaging GOLD imo; it clearly shows Republican Party principles and priorties
This guy is what is called a "DINO". This means, like a "RINO" on the Republican side, as Democrat In Name Only. How can ANYONE who calls themselves "Pro-life" (which in actuality means what it really is as "forced-birth") and be against the ACA (both Obama and I like the term "Obamacare") call himself a Democrat? Vote for the progressive attorney, if he runs, or anyone else, as the "TRUE" Democrat. We Progressives should seriously consider splitting off from the Democratic Party. We should form our own Progressive Party, maybe with AOC as our standard bearer, and force our requirements on what remains of the Democratic Party.
It is obvious that Jonathan is a MAGA Republican by his totally tone-deaf comments.
yup..that must be true
No, I just think he was from “Pennsylvania” in a former life.
If you're referring to pademocrat, no that would be me. And I called myself that because at the time I joined DKE, I lived in Western Pennsylvania (in Greensburg). I've called seven states - New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Vermont, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Delaware plus DC - home during my lifetime.
Ok.
I was born in Chestnut Hill Hospital in 1954. Chestnut Hill is part of the GREAT City of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania. I grew up and lived in Montgomery County from birth to 1977. That year, my family and I moved to Quakertown in northern Bucks County, Pennsylvania. I lived there from 1977 to 1987. I relocated to the Mainline area, near City Avenue in west Philly, to the town of Narberth, which is also in Montgomery County in Pennsylvania. I lived there for over a year until I moved to Indiana in 1988 when I got married. So, 34 years as a Pennsylvanian living in three different parts of greater Philly. I think this has earned me my place as a PROUD Pennsylvania Progressive and, for now anyway, Democrat. Why should we Progressives NOT form our own "Progressive Party"? Oh course, we would align ourselves with the moderate Democrats. What better way to get our priorities taken seriously by them? They need us. Without our support, they would have NO CHANCE against the MAGA Republicans. This guy above is NOT a moderate Democrat.
Around the time ACA was being built and voted on, Lynch was definitely a pain to hear about, and I remember him wanting to be primaried so badly. For some reason, the past several years he's been out of the news and I forgot he was still in congress! But yeah, these latest comments of his are well in his character. Ideally the primary threat might just make him decide to retire, but with the attitude he has, I'm not so sure.
Rightly or wrongly he has a stronger base than we wish. He managed to obtain nearly 42.5 per cent in 2013 when running in the US Senate primary against Ed Markey.
exactly; dude wins elections; pretty simple
Well, except for the election against Markey, which he lost. But yeah, except for the elections he loses, he wins elections
totally nothing to do with the argument i made; nice try though
He's a "Democrat" in the mold of "Dapper" O'Neil and James Kelly. Two former prominent Boston politicians who were "Democrats" both for the same reason Tulsi Gabbard and Rod Blagojevich were "Democrats", political necessity and because for the longest time, the Democratic Party in Massachusetts was considered the "Irish Party." And that was NOT meant as a compliment. Lynch stays in office only due to longevity and the fact that he has a genuine "rages to riches" story that makes him look more "reasonable" than he actually is.
he wont be easily dislodged
Well aware. I know my hometown.
There's already a progressive party. It's called the Green Party. Another one is the Peace & Freedom Party.
Also, aside from Lynch having a more mixed, anti-choice record prior to the Dobbs decision, he actually is far from being a DINO. In fact, he fought for accountability towards the Iraq War and even supported investigating President Bush about lying about the war.
Lynch is a Democrat that WINS elections; full stop
Lynch also happens to represent a D+15 Congressional District in a state that is deep blue.
I'm far more concerned about unseating Republicans than I am with Lynch at this point.
MA-08 voted for Harris 62-35 and Warren 60-40 in 2024. In 2022 it was Healey 64-35. In 2020 it was Biden 67-31, Markey 67-33. The district covers south Boston and major suburbs south of the city like Quincy. It's a D+15 district and in fact the third bluest in the state of Massachusetts, a state well known for how deeply and reliably democratic it votes.
