Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter has announced that he is running in the primary to take Sen. Blanche Lincoln’s job away. He’s got a website up and a video.
He comes out swinging, blaming Washington DC for bailing out Wall Street with no strings attached and serving the interests of the insurance industry. From what I hear, Halter is not a Blue Dog Democrat and is a friend of the LGBT community. I can’t say that I know how he’d vote if elected, but he’s a serious threat to Sen. Lincoln. She will have to watch her left flank now. which probably means that she’ll be a better vote until the primary is decided.
The Washington Establishment, including the DSCC, has no choice but to protect Lincoln, but her reelection numbers are weak. This could be a similar case to Chris Dodd in Connecticut, where the incumbent has worn out their welcome but a new popular Democrat has a good chance to retain the seat. If you want to send a message, you can donate here.
Now, the progressive wing of the party is very likely to get behind this challenge. I think we’ll be better off either way. Lincoln will be a stronger candidate for having won a competitive primary, and Halter will be a fresh face with a lot of momentum if he can upset her. If Lincoln loses the primary it will definitely put other Democrats in the South on notice about what is expected of them. What do you think?
I think it’s a crying shame that elected officials like Lincoln can be such an obstacle to the caucus agenda and still count on support from someone who would likely be a much more reliable vote, espeically if they got partty support. If people want to keep it “fair” they could fund both cadidates in the primary. I know Blanche Lincoln/Joe Leiberman, etc. would see that as an assault, but it would certainly put newer House members and Senators on notice. Also, I think that voters would be more likely to support a party they didn’t see as prone to being punked, which is often how the Democrats come across.
I think the DSCC has to operate as a defender of incumbents. But that’s one reason why we should donate to candidates directly.
In the primary? I think that’s outrageous behavior. Nobody’s giving money to the DSCC so they can spend it suppressing alternative choices. They have no business interfering in primaries.
That’s totally naive. Senators contribute a lot of money to the DSCC and they have a total expectation that the DSCC will work to reelect them. If you’re not technically a Democrat anymore and you campaign for John McCain, then you don’t expect the DSCC to help you, but all elected officials expect support from the DSCC or DCCC. That’s just how it works. To see how it works across the aisle, look at the Cornyn-DeMint row.
Then let the senators be the DSCC’s sole sponsors. To solicit funds from voters pretending that you represent the Democratic Party is indistinguishable from fraud.
I think that so far the DSCC and DCCC have crushed the ‘progressive left’. Painful to watch, easy to fix, never gonna happen. Past few elections have been “Groundhog Day” all over again.
It’s not easy to fix. Overall party donations from corporations go down when the party swings in a progressive or populist direction. Our little contributions can’t equal theirs except in rare cases.
i think a smart thing to do would be to remind readers, incessantly, that contributions to the DSCC go to defend people like Blanche Walmart. I mean Blanche Lincoln.
cut off the DSCC and give directly to your preferred candidates.
DSCC caller started yelling at me last week when I told him I was only contributing to progressive candidates directly. Claimed DSCC contributions would only go to the candidates I wanted. also tried to sell me a bridge connecting lower manhattan with some other place.
As I see it this can only be good. For Democrats, for democracy, for Arkansas and for the country. My take is that Blanche Lincoln has become too far removed from the voters of her state, which is why her approvals have suffered.
Either she becomes more attuned to the voters or she is replaced by someone who is. This is what Democracy is all about.
Since our rancid political system is set up to destroy any third-party relevance, the primary system is our only outlet for real politcal change. MoveOn was a prime voice encouraging Halter to run. They raised (I think it was) something like $5 million in pledges to fund primary opponents for senators that joined filibusters against HCR. It will be interesting to see if that does anything to change Lincoln’s behavior. Probably not, because it’s too late for her.
I think MoveOn’s (and its allies’) playbook is the model for how not-DLC Democrats seek political clout.
I’ll be sending him a donation.
Since my post above I got MoveOn’s email calling in my pledge. They raised $4 million in pledges to fight any Dem who filibustered against healthcare reform. At this point they’re earmarking half a million for Halter. For those who want to support Halter, I suggest doing so through the MoveOn campaign or one of the other organizations allied with them. That way they know what the donation is about, they come to trust that progressive group’s promises can be counted on, and they begin forging lasting ties with progressive organizations. Plus a half-million contribution from one coordinated movement gets much more press attention than a trickle of individual contributions — they don’t get to spin that this is because Lincoln was too liberal.
Blanche dear, don’t let the senate chamber door hit you in the rear on the way out, bless your heart.
Speaking of the Senate … it seems goat blowers want representation too:
http://blogs.laweekly.com/ladaily/city-news/mickey-kaus-for-senate/
I saw Dem Chair Kane (sp?) on Maddow tonight. She told him that the left would be going after Lincoln. He said something along the lines that every state’s electorate was different.
Here’s the rub: with the absurdly anti-democratic rules of the Senate the rest of the nation is at the mercy of every individual senator. Californians, Minnesotans, New Yorkers et al are victimized if the moronic electorate of, say, KY elects a wackjob.
The over-representation of small state voters due to the electoral collage is bad enough but the Senate rules are Alice in Wonderland without the whimsey or humor. On one hand, 56 Senators can’t enact legislation and on the other a single Senator can stop legislation, appointments etc.