Yesterday’s results from the sixth congressional district Democratic primary in Illinois have Chris Bowers worried about Democratic prospects in 06. Iraq veteran Tammy Duckworth was the establishment choice in the Primary. She had the backing of every heavyweight in national party, from Hillary Clinton, to John Kerry, to Barak Obama. She had the money, the media and the endorsements that any primary candidate would kill for. So did she win? Probably, but it’s the margin of victory that should give us some pause. The latest reporting has her clinging onto 43% of the vote, while her primary challenger, Christine Cegelis has holds 41%. This is coming down to a margin of a few thousand votes for what should have been a shoe in.
So why the concern? I haven’t followed Duckworth personally, though she has garnered quite a lot of attention as a wounded Iraq war veteran. She may have wonderful positions, or not. I don’t know. The concern is this, this is the team that’s supposed to deliver us a majority in congress in November, and the results thus far, are less than promising. They are having trouble shoeing in their shoe ins. The earth is moving beneath their feet and they seem deaf to the rumble.
If the Democratic establishment is unable to generate enthusiasm or votes for their preferred candidates, who will? Since they seem hell bent on picking Candidates like Bob Casey in Pennsylvania, a man who seems to generate, at best a yawn, but mostly just outright scorn, the prospects don’t look so great. The establishment ignores the activist base (both online and off) of the party, at the party’s peril. We are the people who stuff the envelopes, canvass neighborhoods, work phone banks, and above all else, always show up to vote. When the establishment trots out a candidate, who takes every opportunity, it seems, to side with the Republican party, and who won’t even commit to the simple idea that illegal wiretapping by the government is illegal, where the hell does that leave us in November?
This is the most important election since the last most important election, whenever the hell that was. The difference, this time, is that we have a shot to start moving the needle in the right direction again by retaking congress. I, for one, am sick to death of bullshit holding actions where I’m expected to suck it up and vote for the least objectionable candidate. I know I’m not alone. By giving us a whole host of bad choices and sub-par candidates, the Democratic party makes what should be an easy and fun election year, anything but easy or fun.
As Chris says, the ball is in the establishment’s court. They need to figure out, in a hurry, what’s important to the grassroots of the party. Understanding the seething anger over the NSA scandal, and understanding the concern over the erosion of a woman’s right to choose would be good places to start. Producing candidates who speak to those issues, along with all the others I haven’t bothered listing, would be a nice change of pace.
Cegelis conceded this morning. Duckworth won 44 – 41. It would be rather refreshing to see a person on wheels in Congress. Maybe disabilities issues could actually get some real face time.
I too have no idea of her stances on absolutely anything, but here’s to hoping she’s a Progressive, female member of Congress.
And here’s to hoping that we can send Chuck Pennacchio, a real Progressive to join her in Congress from Pennsylvania instead of DINObot.
If you want Chuck to win, you’d be wise to spend a few hours reading over the post-mortem diaries this morning. I’ve been trying to follow both campaigns, and note that in both the national and state parties “pre-blessed” candidates for a primary election.
And all this time I thought the endorsements came after the primaries.
And all this time I thought the endorsements came after the primaries.
Yeah, I keep mistaking myself for a member of the party who has some say in who the party endorses. Live and learn. I suppose if I free myself of these silly notions, I’ll be a far happier young (cough) man.
You would be wise to check into the background before you comment. Reworded so that you might understand, your statement sounds like:
Just saying. You could fairly safely substitute Cegelis for Pennacchio and Duckworth for Casey and be on the right track. The only difference being that Christine already had a very strong track record in her district.
that’s why i stated that i too had no idea what she was like and that i hoped she was a Progressive. it seems like many others here don’t know much about her nor the race in general. educate us!
i’ve been getting the word out on the differences between pennacchio and casey for the past few months as has jpol, BooMan and a host of others here. please please make a ruckus if you know of more candidates plopped down from the top.
When “the establishment” brings in someone from outside the district, then tells everyone that this is the candidate — completely ignoring those that are on the ground — what do you expect to happen?
You may be concerned that Duckworth won by such a small margin, but in Illinois, within the district, there are many that are mad as hell that she won at all. (Visit this site for a taste of reaction from within the state.)
Why do party leaders believe that Democrats will stand for outsiders telling them who to vote for, who their candidates should be? Do party leaders look at party members as only so much fodder — the way Bush looks at the volunteer army?
There is a growing disconnect between many grassroots Democrats and the party leadership. Candidates are chosen not for what they believe in but how they fit into the new model. Duckworth is a “fighting Democrat”; Casey is an “electable moderate Democrat”.
Duckworth, in my opinion, is a good candidate. But everyone knows that a candidate needs the party supporters in their district to be united for them. This was a very bad start and has left a bad taste in people’s mouth. Yesterday’s election in Illinois created a lot of “independents” out of were loyal Democrats.
In November, the party will have two tough races on their hand: Duckworth in IL-6, and Bean in IL-8. One has gotten off to a tough start; they other has spent the past two years pissing off progressive Democrats by voting for CAFTA, for the bankruptcy bill, for the Terry Schiavo bill, for the elimination of the estate tax, etc.