Lynch winning that district is so fundamentally unremarkable that bringing it up calls the whole argument that it's made in support of into doubt. Are we going to brag about how Nancy Pelosi is a democrat that "WINS elections" because she got reelected in San Francisco?
Daily Kos has a rule against third party advocacy; doesn't the Downballot as well?
Anyhow, there are a number of things we can do to try to push Dems to the left (though we should be careful about where we choose to do it.) Calling for a new "Progressive" third party is just stupid, as it would almost ensure a lot of Republican wins in states and districts where a majority of voters don't want that.
I don’t think pushing Democrats to take more action than they already are against Trump is exactly moving to the left. That’s like saying Liz Cheney is a liberal for fighting against Trump even though she’s a staunch neocon like her father.
Besides, Andrew Yang has already been failing in trying to elect politicians in his Forward party which he argues represents the “radical middle.” It takes no genius to figure out that the “Forward” brand name was actually Obama’s re-election catch phrase.
I forgot about the Forward Party's existence until just now, which just goes to show how much impact he's making.
Back in 2020, Yang originally lent his support to the lesser known but more liberal Democratic Senate Candidate in the KY-SEN primary race, Charles Booker.
Then later after he lost the NYC Mayoral Race to Eric Adams in 2023 he says he was trying to get more centrists in the Democratic Party and apparently being unsuccessful at doing so led him to start the Forward Party.
FAIL. The Democratic Party ALWAYS has centrists and moderates. When have we never had plenty of them?
The U.S. Green Party is basically a foreign OP; it's not a legitimate political organization.
You can't be serious with this statement: "We Progressives should seriously consider splitting off from the Democratic Party. We should form our own Progressive Party, maybe with AOC as our standard bearer, and force our requirements on what remains of the Democratic Party." Even putting the silliness of this idea aside, AOC is actually a pretty standard Democrat at this point...
he absolutely is and labeled me a Trumper when I pushed back
But are you both Pennsylvanians? I was born in Chestnut Hill Hospital in 1954. Chestnut Hill is part of the GREAT City of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania. I grew up and lived in Montgomery County from birth to 1977. That year, my family and I moved to Quakertown in northern Bucks County, Pennsylvania. I lived there from 1977 to 1987. I relocated to the Mainline area, near City Avenue in west Philly, to the town of Narberth, which is also in Montgomery County in Pennsylvania. I lived there for over a year until I moved to Indiana in 1988 when I got married. So, 34 years as a Pennsylvanian living in three different parts of greater Philly. I think this has earned me my place as a PROUD Pennsylvania Progressive and, for now anyway, Democrat. Why should we Progressives NOT form our own "Progressive Party"? Oh course, we would align ourselves with the moderate Democrats. What better way to get our priorities taken seriously by them? They need us. Without our support, they would have NO CHANCE against the MAGA Republicans. This guy above is NOT a moderate Democrat.
Are you seriously suggesting running a third party candidate against Democratic candidates? You were born in 1954, yet you still suggest that? Have you ever looked into why Woodrow Wilson won the 1914 election? Why the 2000 election was close enough for the Supreme Court to fuck around with it? Why Hillary Clinton "lost" in 2016? We really don't need this kind of talk here, and I'd like it to be banned here just as it was on DKE and SSP.
I can't believe I'm even replying to this nonsense, but here goes. You'd be willing to cede elections to MAGA crazies in order to get your way? It's also unclear what your being from PA has to do with anything.
