NM Senate- Progressive challengers defeat five conservative Democrats

[Landslide Lyndon]

Yeah, these guys were no thoughtful moderates. They were reactionary assholes and invited this to themselves. Their abortion vote was especially egregious and was what essentially sealed their fates.

[Dipper Josh]

Andriy still seems to be taking the Dan Lipinski loss pretty hard. I don't know why he's so beaten up about it. Need not worry, there's another party in the United States that wants to take away women's reproductive health rights. I'm sure he'll find a comfortable home there.

[Nyvin]

Looking at the districts they came from -

Smith was in the most Republican districts represented by a Democrat in the state (Trump+10)

Sanchez was in the second most Republican district represented by a Democrat (almost exactly even)

Ramos came from a Clinton+2 seat

Papen and Martinez came from Safe D seats (Clinton+25 or more)

Knocking out an incumbent in a Trump+10 seat seems kinda risky.  I guess I'm less worried about the other two.

[😥]

Andriy still seems to be taking the Dan Lipinski loss pretty hard. I don't know why he's so beaten up about it. Need not worry, there's another party in the United States that wants to take away women's reproductive health rights. I'm sure he'll find a comfortable home there.

Thanks for the advice, but I will decide for myself whether to support the Republicans from now on. And I decided that I would remain in the Democratic Party, a party that has not yet lost all the fundamental principles of humanity, compassion and democracy.

And I will also give you advice: understand that the Democratic Party should have a place for everyone, including pro-life people, or create your own party intolerant of other opinions.

And, yes, I really took Dan Lipinski's defeat very hard. Because I didn't see it as another primary, where the activist in AOC-style defeated the mainstream incumbent, but I took it as it really is, that Democrats don't want to see pro-life politicians in their ranks. And if you also don't want to see pro-life politicians in the DP, then accept the fact that Democrats will almost always lose winnable Senate, House and gubernatorial races in conservative areas and lose most of their voters.

Democratic Party is party for all. And if I support the pro-life movement, death penalty, oppose to legalization of marijuana and break with the party on several other issues, but fully agree with the party on other issues, including all economic issues, gun conrtol and climate change and many others - this is no reason to expel me from the party and compare me to racists, Nazis and Dixiecrats.

[Dr. MB]

If you're gonna block even the most moderate left wing reform I see 0 idea why you should get the party's backing.

[Joseph Cao]

Cast thine eyes toward yonder fields of wheat and think upon their deeper meaning. To the left, further to the left, even further to the left, and in the enlightened middle – far as the eye can see – lie strawman piled upon decapitated and disemboweled strawman. And in the distance, barely visible on the horizon, a young Theresa May running away with the original thread topic.
____

It seems the justification Papen gave for her vote against HB-51 was that it provided for later abortions, which she doesn't personally support. If her constituents felt that she didn't represent their exact interests because she voted like a "Republican-lite", it's within their right to primary her and others if they so choose. Nothing wrong with that in itself – I personally don't like the result here, but that's politics. I know my politics isn't a majority anywhere in the country, least of all in the Illinois statehouse, so I'm not terribly surprised that very few elected politicians share my views.

Democratic Party is party for all. And if I support the pro-life movement, death penalty, oppose to legalization of marijuana and break with the party on several other issues, but fully agree with the party on other issues, including all economic issues, gun control and climate change and many others - this is no reason to expel me from the party and compare me to racists, Nazis and Dixiecrats.

Let's leave it on this (very well-said) note, shall we? There's five defeated state senators with actual voting records for progressives to dunk on and for fellow moderates to defend instead of beating up on each other in this juvenile manner.

Looking at the districts they came from -

Smith was in the most Republican districts represented by a Democrat in the state (Trump+10)

Sanchez was in the second most Republican district represented by a Democrat (almost exactly even)

Ramos came from a Clinton+2 seat

Papen and Martinez came from Safe D seats (Clinton+25 or more)

Knocking out an incumbent in a Trump+10 seat seems kinda risky.  I guess I'm less worried about the other two.

This ought to be a more relevant topic of discussion for the purposes of this thread, anyway. Which is why all I'll say for now is that Papen and Martinez absolutely had it coming to them.