And to top it all off, Republicans are sure to point out that neither person lives in the district that they want to represent.
but in Illinois, within the district, there are many that are mad as hell that she won at all.
This is why I’m moderately pissed off about this. The Washington crowd that annointed Duckworth and threw so much money at her doesn’t have a clue. They are being handed a 15-20 point generic majority and they’re still going to blow it. Duckworth may well be a better candidate than Cegelis, I’m too far removed to tell, but ignoring local party members to install a candidate they’re not familiar with is a lousy way to energize the base.
I wouldn’t be so upset about the party ignoring non-establishment voices if the Washington establishment wasn’t so inept. This election season is going to end badly.
couldn’t agree more about the ‘leadership’ anointing candidates. buuuullllshiiiit. the ‘leadership’ is moving further and further from the base and taking them for granted. well, fuck them.
Don’t worry. Yes, Casey is bland, but he hasn’t won the primary yet. Besides, it’s Pennsylvania, not Vermont.
I understand that Cegelis was quite a vivacious campaigner, very clear, appealing, informed, Progressive positions on all the issues. If I’m not mistaken she also brought some political experience of some kind to the race. She was a very tough competitor who had a lot of grass roots support and knew how to raise money.
Nevertheless, your points about the establishment are well taken.
Instead of waiting around for another sad November 3rd, I’m going to be PISSED OFF now and use the guerrilla media to militate for meaningful representation in the Democratic party.
give a warm welcome to our newest front-page writer, Chris from Rowhouse Logic. And watch out for the pandas.
Welcome Chris!
Welcome to the pond Chris!
I had heard something about welcoming you with Panda Beers, so here you go!

What’s that? Oh….bears….oops.
Hmmmn, interesting ejmw. Did you photograph the Red Panda in Bhutan or at home? Strangely, there is also a Red Panda beer made by a small brewery in Australia. It, too is a wheat beer. Must have ripped off the idea from Fritz in Bhutan, I guess. Never tasted it, though.
Chris so happy you’re here that we’re shouting from the treetops.
Glad to have you. Hopefully your stay will be long and enjoyable.
Welcome to BT, chris!
HAHAHAHA – that’s the one you were talking about? priceless. the ace freeley one [that’s the one with only one eye done up, right?] looks sad.
I never thought pandas could look disreputable.
Welcome, Chris!!
I’ll be hanging on your every word. Welcome!
Welcome Chris!
I share your belief that this is a hugely important election. But I don’t see why a strongly contested primary is a sign of anything but a healthy democratic process within the party. I continue to feel very good about our prospects for November.
-Alan
I’m a huge fan of primaries, beleive me. The more, the better. I may have worded this post poorly. As it’s my first, I was a little nervous and may not have been clear. My concern is that the establishment that did such a bad job of forcing their shoe-in candidate is the same one that will be charge of beating the Republicans in November. They don’t inspire confidence.
Right, I see your point. I don’t think what you are saying is stupid or unreasonable–I just disagree. But I admittedly have a tendency toward being overly optimistic (in contrast to my friends in my former home of Minnesota, for instance, I perennially believe “this is the year” the Vikings will finally win the Super Bowl). So no need to pay me much mind. 😉
-Alan
I have to join in on this madness, now don’t I?

Peace
this was expected to be a close primary, with 2 good candidates. The “Establishment” did have their choice, Duckworth, but most people respected Cagelis. I understand your worry, but in this case, I think it was a case of 2 respected candidates.
Ridiculous, is one way to put this diary.
We had two candidates. both had good messages. One was more experience, the other had more money.
That has of course absolutely NOTHING to do with Nov. That’s because, amazingly, in Nov the winner will face a repuke.
Please, let’s keep our heads.
Yeah, I guess It’s a little ridiculous. Judging from your comment, and some others, I can tell I failed to make the point I was trying to make. That point may well have been stupid, and I probably should have left Il-06 out of it.
Watching candidates pushed in and out of races in Pennsylvania over the last year by Rendell and the DSCC and DCCC has been a frustrating experience, and I’ve really disagreed with the choices they’ve made. Reading Bower’s commentary about how an anointed candidate nearly lost to a more progressive opponent, reinforced some of the concerns that I have about that strategy. Perhaps that’s a bridge too far, and I’m making something out of nothing. I think the democratic base, ultimately, needs to be really excited the general or we’re in for another disappointing election season. I don’t see the moves being made by the Democratic party leadership as doing anything other than dampening that excitement.
Thanks for the feedback Dataguy. I’ll try to be less ridiculous in the future.
Why? It’s refreshing to read (at least for a couple of paragraphs) about an election that’s NOT taking place in Pennsylvania. Although the PA races are indisputably important, not all of us are from PA. We don’t mind the diversion. So write about whatever you want to write about.
Oh nevermind him. I thought it was an interesting point. The Dems should either (1) not force candidates down the throats of the base or else (2) at least pick candidates who win. I prefer (1), of course, being the base.