Boy, you guys just do NOT get it, do you? When did I ever say that we in a new "Progressive Party" would run a third party candidate? That is a known recipe for disaster. Yes, I DO remember Ross Perot way back in 1992. He is the reason that Bill Clinton won. He was correct about that "giant sucking sound". So you see, it can go both ways. We have a Progressive Caucus currently that is chaired by a very good lady from Washington State named Pramila Jayapal. She is doing a great job. But, it is only a "caucus", and is part of a greater Democratic Party. That means the moderates and DINO Dems, like this guy above, can stymie us. If we had our own "Progressive Party", then the moderates and DINO's would be FORCED to deal with us as they NEED our support against the, as you say, MAGA crazies. What I am talking about here is what Trump is doing on his side. It is called hardball leverage negotiating. Also, your comments are more MAGA Republican than you realize. You cannot "ban" this kind of talk, as that is NOT free speech. Banning speech is what dictators like Putin do, and is what Trump longs to do also. And, unless the two or more of you are actually current or former Pennsylvanians, as I am, then you have less of a leg to stand on. As for 2016 with Hillary (whom I did vote for) if it had been Bernie Sanders instead, then Trump would most likely not have won. Bernie is now too old and frail. The logical replacement would be AOC.
What Gavin is up to next:
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/26/gavin-newsom-podcast-maga-00206153
Maybe he can invite his ex-wife.
lmao; i saw what you did there; lol
How does Newsom have the time to do his own podcast? It's almost as if he's not even interested in being Governor of California.
Many Democrats in elected office serve in their roles to their fullest with no podcasts.
I wouldn't mind a "weekly address" kind of podcast for Governors or MoCs to communicate to their constituents.
Frankly I wouldn't mind an annual Democratic Party conference where the stars and rising stars of the Democratic Party gather. The major parties in our brethren Anglosphere nations do this on an annual basis.
Both make sense to me.
I’d be very onboard with such a confab
That could work!
Tim Walz is not running for MN-Senate. Still considering a third term for gov.
This is good, we don't need a handful of Dem heavyweights slugging it out until August then turning around and trying to win inside a 2 month general election window. I'd like to see this race coalesce around one Democrat.
Praying to God Keith Ellison does not run now. Or Omar.
i think neither of them would get nominated anyway
About the only thing Ellison has going for him vs. Omar is that he's been elected statewide and re-elected in the same office.
However, I doubt Ellison will want to run for the Senate.
Arizona Governor
Hobbs 43%
Taylor Robson: 35%
Hobbs: 40%
Kimberly Yee: 34%
Hobbs: 39%
Charlie Kirk: 36%
Hobbs 37%
McCain: 36%
Hobbs 40%
Andy Biggs: 38%
Hobbs 40%
Hoffman: 35%
@NoblePredictive | 1,000 RV | 2/11-13
Continuing a trend of weak numbers for the Dem incumbent governor recently. Hochul, Healy, and Hobbs in mid to low 40's. But it's very early as well. Still not where I'd want to be as an incumbent in an ultra swing state.
Trump will make them more popular; just give him time
Agree but it would be helpful if some Democratic incumbents were popular in their states to stand on their own. I think Healy will be fine and Hochul will still win even after a bloody primary but I am not pleased with GOP strength in the North East last year.
And Hobbs is very vulnerable
agreed
Is there anything in particular with Governor Katie Hobbs that would contribute to these polling numbers other than being a Governor in a state where Trump won again but Ruben Gallego also won election to the Senate?
She's another governor that has had the "weak" label on her ever since she eeked out a win in 2022 despite running a terrible campaign.
I'm not sure she's done anything specific but Democrats in particular love to cannibalize their own. She's been hounded by speculation she could be primaried by the Democratic SoS, and though he declined, it still helped fuel the belief that she is a weak incumbent.
My Governor Kathy Hochul of NY has had the same issue of being perceived as weak that she has been unable to shake, although she has done more to herself to deserve it than Hobbs seemingly has.
Nothing of what you have described suggests this is evidence that Hobbs should get a primary challenge. If anything, she should be commended for being the first Democrat being elected as Governor of Arizona since Janet Napolitano back in 2002 (who was re-elected in 2006).