[YE]

As a Democrat who can be defined as pro-life much like the five incumbents who lost, I don't think abortion should be a litmus test, and honestly I think a decent chunk of the red avatars here would agree with me (the more activist base not so much). That's not really the problem here. It's their more conservative fiscal views that's the real problem here and in similar primaries (IL-03) in the past. I would have voted against all five incumbents because I prioritize economic bread and butter issues over the traditional culture war battles. If I wanted a party that emphasized the latter, I'd be a Republican.

In regards to the muh big tent argument, obviously, you don't want too small of a tent because that narrows the swath of possible voters. On the other hand, the two parties can't be effectively identical either. On certain issues, lines need to be drawn and everything I know about these five seem to imply they're past that line given their alliances with Republicans to implement what smells like bad policy.

Lack of bipartisnasism and extremism in politics are serious issues and I can't say I don't have problems with certain aspects of the far left (depending on how you'd define that term of course, there's a major difference between Illhan Omar who is an undisciplined anti-semite to AOC who is a bit young but well meaning to someone more generic and inoffensive like TLF) or the right to far out. There has obviously been a decline of moderates across the political spectrum as polarization intensified. But shouting on a rooftop we need more moderates pushing the same old policies isn't the solution either because moderate hero politics pushed policies that in my view (and people are welcome to disagree on this) aren't good for the middle class and in turn fueled the rise in polarization and a drop in trust of institutions.

[smoltchanov]

As a Democrat who can be defined as pro-life much like the five incumbents who lost, I don't think abortion should be a litmus test, and honestly I think a decent chunk of the red avatars here would agree with me (the more activist base not so much). That's not really the problem here. It's their more conservative fiscal views that's the real problem here and in similar primaries (IL-03) in the past. I would have voted against all five incumbents because I prioritize economic bread and butter issues over the traditional culture war battles. If I wanted a party that emphasized the latter, I'd be a Republican.

In regards to the muh big tent argument, obviously, you don't want too small of a tent because that narrows the swath of possible voters. On the other hand, the two parties can't be effectively identical either. On certain issues, lines need to be drawn and everything I know about these five seem to imply they're past that line given their alliances with Republicans to implement what smells like bad policy.

Lack of bipartisnasism and extremism in politics are serious issues and I can't say I don't have problems with certain aspects of the far left (depending on how you'd define that term of course, there's a major difference between Illhan Omar who is an undisciplined anti-semite to AOC who is a bit young but well meaning to someone more generic and inoffensive like TLF) or the right to far out. There has obviously been a decline of moderates across the political spectrum as polarization intensified. But shouting on a rooftop we need more moderates pushing the same old policies isn't the solution either because moderate hero politics pushed policies that in my view (and people are welcome to disagree on this) aren't good for the middle class and in turn fueled the rise in polarization and a drop in trust of institutions.

Here is an opinion i half-agree and half-disagree. But, at least, i wholeheartdly respect your opinion, what can't be said about many other that sounded here.... Thank you!

P.S. I am pretty pro-choice myself, so - no need to offer me to become Republican. I have no place in that party (even theoretically). But - i value diversity, including (may be even foremost) - intraparty, given how few real parties exist in US, even more.. Yes, the same old "big tent". As big as possible...

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Maybe now Democrats will be willing to draw NM-02 into a Lean/Likely Dem seat. Instead of the North-South divide, make it East-west

[America Needs R'hllor]

I see the centrist crybabies are out in full force today. This doesn't even represent some grand purging of moderates from the Democratic party or whatever, this just means that moderate Democrats need to make the case to their constituents on why they deserve re-election or not. If they can't do that, then that's on them.

Holding open contempt for primary voters and hoping the candidates lose in the general is well, idiocy))), as some would put it.

This. Everyone name-dropping Dan Lipinski is especially irksome because you're always talking about Congresspeople who "represent the districts!", apparently until the district WANTS to be represented by a progressive rather than a representative who isn't only anti abortion, but also opposed healthcare reform and gay rights.

