Connect with us

Politics

‘What so many people told us was impossible’: Progressives promote early midterm success

Published

on

‘What so many people told us was impossible’: Progressives promote early midterm success

Eight years in the past, Jessica Cisneros was an intern for Texas’ Rep. Henry Cuellar.

Two years in the past, she got here inside 4 share factors of forcing the veteran Democratic congressman out of workplace.

And this week, she held her former boss under the brink essential to win the district’s Democratic nomination, triggering a Might 24 runoff.

“What we’re doing proper now’s what so many individuals instructed us was inconceivable,” Cisneros, a 28-year-old immigration lawyer, instructed supporters at a main night time marketing campaign occasion Tuesday. “And right here we’re.”

Advertisement

Tuesday’s primaries in Texas, the nation’s earliest, provide the primary glimpse into what the midterm election cycle has in retailer for each events. As Democrats try to take care of their razor-thin majorities within the Home and Senate, Cisneros’ sturdy displaying within the twenty eighth District has reignited debate round which wing of the occasion holds momentum heading into the first season.

Her marketing campaign represents the sort of story liberal Democrats have sought to share over latest cycles: that progressive insurance policies on every thing from healthcare to local weather change are well-liked, even in a various district like Cuellar’s, which stretches from the border city of Laredo to San Antonio, one of many fastest-growing cities within the nation.

Over the previous few election cycles, progressives have demonstrated they will topple well-funded and established centrist Democrats, even in components of the nation that don’t seem to be sturdy territory for the far left.

However progressives have but to show that they will draw out sufficient new voters to win normal elections within the sort of swing districts the place the Democratic institution prefers to run moderates.

Can a candidate who backs the Inexperienced New Deal and “Medicare for all” win a aggressive seat in a normal election? A handful have come shut.

Advertisement

“The narrative going into this election has been that progressives try to go too far too quick, that our politics aren’t resonating with People,” stated Pedro Lira, co-director of the Texas Working Households Occasion, which endorsed Cisneros and three different congressional candidates who both received their primaries outright or superior to a runoff. “We’re clearly displaying in Texas that that’s not true.”

Republicans used the 2021 redistricting course of to shore up their incumbents, which means that solely two of the state’s 38 congressional districts are seen as aggressive. The seat Cisneros is searching for is one in every of them. Following Tuesday’s outcomes and the extended Democratic main, election forecasters on the Prepare dinner Political Report rated the seat a toss-up.

The opposite Texas Democrat to earn the endorsement of progressive leaders Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) was Greg Casar, a former Austin metropolis councilman and tenants’ rights organizer, who received a main in a closely Democratic district.

Few victories would provoke progressives like taking down Cuellar, one in every of a handful of conservatives left within the Home Democratic Caucus.

The race can also be a key one for abortion rights teams. Cuellar is the final Democrat within the Home against abortion rights. Final 12 months he was the only Democrat to hitch Republicans in voting in opposition to a invoice to stop states from limiting entry to abortions.

Advertisement

Whereas Cuellar has tried to color Cisneros as too liberal for the district, significantly on border safety and oil and gasoline points key to the area, Cisneros has argued that Cuellar is out of step as a consequence of his conservative stances on abortion, immigration and gun management.

In latest weeks, Cisneros leaned right into a political reward within the type of an FBI raid on Cuellar’s residence and workplace. Whereas Cuellar has not been accused of any crimes and has stated the investigation will reveal no wrongdoing on his half, he pulled again on public campaigning after the information broke. Although the investigation hasn’t helped him, it wasn’t sufficient at hand Cisneros a victory, both: Cuellar took 48.4% of the vote to her 47%.

“The runoff goes to be hard-fought and actually shut,” stated Ross Morales Rocketto, co-founder of Run for One thing, a political motion group that recruits progressive candidates. “I believe folks underestimate Henry Cuellar and the connections he has with the communities in south Texas.”

For Democrats, the intraparty battle usually presents itself as a David vs. Goliath contest between an entrenched incumbent and an upstart progressive. In firmly Democratic districts, progressives who beat extra reasonable members of their occasion have gone on to simply win the final election, like Ocasio-Cortez in New York and Reps. Ayanna Pressley and Marie Newman in Massachusetts and Illinois.

Moderates, nonetheless, argue that there’s a distinction between nominating a Casar within the liberal enclave of Austin, and, doubtlessly, a Cisneros within the mixed rural, city and border communities that make up Texas’ twenty eighth District.

