Posted: Mar 17, 2020 2:03 am
Re: Porter... Any politician’s “support for” M4A is only as good as his/her willingness to push back against lies about feasibility, & to call out the money interests behind that propaganda. Let’s remember that Yang, Beto, Harris, Warren, and briefly even Buttigieg all expressed “support for” M4A. They all capitulated, some quickly, some gradually, all for generally the same reasons. None of these people are dumb enough to have supported something & only later figured out it wasn’t financially feasible. It’s always a realization about political support, and that’s essentially a matter of courage. Career politicians are not generally brave.
Katie Porter seems to be the real deal, and luckily she comes from a state that’s among the likeliest to push for something like M4A, which I think is the best chance for a national shift in the political dialogue (though Sanders’s two presidential runs are still the single biggest catalysts). Porter ran against a neolib anti-M4A Dem, and then won against an incumbent Repub in a district that had apparently never once elected a Dem to Congress.
I don’t know where she got her backing in the general, but in other places where similar matchups took place (progressive vs “centrist”, and then progressive vs Repub) the Dem apparatus has consistently undermined the candidate even after the primary, such as Kara Eastman in Nebraska’s 2nd. That district is only +4 Repub, and she lost the general by 2 points. She’s running again, and she hasn’t changed her tune (quote from this Omaha World-Herald piece after the 2018 election):
That’s the kind of determination it’s going to take, plus some pragmatic maneuvering in state legislatures in CA & some other states... and it’s the motivation behind AOC’s decision about fundraising to promote progressives across the country. And let’s remember, Sanders is one of the immediate inspirations for AOC entering politics. It’s the “not-me-us” long game that matters more. (If we survive climate change, that is.)
The base wants what progressives want. They’re just too easily spooked by the cowardly establishment politicians, who have ruthless funders.
Katie Porter seems to be the real deal, and luckily she comes from a state that’s among the likeliest to push for something like M4A, which I think is the best chance for a national shift in the political dialogue (though Sanders’s two presidential runs are still the single biggest catalysts). Porter ran against a neolib anti-M4A Dem, and then won against an incumbent Repub in a district that had apparently never once elected a Dem to Congress.
I don’t know where she got her backing in the general, but in other places where similar matchups took place (progressive vs “centrist”, and then progressive vs Repub) the Dem apparatus has consistently undermined the candidate even after the primary, such as Kara Eastman in Nebraska’s 2nd. That district is only +4 Repub, and she lost the general by 2 points. She’s running again, and she hasn’t changed her tune (quote from this Omaha World-Herald piece after the 2018 election):
”If not having complete support from the national party means that I did not acquiesce to the party’s bland speaking points or want the party to personally attack my opponent, then I am grateful to have stood on my own,” she wrote. “As a first-time candidate for federal office, I believe that we won the most important battle — to change the political landscape here in the heartland.”
That’s the kind of determination it’s going to take, plus some pragmatic maneuvering in state legislatures in CA & some other states... and it’s the motivation behind AOC’s decision about fundraising to promote progressives across the country. And let’s remember, Sanders is one of the immediate inspirations for AOC entering politics. It’s the “not-me-us” long game that matters more. (If we survive climate change, that is.)
The base wants what progressives want. They’re just too easily spooked by the cowardly establishment politicians, who have ruthless funders.