[jake_arlington]

*Centrist/Conservative Democrat defeats Progressive in primary* "Don't be so unreasonable, you want the Republicans/Trump to win just to 'send a message'!? Just because your candidate didn't win doesn't mean you're being 'excluded.' We need to work together, so unite behind the Democrat."

*Progressive defeats Centrist/Conservative Democrat* "How dare Democrats move (relatively/even slightly) to the left! They're excluding me! I'm voting Republican to send them a message!"

But when was last time centrist/conservative Democrat defeats incumbent progressive Democrat in primary without major scandal against incumbent? Progressives much more often defeat moderates incumbents than the opposite

That's because there were far more moderate incumbent to beat than progressive in the first place.

[jake_arlington]

See, though: It's called democracy, bro. But keep dreaming, mate! The tenacity's still greatly admirable 💪 lmao

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Really the only seat where throwing out the conservative in favor of the progressive was questionable was SD-35, but even then, that guy was pushing 80 years old and if there was ever a year to try to get a younger Democrat in a seat that tough, it’s this year

[smoltchanov]

Really the only seat where throwing out the conservative in favor of the progressive was questionable was SD-35, but even then, that guy was pushing 80 years old and if there was ever a year to try to get a younger Democrat in a seat that tough, it’s this year

I would say - 3 seats. Trump won 2 in 2016, and third was very narrow Clinton with very substantial Libertarian vote.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Really the only seat where throwing out the conservative in favor of the progressive was questionable was SD-35, but even then, that guy was pushing 80 years old and if there was ever a year to try to get a younger Democrat in a seat that tough, it’s this year

I would say - 3 seats. Trump won 2 in 2016, and third was very narrow Clinton with very substantial Libertarian vote.

The second one Trump won was only by 13 votes or something and no other Republican has come close to doing as well in that seat at any level in the Trump era. Same thing for the marginal Clinton seat. It’s clear that she was just a poor fit for these areas

[smoltchanov]

Really the only seat where throwing out the conservative in favor of the progressive was questionable was SD-35, but even then, that guy was pushing 80 years old and if there was ever a year to try to get a younger Democrat in a seat that tough, it’s this year

I would say - 3 seats. Trump won 2 in 2016, and third was very narrow Clinton with very substantial Libertarian vote.

The second one Trump won was only by 13 votes or something and no other Republican has come close to doing as well in that seat at any level in the Trump era. Same thing for the marginal Clinton seat. It’s clear that she was just a poor fit for these areas

May be. We will see in November. I am all out for progressives in "progressive districts", but prefer to be extremely cautious in swing ones.. And laugh heartily when they are nominated in really conservative ones.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Andriy still seems to be taking the Dan Lipinski loss pretty hard. I don't know why he's so beaten up about it. Need not worry, there's another party in the United States that wants to take away women's reproductive health rights. I'm sure he'll find a comfortable home there.

Thanks for the advice, but I will decide for myself whether to support the Republicans from now on. And I decided that I would remain in the Democratic Party, a party that has not yet lost all the fundamental principles of humanity, compassion and democracy.

And I will also give you advice: understand that the Democratic Party should have a place for everyone, including pro-life people, or create your own party intolerant of other opinions.

And, yes, I really took Dan Lipinski's defeat very hard. Because I didn't see it as another primary, where the activist in AOC-style defeated the mainstream incumbent, but I took it as it really is, that Democrats don't want to see pro-life politicians in their ranks. And if you also don't want to see pro-life politicians in the DP, then accept the fact that Democrats will almost always lose winnable Senate, House and gubernatorial races in conservative areas and lose most of their voters.

Democratic Party is party for all. And if I support the pro-life movement, death penalty, oppose to legalization of marijuana and break with the party on several other issues, but fully agree with the party on other issues, including all economic issues, gun conrtol and climate change and many others - this is no reason to expel me from the party and compare me to racists, Nazis and Dixiecrats.

You are not a Democrat.

You are not even an American.

Stop telling foreign political parties what to do.

Literally no one cares.