Advertisement

“If Cisneros wins her runoff, it isn’t in any respect clear that she’s going to have the ability to win the final election,” stated Matt Bennett, a co-founder of the centrist Democratic suppose tank Third Manner.

“We hope she does; we’d be very strongly behind her,” he added. “However there’s a fairly unhealthy monitor file for candidates endorsed by the far left in swing normal elections.”

Bennett pointed to 2 progressives — Kara Eastman of Nebraska and Dana Balter of New York — who beat reasonable Democrats in 2018 primaries however misplaced their normal elections in addition to rematches in 2020.

Progressive teams like Our Revolution and Justice Democrats “have by no means, ever flipped a seat — not as soon as ever,” stated Bennett. “That’s what the secret right here is … creating majorities and beating Republicans in robust districts.”

Not solely have progressives did not flip seats, centrists say, however the insurance policies they promote may also be liabilities for moderates working in aggressive seats.

Advertisement

Final 12 months Third Manner launched Defend PAC, an effort to guard reasonable Democrats working in purple districts from being tied to progressive insurance policies they don’t help. Former centrist Democratic Reps. Xochitl Torres Small of New Mexico, Joe Cunningham of South Carolina and Kendra Horn of Oklahoma signed on as advisory members.

The three flipped Republican-held seats in 2018 however misplaced their reelection bids in 2020 after GOP opponents claimed they supported progressive insurance policies just like the Inexperienced New Deal and Medicare for all.

President Biden, in his State of the Union speech on Tuesday, provided a blueprint to candidates combating to plant their flag within the reasonable camp: He rejected calls to “defund the police” by ad-libbing, “fund them, fund them,” and referred to as for safer borders, whereas glossing over or ignoring progressive issues like local weather change, abortion rights and pupil mortgage debt.

“I believe he was making an attempt to mannequin habits right here for Democrats and say to them, ‘Look, you’ve got to articulate a really clear place on these points,’” Bennett stated of the president’s effort to stake out claims to stances that enchantment to extra centrist voters.

Nonetheless, for progressives in different races, the leads to Texas renewed hope that their idea of elections is appropriate — that sturdy grassroots actions centered round their favored insurance policies can draw out sufficient voters to win primaries and normal elections, even within the hardest races.

Advertisement

“It was encouraging to see that the motion that we’re constructing in locations like Kentucky — but additionally locations like Texas — they’re gaining help,” stated Charles Booker, a progressive Democrat searching for to unseat Republican Sen. Rand Paul in Kentucky. “We’re definitely taking some inspiration in our personal proper.”

That is Booker’s second Senate marketing campaign, having misplaced the 2020 Democratic nomination to former Marine fighter pilot Amy McGrath. McGrath’s supporters had argued that as a former congressional candidate with a deep battle chest, she was one of the best candidate to take a run at then-Senate Majority Chief Mitch McConnell. In addition they argued that a few of Booker’s coverage positions, like help for the Inexperienced New Deal in a coal-producing state, put him out of contact with voters.

Booker, who had solely ever received a state legislative seat, entered the 2020 race after McGrath had already received the backing of the occasion equipment.

However he skilled a surge in help over his sturdy stance on racial justice, together with his presence at Black Lives Matter protests, and misplaced the first by lower than 3 share factors.

McGrath went on to lose by practically 20 factors to McConnell, regardless of outraising him by $30 million. Kentucky has not despatched a Democrat to the Senate in three a long time.

Advertisement

Booker has cleared the Democratic area this time, however trails Paul in fundraising and polls.

He says that if extra Democrats invested in his marketing campaign as a substitute of questioning whether or not he’s a viable candidate, it might make the distinction.

“The query that some will ask,” he stated, “is ‘Are you able to win as a progressive?’… What you’re really asking is ‘Are you able to win with out assist?’”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Trump says Israel should hit Iran’s nuclear facilities, slamming Biden’s response

Published

on

Trump says Israel should hit Iran’s nuclear facilities, slamming Biden’s response

Former President Trump on Friday said that Israel should attack Iran’s nuclear facilities while mocking President Biden’s answer earlier this week on the subject.  

While speaking at a campaign event in Fayetteville, North Carolina, he said when Biden was asked about Israel attacking Iran, the president answered, “’As long as they don’t hit the nuclear stuff.’ That’s the thing you wanna hit, right? I said, ‘I think he’s got that one wrong. Isn’t that what you’re supposed to hit?’” 

Trump went on to say that nuclear proliferation is the “biggest risk we have.” 

