Regardless of their political stances on Israel, shouldn’t we be encouraging more Primary challenges in general? After all, AOC got her seat in the first place because of a well-timed Primary challenge to an entrenched incumbent.
Politicians shouldn’t expect their seat to be theirs indefinitely. If these Representatives think their views represent their constituents well enough, they should have nothing to worry about.
In general, sure, but a) our campaign finance laws being an utter joke and the prevalence of dark money organizations that spread disinformation doesn’t make for a very fair fight, b) I really have to question the priorities of some of these challengers, i.e.,
St. Louis County prosecutor Wesley Bell, a Democrat, dropped his bid against a Republican senator [Josh Hawley] to challenge a House Democrat. ‘I think we have to stand with our allies,’ he said.
I’d be willing to wager that any squad member is way more in touch with the voter base in their district than the Democratic Party in general or even other politicians in the district.
In AOC’s case in particular, she was boosted by a law we passed that matched personal donations with a certain amount of public funds as well. It was intended to allow people like her (i.e. the not-already-disgustingly-wealthy) a more viable route to government. So there are some places that are keeping an eye on campaign finance, albeit at a glacial pace.
His priority appears to be getting a gig in Congress, and he thinks this is a better chance than a longshot against Senator Fist Pump.
In this case, there’s also the fact that no Democrat is going to be winning a statewide race in Missouri any time remotely soon.
In theory yes but in practice, because seats are so gerrymandered, primaries in safe seats move the selection process to within a party, so you end up with who can win a majority of one party rather than who fits the district the best. Moves everyone in safe seats further to the fringes.
This is a problem with gerrymandering, not with primaries. Nobody should feel like their seat is owed to them, no matter how “safely” the district is drawn.
Last cycle this happened in a race in Michigan and AIPAC was likely the difference maker in taking away our other most progressive congressional rep, Andy Levin, a Jewish representative. I don’t think you could say Andy was ever going to be on the squad, but he vocally supported things like the green new deal and universal healthcare, where his opponent, Haley Stevens, is pretty much a corpo Dem that will vote however the money tells her to.
To be fair, it wasn’t a primary challenge, it was an artifact of a redistricting runoff, but Levin (a former synagogue president) had been critical of Israels policies.
They’ll certainly be coming for blood, and at least in Michigans case, some of us will end up far worse for the wear in the quality of who represents us.
Do any of them have a voting base who take issues with their stances on Israel? Rashida Tlaib is straight up a Palestinian American and beat a censure vote over it.
The Democrats will no doubt be pouring a lot of money into primary challenges against them.
Neolib ghouls ALWAYS side with Republicans against progressives. Never forget that establishment Democrats hold the same platform as the now mythical moderate Republican from decades past, with just enough lip service to progressive flavors to get the vote of someone who likes Elizabeth Warren and RBG.
I don’t foresee them having any issues.
So, when the party threw its weight behind the anti-choice pro-nra Henry Cuellar, we were assured that it was because the party supports incumbents and it totally wasn’t because his opponent was a progressive.
Naturally the Squad can expect the same level of support that the party gave to an anti-choice nra-owned stooge like Cuellar, right?
Don’t worry, I’m sure Nancy Pelosi will come to the aid of the Squad since she does not want any primary challengers. /s