I wouldn't lump all those numbers together. Healey was polling stuff like 40-12 vs various opponents. That's not comparable with someone else polling 40-36. I wouldn't call any of the numbers weak specifically, since we're nearly two years out from election day and people don't like to truly admit to themselves how (and/or if) they are voting until August of election year.
Hobbs will have a serious campaign on her hands. Healey will not. Hochul might or might not, depending on if New York's recent statewide performances are reflective of where the state is going.
My reaction was that it's good she is leading them all, including a McCain, even if just barely.
Does it really matter what this guy does. None of the Dems are really doing anything that personally makes them at risk. They all complain that they can't do anything because they have too few numbers. They have no imagination and the country is crumbling. Several Dems including John Fetterman have voted with the other side. What are they doing about them?
Crazy that one McCain son is considering running for congress as a Democrat and the other for Governor as a Republican.
Keep in mind that Cindy McCain started endorsing Democrats as soon as Trump and maga Republicans came on board.
i would welcome both of them running as a anti-Trump alternative(Cindy McCain is richer than rich; both of her sons would be immediately viable)
So crazy that we managed to get them mixed up in a tweet! 🤪
VA-Gov: Ex-Del. Dave LaRock (R) challenges Winsome Earle-Sears, saying she's not conservative enough and promising a "Virginia DOGE".
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/02/26/virginia-trump-youngkin-larock-governor/
He probably won't be nominated and almost certainly wouldn't win the general if he were, but let the cat fud fly....
Regardless it doesn’t augur well for enthusiasm for Winsome-Sears
If LaRock gains traction, then it may require Sears to move further right to win the primary, thus harming if not killing her general election prospects.
Though LaRock to me is the latest in the long line of "where the hell does he think he's running?" candidates, in both parties. DOGE isn't popular nationally, but it's hard to think of a state where praising it is more harmful (at least with the general electorate) than VA, with the possible exception of MD.
It definitely goes to show how high on their own supply movement conservatives have become. Utterly divorced from reality at this point
I have mixed feelings about this remark, given what election results we actually had last year. These folks are a lot closer to the political reality in the U.S. than they ever should have been.
They are, in many senses. I do not think general policy is one of those. Social and media discourse of the 2024 election was absolutely bereft of policy.
The swingy-ish people that voted R weren't voting that way because they liked the republican policy proposals. If anything their ignorance — often willful ignorance — of republican policy proposals was crucial for their vote turning out the way it did.
I can't agree. Lots of Republican voters have to have supported large-scale deportations of immigrants, for example.
Yes, but how many of them are the swingy-ish people that voted republican instead of die-hard consistent republican voters?
If 80% of 2024 republican voters support large scale deportations, and 20% oppose, that would mean that ten percentage points of their final support do not like that policy. Those ten points would have been less likely to support republicans if they knew of that policy.
The 2024 election had republicans pretty close to 50% of the vote, especially at the presidential level. Losing ten points of support would bring them to only 40% of the vote — that would be a crushing loss. Obviously that kind of swing would not be likely over a single policy item even if that group were voraciously opposed. Even a far more realistic two point swing away from them would be huge, and that would align with >95% of 2024 republican voters being pro-deportation and <5% being ardently opposed.
I think it's safe to assume that the parts of their voter composition that are least likely to support them on various policy grounds are that swingy-ish group.
I fully stand by my argument.
Are you ignoring the percentage of Democratic voters who support large-scale deportations but voted for the Democrats, anyway, because of other factors?
Besides, whatever Republican voters theoretically claim to support or oppose in opinion polls, their decisions to vote for extremist authoritarian types mean that they effectively support them because they are Republican extremist authoritarian types, with whatever issues they supposedly disagree with being either disingenuous or not too important to a great majority of them. I mean, to the Nazi voters who weren't antisemitic or didn't support an attack on the Soviet Union, it was your fault.