[😥]

Andriy still seems to be taking the Dan Lipinski loss pretty hard. I don't know why he's so beaten up about it. Need not worry, there's another party in the United States that wants to take away women's reproductive health rights. I'm sure he'll find a comfortable home there.

Thanks for the advice, but I will decide for myself whether to support the Republicans from now on. And I decided that I would remain in the Democratic Party, a party that has not yet lost all the fundamental principles of humanity, compassion and democracy.

And I will also give you advice: understand that the Democratic Party should have a place for everyone, including pro-life people, or create your own party intolerant of other opinions.

And, yes, I really took Dan Lipinski's defeat very hard. Because I didn't see it as another primary, where the activist in AOC-style defeated the mainstream incumbent, but I took it as it really is, that Democrats don't want to see pro-life politicians in their ranks. And if you also don't want to see pro-life politicians in the DP, then accept the fact that Democrats will almost always lose winnable Senate, House and gubernatorial races in conservative areas and lose most of their voters.

Democratic Party is party for all. And if I support the pro-life movement, death penalty, oppose to legalization of marijuana and break with the party on several other issues, but fully agree with the party on other issues, including all economic issues, gun conrtol and climate change and many others - this is no reason to expel me from the party and compare me to racists, Nazis and Dixiecrats.

You are not a Democrat.

You are not even an American.

Stop telling foreign political parties what to do.

Literally no one cares.

And can you call yourself a people with democratic policies? If I'm not American, then I can't express my opinion, do you think? I want and will express my thoughts, like you it or not, (put me on ignore if you want). And, by the way, I do not forbid you, unlike you, to criticize political parties in Ukraine.

And a little advice: be more polite to people

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Andriy still seems to be taking the Dan Lipinski loss pretty hard. I don't know why he's so beaten up about it. Need not worry, there's another party in the United States that wants to take away women's reproductive health rights. I'm sure he'll find a comfortable home there.

Thanks for the advice, but I will decide for myself whether to support the Republicans from now on. And I decided that I would remain in the Democratic Party, a party that has not yet lost all the fundamental principles of humanity, compassion and democracy.

And I will also give you advice: understand that the Democratic Party should have a place for everyone, including pro-life people, or create your own party intolerant of other opinions.

And, yes, I really took Dan Lipinski's defeat very hard. Because I didn't see it as another primary, where the activist in AOC-style defeated the mainstream incumbent, but I took it as it really is, that Democrats don't want to see pro-life politicians in their ranks. And if you also don't want to see pro-life politicians in the DP, then accept the fact that Democrats will almost always lose winnable Senate, House and gubernatorial races in conservative areas and lose most of their voters.

Democratic Party is party for all. And if I support the pro-life movement, death penalty, oppose to legalization of marijuana and break with the party on several other issues, but fully agree with the party on other issues, including all economic issues, gun conrtol and climate change and many others - this is no reason to expel me from the party and compare me to racists, Nazis and Dixiecrats.

You are not a Democrat.

You are not even an American.

Stop telling foreign political parties what to do.

Literally no one cares.

And can you call yourself a people with democratic policies? If I'm not American, then I can't express my opinion, do you think? I want and will express my thoughts, like you it or not, (put me on ignore if you want). And, by the way, I do not forbid you, unlike you, to criticize political parties in Ukraine.

And a little advice: be more polite to people

I really don't care if you criticize the Democratic Party.  But a person who lives over a thousand miles away from the country is not a "lifelong Blue Dog Democrat".  You cannot "remain" in a party that you were never a part of in the first place.  Because it's not your party.  It doesn't need to appeal to the smoltchanov's and the АndriуValeriovich's of the world any more than Слуга народу needs people like me to stay viable.

[PSOL]

I see Smoltchanov is triggered. Oh, what a glorious sight to see.

[😥]

Andriy still seems to be taking the Dan Lipinski loss pretty hard. I don't know why he's so beaten up about it. Need not worry, there's another party in the United States that wants to take away women's reproductive health rights. I'm sure he'll find a comfortable home there.

Thanks for the advice, but I will decide for myself whether to support the Republicans from now on. And I decided that I would remain in the Democratic Party, a party that has not yet lost all the fundamental principles of humanity, compassion and democracy.

