I wonder how much of this is the perceived failures or lack of success of Peters as Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee chair in 2022 and 2024. Peters isn't that old, especially for a senator. In fact many individuals in their 70s run for office, especially for senate. He may have some underlying health issues, but barring that this…
I wonder how much of this is the perceived failures or lack of success of Peters as Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee chair in 2022 and 2024. Peters isn't that old, especially for a senator. In fact many individuals in their 70s run for office, especially for senate. He may have some underlying health issues, but barring that this may just be internal pressure to step down. 2026, unless some massive scandal or anomaly happens, should be a very favorable year for Democrats including in the senate and in swing states like Michigan. Perhaps we'll get more details later along with how the MI senate race now plays out.
I wouldn't call Peters time as senate chair a failure but others from what I've read see it as a failure or "perceived failure." There has been some frustration that the Wisconsin senate election in 2022 was very winnable and Mandela Barnes was neglected due to perceptions of being a weak candidate and thus didn't get nearly enough funding. Many would also point out a very winnable race in PA in 2024 that somehow more could have been done to win. Personally, I don't think Peters was a "failure" though I do think his time in this role was rather lackluster. He's no Howard Dean but he got the job done considering all the chaos in DC. The problem is his "perceived failure" which translates to what the DNC failed to achieve, even if much of that is beyond his control.
Frankly, I see problems with the DSCC as not unique to when Peters ran it.
There were problems with the DSCC even back in 2020 when it chose to endorse Sara Gideon's Senate campaign against Senator Susan Collins back in June 2019, months before the primary race was even held. According to Nathan Bernard, a reporter at the worker-owned magazine Mainer (when he was interviewed by CBS News), the DSCC's endorsement of Gideon's campaign killed her chances of unseating Susan Collins.
The DSCC can make plenty of errors. The way to deal with this is to be smart in when the right time to make the investment for a particular campaign. I'd prefer the primary process be dealt with where the Senate candidates themselves run their own campaigns and the DSCC comes in later, not earlier.
Many politicians stick around until they are no longer able to hold office anymore, but not all. He'll be retiring from politics at 68, having served 18 years in elected federal office and 25 years in total elected office.
We're in an era where senators' primary day job is confirming executive nominees and making last minute votes to avoid government shutdowns or debt limit implosions (where all the details are decided by someone else). Why stick around to do boring work that any other decent democrat can do basically the same thing and he can go enjoy retirement?
For this whole decade 2026 is the most promising one for a democrat in a swing seat/state to retire. Obviously we don't know the outcome yet, but nobody does when they're deciding whether or not to retire. It's as good a bet as he can count on to give his successor a better chance of being another democrat.
I wonder how much of this is the perceived failures or lack of success of Peters as Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee chair in 2022 and 2024. Peters isn't that old, especially for a senator. In fact many individuals in their 70s run for office, especially for senate. He may have some underlying health issues, but barring that this may just be internal pressure to step down. 2026, unless some massive scandal or anomaly happens, should be a very favorable year for Democrats including in the senate and in swing states like Michigan. Perhaps we'll get more details later along with how the MI senate race now plays out.
Per Peters, he didn’t want to stay in elected office in Congress forever.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna189579
I think Peters did a terrific job at DSCC
Failure? They hung on to the senate in 2022 when everyone thought they were going to lose it.
I wouldn't call Peters time as senate chair a failure but others from what I've read see it as a failure or "perceived failure." There has been some frustration that the Wisconsin senate election in 2022 was very winnable and Mandela Barnes was neglected due to perceptions of being a weak candidate and thus didn't get nearly enough funding. Many would also point out a very winnable race in PA in 2024 that somehow more could have been done to win. Personally, I don't think Peters was a "failure" though I do think his time in this role was rather lackluster. He's no Howard Dean but he got the job done considering all the chaos in DC. The problem is his "perceived failure" which translates to what the DNC failed to achieve, even if much of that is beyond his control.
A “perceived failure”. Oh, politics.
Barnes was funded; I am tired of such Monday morning quarterbacking (not saying that you are doing it)
Frankly, I see problems with the DSCC as not unique to when Peters ran it.
There were problems with the DSCC even back in 2020 when it chose to endorse Sara Gideon's Senate campaign against Senator Susan Collins back in June 2019, months before the primary race was even held. According to Nathan Bernard, a reporter at the worker-owned magazine Mainer (when he was interviewed by CBS News), the DSCC's endorsement of Gideon's campaign killed her chances of unseating Susan Collins.
The DSCC can make plenty of errors. The way to deal with this is to be smart in when the right time to make the investment for a particular campaign. I'd prefer the primary process be dealt with where the Senate candidates themselves run their own campaigns and the DSCC comes in later, not earlier.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chUCk-1NVaM
All states are different; you have to adjust the strategy depending on the state being analyzed
Many politicians stick around until they are no longer able to hold office anymore, but not all. He'll be retiring from politics at 68, having served 18 years in elected federal office and 25 years in total elected office.
We're in an era where senators' primary day job is confirming executive nominees and making last minute votes to avoid government shutdowns or debt limit implosions (where all the details are decided by someone else). Why stick around to do boring work that any other decent democrat can do basically the same thing and he can go enjoy retirement?
For this whole decade 2026 is the most promising one for a democrat in a swing seat/state to retire. Obviously we don't know the outcome yet, but nobody does when they're deciding whether or not to retire. It's as good a bet as he can count on to give his successor a better chance of being another democrat.
I think I'd make the same decision if I were him.