Yeah, the recent polling showing Earle-Sears behind Spanberger by double digits is not a good sign for her.
It won’t be better though for a more DOGE friendly GOP candidate who defeats Earle-Sears in the primary. Doesn’t change how toxic Trump, Musk and DOGE are in VA right now.
If Mike Levin (D-CA) doesn't take a strong stand against that lithium battery storage facility in south OC (near homes) he will face a very strong backlash is the OC portion of his district. A statement he released seemed a bit wishy-washy.
Big fire hazard? Are lithium battery storage facilities going to be the new nuclear waste disposals, politically?
already in WA one lit up the night sky big time..near Spokane
Primary him!!
Have supported Lynch but thought he was smarter than this.
it was an own goal; I still think he wins the primary
Hopefully a learning and teaching moment.
Probably, but now and then, people like Eliot Engel get defeated for showing how little they care about their constituents. This district is traditionally quite socially conservative, though.
I do wonder how much that "traditionally" still applies. South Boston, Back Bay, Seaport, and Beacon Hill are not working class dominated areas. Seaport is a new development full of the wealthy. South Boston was the historically working class part of his district but it's been gentrifying over the years as people with higher income jobs move as close to the core city areas as they can, if they can afford it. Quincy is one of the least white cities in the area, with >30% of the city being Asian-American.
The district has changed a lot since the 90s and early 00s when Lynch first came around. If you made an ideological clone of Lynch but without his incumbency, name recognition, history, and connections, I think they'd end up struggling to break through in a primary without doing something to hide their more moderate ideology.
As-is he probably has the seat as long as he wants it, but as you note we do have recent examples of complacent and arrogant incumbents losing primaries.
Indeed. The fact that Boston now has an Asian American Mayor speaks for itself. This is not the same city that was once run by hardline social conservative Ray Flynn. Interestingly, his son Ed Flynn is a Boston City Councilor, but just as Bob Casey Jr wasn't as militant a social conservative as his father, he's not as militant about social issues.
Beacon Hill has NEVER been a working class area. As long as my hometown has been around, it has ALWAYS been a bastion for the elite. We call them Boston Brahmins, wealthy English American Republicans who dominated the city until the Irish population came and in turn dominated until recent years.
Yeah, I didn't want to make my comment too long but I was pretty sure that Beacon Hill and Back Bay have never been working class areas. I know Back Bay was originally developed to attract more upper-middle class residents to the city for tax purposes.
Nowadays, if there's a business opening a location that appeals to that middle class and especially upper middle class demographic (e.g. Patagonia) it's almost always in one of: Back Bay, Harvard Square, or Seaport. Or, very frequently, multiple of those locations. Case in point: Patagonia has a store in Harvard Square and another in Back Bay.
I did say it was traditionally quite socially conservative. I didn't say anything about working-class people, a phrase that has been hijacked in the U.S. not to mean anything about working!
Lynch hasn't ever been at risk of losing re-election. The GOP has failed so hard trying to even run candidates to challenge Lynch that he ended up essentially winning re-election in 2018 and 2020 with no real opponents.
We'll have to see how this plays out come the Democratic Primary next year. Providing Lynch survives the primary, he won't be at risk of losing re-election.
totally agree with your post; i am fine with primarying any incumbent that shows the arrogance mentioned above(especially in districts that the eventual nominee is going to win); however, ive argued many times here that every district and state is different and calls on this site for third party's is just absolutely handing over future elections to the Republicans; i posted some things that i should not have(and it is no excuse) but being called a Trumper frankly pissed me off; apologies to the site owners and the posters
I'm glad I didn't see some of the deleted comments, but there are new comments that need to be policed. I don't want to see remarks about the Democrats serving only AIPAC and not the American people and calls for voting for 3rd parties. Anyway, I agree with your remarks here. Each district is indeed different, and a socialist can win in parts of Queens but not parts of Nebraska.