Interesting thread with some posters in my view completely underrating Pressley & falling into the trap of treating the 'squad' as some sort of collective lump.
The two most skilled politicians out of the four are AOC & Pressley- and it's obvious because they beat incumbents.
Pressley deserves more credit than AOC because a large part of AOC's race seemed to do well out of Crowley being the
typical democratic pol that people hate. Pressley beat a progressive democrat with the emphasis on personal differences rather than ideological.
Besides look at Pressley's background: former staffer to both Kennedy & Kerry, had done consitutency work irrc (an extremely underrated job for aspiring politicians) & then served on the Boston Council. It's pretty much the exact same route that most politicains take- she just would have had to wait until she was 50 odd to get this seat (if she did)
Moulton. Pressley's tried to do a delicate dance between the radicalism of the Squad and the mainstream liberalism of the Congressional Black Caucus. Moulton will be able to constantly put her on the spot about whether she believes wildly unpopular positions of AOC, Omar, and Tlaib, and she'd be in a no-win situation.
I mean this would work well with a democratic primary in West Virginia.
Beyond questions about BDS (which what like 5% of democratic voters actually care about or understaand) I can't see why spending your whole race talking about
other people would help Moulton.
I imagine that if you polled Massachuttes democrats about A.) The Green New Deal B.) A $15 minimum wage C.) Assault weapons ban etc etc you'd find they were all popular.
I mean Moulton himself is hardly somesort of moderate; he's just good at talking about values & uses his army background but he's still broadly in the ideological mainstream of the party (supports £15, supports pot legislation etc)
Poll