And I will also give you advice: understand that the Democratic Party should have a place for everyone, including pro-life people, or create your own party intolerant of other opinions.

And, yes, I really took Dan Lipinski's defeat very hard. Because I didn't see it as another primary, where the activist in AOC-style defeated the mainstream incumbent, but I took it as it really is, that Democrats don't want to see pro-life politicians in their ranks. And if you also don't want to see pro-life politicians in the DP, then accept the fact that Democrats will almost always lose winnable Senate, House and gubernatorial races in conservative areas and lose most of their voters.

Democratic Party is party for all. And if I support the pro-life movement, death penalty, oppose to legalization of marijuana and break with the party on several other issues, but fully agree with the party on other issues, including all economic issues, gun conrtol and climate change and many others - this is no reason to expel me from the party and compare me to racists, Nazis and Dixiecrats.

You are not a Democrat.

You are not even an American.

Stop telling foreign political parties what to do.

Literally no one cares.

And can you call yourself a people with democratic policies? If I'm not American, then I can't express my opinion, do you think? I want and will express my thoughts, like you it or not, (put me on ignore if you want). And, by the way, I do not forbid you, unlike you, to criticize political parties in Ukraine.

And a little advice: be more polite to people

I really don't care if you criticize the Democratic Party.  But a person who lives over a thousand miles away from the country is not a "lifelong Blue Dog Democrat".  You cannot "remain" in a party that you were never a part of in the first place.  Because it's not your party.  It doesn't need to appeal to the smoltchanov's and the АndriуValeriovich's of the world any more than Слуга народу needs people like me to stay viable.

I don't see anything wrong with you saying, "I will stay in the party "Servant of the People"", even if you are not Ukrainian. About the Democratic Party, I say hypothetically (if I were a US citizen, I would belong to the Democratic Party ..., so ...)

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Looking at legislator's ACU ratings - it seems, that the word "conservative" must be used here in strictly relative sense (as all 5 have 20-30 ratings by ACU standards). Real conservatives in the past usually had 80+ from ACU... At least - 70. Former Democratic congressman from New Mexico Harold Runnels, for example, had lifetime ACU rating 79 (a couple percentages higher, then his Republican counterpart, btw..)

yeah, this is a disappointing sign of the Democrats' continued leftward lurch excluding moderates, not some toppling of conservative scions

Congressional Progressive Caucus has 95 members in House of Representatives, while Blue Dog Coalition has 25 members. Great Representative Dan Lipinski lost his primary to left-wing Marie Newman, Henry Cuellar almost lost his primary to 27-year old, inexperienced Jessica Cisneroc. Many of state senators and representatives was in danger of losing or lost their seats because of their moderate voting record. How is it exact opposite?

To paraphrase an old post from when Lipinski lost:


Moderate Democrats on this board: "The Progressive Movement needs to move past Bernie if they want any hope of growing their numbers. Running better & more appealing candidates would be a great start."

Moderate Democrats on this board after an appealing Progressive candidate wins: "Damn them for unseating a Moderate incumbent! Democrats are on a death march if they keep appeasing the Progressive Movement!"

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Mary Kay Papen is 88 years old. Ridiculous.

She's got nothing on Fred Risser, who's 93 and is still serving as a Wisconsin State Senator since 1962 (and before that as State Representative from 1957).

He's retiring this year, though

[Galeel]

All the talk moderates put out about party unity gets thrown out the windows as soon as they lose a primary. This is ridiculous. Hoping that progressive dems lose "to send a message" is literally the exact same argument Bernie or busters make.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

the Democratic Party should have a place for everyone, including pro-life people.

Well, no. I mean, if you want to vote for us, then great, but that is an absolute red line for me when it comes to elected Democrat officials. And this is coming from a guy most on Atlas would consider representative of moderate, pro-establishment Democrats. Certainly, I want Dems to be a party of good government which compromises and can build majority coalitions spanning multiple ideologies, but what good is a party if it doesn't have some philosophical cohesion? At the very least, we should expect absolute unity amongst elected officials on issues of human rights, which of course encompasses abortion.