The only concern I have is that Duckworth won after DC jammed Duckworth down their throats.
I interviewed Cegelis for ePluribus Media and found her to be a great progressive candidate. She has been running for almost four years after a near miss in 2004. She had DFA and local support and was on her way to winning and then the DLC and consultants came in and stole her party supplies.
Sucks big time…but I’m a Dem and will support Duckworth. We need the Congress more than we need one candidate (See Crashing The Gates).
Welcome to BT, Chris. Looking at your own blog, I wonder if we should expect more car blogging at BT? 😉 (This might increase the young male demographic here, and I’m not sure that would be a good thing…)
Oh, and you might be interested in the origins of ‘shoo-in’.
No need to worry about car blogging from me. I don’t own one and I only rent one when I travel somewhere with no decent public transportation. Thanks for the tip on “shoo in.” I engage in huge number of misspellings and typos, so brace yourself for the worst.
There was an acticle about Duckworth in the N.Y.times or USA a while back, and I was not impressed. She was a moderate at best, a “little” Hillary,she was not against war.
Lois Murphy in 6th district in Pa. is also looking like “little” Hillary,changed her colors from green on yellow to red,white and blue.
I was told by her people its because ,you can’t see green on yellow that well????????
From what I have heard about Tammy Duckworth, is that she wants us to stay in Iraq till the cows come home. She wants the job done and then come home. I think she has drunk the koolaid from the dlcers for sure! I have nothing against her. except that she is running in the crowd that is not good for us as a whole. Thank God I am not in Illinois anylonger. I would be hopping mad right now. Christine was the better of the two, for sure!
Some have suggested that its OK that this was a competitive primary and that this is a good sign. I wouldn’t argue with the point about competitive primaries. But one has to consider that in these primaries, most of the discussion is about name recognition and very little of it gets to the real issues. As a result, when a candidate is brought in from outside the district and given huge financial support, it is difficult for the grassroots to compete against this.
But the worst part is that when you look at IL-6 and IL-8, the party is supporting candidates that hardly contrast at all with the republicans. While we sit here and discuss how much we are disgusted with the Bush administration and their policies, the party leadership is recruiting candidates that could easily run as Republicans if they needed to.
Obviously, Bob Casey comes to mind. But to a slightly lesser degree so do these two candidates in Illinois (especially Bean). Instead of running campaigns that contrast Democrats with Republicans, the party seems to have adopted Markos’ (DailyKos) strategy of simply going after Bush fatigue. According to Rahm Emmanuel, it all comes down to money anyway == so forget the issues and fundraise like crazy.
The party membership in Illinois feel different — we want candidates that will stand up for progressive values and solutions, not run away from them. We want candidates that will not run into a corner if their opponent calls them a tax and spent liberal who is soft on defense. We want someone who will say “it is YOU who have spent our national treasure — you have spent in on an immoral war, on enriching businesses that export our jobs. We are fiscally responsible and we have a track record to prove it.” Instead, we get pro-life candidates who endorse Bush’s tax policies and who believe increasing the defense budget is priority number one. Great, so what will be so different if we elect these people?
The establishment picks someone who they feel won’t rock boats too much, too soon, too fast (and I’m still wondering exactly what boats those are, are they really the nations boat or does it also include our own establishments boat) and they throw all their money behind their pick. Meanwhile the grassroots is on fire for someone totally different with very few dollars and both candidates are neck and neck in the primary! God give me strength to listen to the establishment bitch that Howard Dean is wasting “their” campaign cash ever again…..they are wasting their own damn money and blaming someone else. It’s like Bush saying that we will lose the Iraq War because don’t all spew propaganda and bullshit to confuse the enemy and make them all believe we are tougher and bigger and leaner and meaner than we really are! It is all just so much bullshit!
Why are we constantly surprised that the Democrats put forward candidates that are centrist at best? They have abdicated the role of opposition and they are uninterested in representing real progressives.
Are you comfortable knowing that the Democratic Party is the chewing gum and bailing wire we plan to use to hold the republic together? Does anyone feel confident they would know how to use the power of the majority if they happen to win in 2006? Has anyone, except Representative Conyers and Senator Feingold, laid out a plan to restore the rule of law and accountability to the government? How will they purge and then rejuvenate the thousands of Federal jobs given over to Republican cronies and political incompetents? How precisely will they account for and recover the billions misspent by the Bush Administration? Who in their ranks will formulate the military/political policies and provide the leadership that will extricate us from the quicksand of the current Middle East situation? Why isn’t this party calling for a comprehensive, scientific, all-out effort to avert a planet-wide ecological crisis?
How many chances do they get before we form a real party of progressive values? How long before we create our own ideological platform to support real democracy after so many fruitless attempts to get through to the Democrats’ weak-kneed, bourgeoisie leadership? I, for one, am donating nothing this cycle to any general Democratic campaign fund but I will support candidates with the right views. I will not waste my vote or my money on mediocrity ever again.