TRUMP SLAMS THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION’S RESPONSE TO HURRICANE HELENE

Former President Trump on Friday during a campaign event in Fayetteville, N.C., said that Israel should attack Iran’s nuclear facilities while mocking President Biden’s answer earlier this week on the subject.  (AP Photo/Karl B DeBlaker)

Advertisement

The former president said he rebuilt the “entire military, jets everything, I built it, including nuclear” while he was president. “I hated to build the nuclear, but I got to know firsthand the power of that stuff, and I’ll tell you what: we have to be totally prepared. We have to be absolutely prepared.”

He said when Biden was asked about Israel and Iran: “His answer should have been “‘Hit the nuclear first, worry about the rest later.’”

Trump made similar comments in an interview with Fox News on Thursday, telling correspondent Bill Melugin Biden’s response on Israel attacking Iran was the “craziest thing I’ve ever heard. That’s the biggest risk we have. The biggest risk we have is nuclear.” 

TRUMP NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISORS MOCK BIDEN’S WARNINGS TO ISRAEL TO STICK TO ‘PROPORTIONAL’ IRAN RESPONSE

Rockets over Israel this week

Many rockets, fired from Iran, are seen over Jerusalem from Hebron, West Bank, Tuesday. The Israeli army announced that missiles were fired from Iran towards Israel and sirens were heard across the country, especially in Tel Aviv.  (Wisam Hashlamoun/Anadolu via Getty Images)

He continued, “I mean, to make the statement, ‘Please leave their nuclear alone.’ I would tell you that that’s not the right answer. That was the craziest answer because, you know what? Soon, they’re going to have nuclear weapons. And then you’re going to have problems.” 

Advertisement

Former deputy director of national intelligence Kash Patel, who served under Trump, said this week: “Iran launched a war into Israel, so to say that the Israelis who are defending themselves and our hostages shouldn’t attack sites in Iran that could kill them – especially when you’re the one who gave Iran $7 billion as a commander in chief and then allowed them to acquire nuclear materials – is wildly political.”

Biden speaking to reporters

Biden told reporters this week that he and the other members of the G-7 were in agreement that Israel should have a “measured” response to Iran.  (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Following Tuesday’s attack by Iran on Israel, Biden told reporters at Joint Base Andrews, “the answer is no,” of Israel potentially targeting the country’s nuclear program. 

He added that he and the other members of the G-7 all “agree that [Israel has] a right to respond, but they should respond proportionally,”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump blames immigrants as if that were a policy position. It's racist

Published

on

Trump blames immigrants as if that were a policy position. It's racist

On Friday, we learned that the U.S. added 254,000 jobs in September, bringing the unemployment rate down to 4.1%. When President Obama was elected, the Great Recession had pushed the rate to 7.8%. President Trump inherited a rate of 3.6%, and he gave President Biden a mishandled pandemic and 6.4% unemployment.

Opinion Columnist

LZ Granderson

LZ Granderson writes about culture, politics, sports and navigating life in America.

Advertisement

The next president is likely going to inherit an economy that is strong, even if many Americans aren’t feeling that way. The next president will also bring with them a narrative about the economy. In the case of Trump, it’s a story we’ve heard far too many times: Blame the minorities.

Over the eight years of the Obama administration, wages went up and unemployment reached historic lows, but the subprime mortgage crisis that began in 2007 left a lasting mark on housing. How could it not, when home ownership fell to its lowest point since 1965? Construction slowed, but demand for housing did not, and that’s how we ended up with the affordability crisis we have now.

Trump wants voters to blame desperate migrants for the shortage of affordable housing, but it was his friends on Wall Street who began this cycle.

Just as it was his intentional downplaying of the pandemic during the first few months — something he said he did to prevent panic — that left Americans misinformed and sent the economy into a tailspin. Instead of preparing us, Trump told us to blame China. That rhetoric sparked a wave of anti-Asian hate crimes.

Advertisement

During the Obama administration, more than 2.5 million immigrants were deported. That’s more than any other administration had forced out before, and Americans were still losing their homes — because that housing crisis was caused by corporate greed, not by illegal immigration.

Trump fared well in 2016 by blaming desperate Black and brown people as the root cause of housing problems and any other economic issue, neatly avoiding any context about Wall Street’s role. And because this helped get him to the White House the first time, I understand why there’s a temptation for his campaign now to couch this rhetoric as policy — to claim, for instance, that deporting people will ease the housing shortage or that disaster relief money for victims of Hurricane Helene was diverted to migrants at the border.

But it’s not policy.

It’s just racist.

And we need to just call it out for what it is.

Advertisement

This week, the Trump campaign sent out a press release that read “Kamala’s Open Border Jeopardizes FEMA’s Hurricane Response.” It was in response to Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas reiterating that the Federal Emergency Management Agency may not have enough funds to make it to the end of hurricane season in November. The agency initially raised concerns at the beginning of the season in June, and the Biden administration overhauled aspects of FEMA relief to get funds out quicker. From Hurricane Katrina in 2005 through 2021, FEMA has spent more than $12 billion a year. From 1992 to 2004, it was $5 billion.

It was weather, not immigrants, that forced more than 3.3 million Americans out of their homes in 2022, nearly half that number for more than a month. However, the Trump campaign didn’t mention climate change, perhaps because the former president still thinks it’s a hoax. But the data show more funds were needed in response to the sweeping damage caused by natural disasters, not because of any trend in immigration.

And yet, the Trump campaign’s press secretary said: “FEMA has run out of money for the rest of hurricane season because Kamala Harris used the funds for free giveaways to illegal immigrants.”

That’s not true.

During the vice presidential debate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) took every opportunity he could to fault migrants and immigration for economic issues, echoing his boss. For his part, Trump’s comments about immigrants “poisoning the blood of our country” echoed Adolph Hitler. No wonder Vance compared Trump to Hitler in 2016 before switching allegiances.

Advertisement

Now the two of them are floating “mass deportation” as a solution … to problems caused by corporate greed. Never mind that deportations would aggravate many problems, including food costs and housing shortages.

In 2019, more than half the farmworkers in the country — 450,000 — were immigrants. In addition to the billions it would cost for the Trump-Vance deportation plan, what do you think would happen to food prices if they had their way? And to housing availability if a huge percentage of construction workers were deported? In Texas, half of the industry’s laborers undocumented.

Blaming Black and brown people might be red meat on the campaign trail, but it just isn’t sound economic policy.

It’s just racism.

@LZGranderson

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Biden Cautions Israel on Striking Iranian Oil Fields

Published

on

Video: Biden Cautions Israel on Striking Iranian Oil Fields

new video loaded: Biden Cautions Israel on Striking Iranian Oil Fields

transcript

transcript

Biden Cautions Israel on Striking Iranian Oil Fields

President Biden said Israel should consider alternative ways of retaliating against Iran, a day after he said the United States was “in discussion” about the possibility of Israel striking Iran’s oil fields.

“The Israelis have not concluded how they’re — what they’re going to do in terms of a strike. That’s under discussion. I think there are — if I were in their shoes, I’d be thinking about other alternatives than striking oil fields.” Reporter: “At this point, you still haven’t spoken to Netanyahu. Is it fair to say that you have little personal influence over what he decides to do?” “No, look, our teams are in contact 12 hours a day. They’re constantly in contact. I’ve already had my presidential daily brief. We’ve already had interface between our military, our diplomats. It’s in constant contact. They are trying to figure out — it’s the high holidays as well — they’re not going to make a decision immediately. And so we’re going to wait to see when they want to talk. The Israelis have every right to respond to the vicious attacks on them, not just from the Iranians, but from everyone from Hezbollah to Houthis — anyway. But the fact is that they have to be very much more careful about dealing with civilian casualties.” Reporter: “So how should they respond? You expressed concerns about attacks on Iranian oil facilities. How should they respond?” “That’s between me and them.” Last night you said that there’s still a lot to do to avoid an all out war in the Middle East. Firstly, aren’t we pretty close to that definition already. And secondly, what can you really do to stop that happening. There’s a lot we are doing. The main thing we can do is try to rally the rest of the world and our allies into participating the French are and in Lebanon and other places to tamp this down. But when you have proxies as irrational as Hezbollah and the Houthis, and it’s a hard thing to determine. Did you have any worries that Netanyahu may be trying to influence the election. And that’s why he has not agreed to a diplomatic solution. No administration has helped Israel more than I have. None none. And I think Bibi should remember that. And whether he’s trying to influence the election, I don’t know. But I’m not counting on that. You’ve said many times recently that you want to speak to him, that you plan to plan it and say, I want to. You don’t want to. No, I didn’t say that. You’re making it sound like I’m seeking a speaking. I’m assuming when they make their adjustment, how they’re going to respond, we will then have a discussion.

Advertisement

Recent episodes in Middle East Crisis

Continue Reading

Trending