Democrats trying to unseat each other II

[lpetrich]

So much crypto is flooding into campaigns that the surge in Oregon’s 6th threatens to wash out a crypto bro already running in the race. Cody Reynolds explained to Willamette Week that after four previously failed attempts at federal office, he developed a new strategy and set out to work in the crypto world, hoping to translate new wealth into political power. “Before, I naively thought I could do that with ideas and passion,” Reynolds said, “but the political system is no longer a marketplace of ideas. It’s also about reach and money.” Reynolds loaned his new campaign $2 million to get off the ground.

After noting Citizens United and large amounts of money going into politics,

Some have run the gauntlet by simply saying yes to the crypto agenda. State Rep. Jasmine Crockett, running in a Texas district to replace Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, had no history as either an outspoken advocate for crypto or an opponent of regulation but facing the question in the campaign, she sided with the policy positions favored by crypto PACs. The two major crypto super PACs came in with $1 million each, helping to put her over the top.

Protect Our Future PAC, the one linked to Bankman-Fried, has also spent $2 million boosting Georgia Rep. Lucy McBath in her member-on-member contest forced by redistricting. The PAC is also backing Nikki Budzinski in Illinois and has endorsed New York Rep. Ritchie Torres, a crypto supporter.

One of the most outspoken Democratic critics of crypto in Congress is California Rep. Brad Sherman. This cycle, he’s being challenged by Aarika Rhodes, a school teacher organizing her entire campaign around the defense of crypto and opposition to Sherman’s critical approach, and has drawn support from crypto advocates. Whether the spending against Sherman will unseat him or not, other incumbents and challengers are observing the dynamic: Opposition to crypto risks an onslaught from the industry, and support of crypto invites a tsunami of supportive spending.

The article then described how there is no counterbalancing anti-crypto lobby, meaning that the crypto lobby is like many other lobbies, without opposition focused on it. That enables such lobbies to get much of what they want.

Author Ryan Grim then described how Democrats got in bed with the banking industry when they got into big-money corporate funding in the 1980's. Associating with car-industry executives would piss off labor unions, and associating with polluting industries would piss off environmentalists, but bankers seemed safe, at least at first.

 

[lpetrich]

Not just OR-06, but also OR-04:

Doyle Canning on Twitter: "Democrats who cuddle with crypto billionaires aren’t in this for Oregon. Ending Citizens United big dark money politics #CantWait" / Twitter
noting
Nick Cunningham on Twitter: "Crypto superpac dropping $174k in Oregon's 4th district to support @ValHoyle against @Canning4Oregon (link)" / Twitter
and
Nick Cunningham on Twitter: "@Ecosozialismus @ValHoyle @Canning4Oregon and fossil fuel corporations (link)" / Twitter

202204069495953943.pdf at fec.gov: contribution by Web3 Forward in support of Val Hoyle's campaign: $165,000

In a Contested Oregon Primary Race, Democrats Back Candidate Taking Fossil Fuel Money - DeSmog - "Rather than back a progressive climate champion, a retiring congressman throws his weight behind a candidate who has taken campaign cash from Jordan Cove LNG."

Late last year, U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) announced his retirement from Oregon’s 4th District, opening up a seat that he held for more than three decades. He’s earned a reputation in Congress as a champion of transportation and climate policy: He was one of the original cosponsors of the Green New Deal in 2019, and most recently, he helped craft the bipartisan infrastructure bill that was signed into law last year, and also helped shepherd President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better agenda through the House of Representatives, before it ran aground in the Senate.

Within hours of DeFazio making his retirement public, Val Hoyle announced her intention to seek his seat. He quickly endorsed her. Hoyle served as a representative in Oregon’s legislature from 2009 to 2017 and is currently the state Labor Commissioner. She quickly consolidated the backing of powerful Democrats, with U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) endorsing her in late January.

But at a time when the climate emergency is worsening and the Democrats’ climate agenda is sputtering, DeFazio’s anointed successor for his relatively safe Democratic seat is a candidate who has a long record of supporting Jordan Cove, the now-defunct liquefied natural gas (LNG) export project that southern Oregonians battled for more than 15 years.

A natural-gas pipeline would run to there, and a port for LNG carrier ships would be there. LNG = liquefied natural gas.

Then going into the history of Val Hoyle accepting campaign donations from the project's managers, all the way back to when VH was a state representative.

To be sure, Hoyle is a strong ally of the building trades, and has the backing of labor groups. Labor PACs, including Building Trades PAC, have routinely donated to her various campaigns, and unions supported Jordan Cove for the hope of new construction jobs.

But her vocal support for Jordan Cove, and her acceptance of campaign contributions from the company, sets her apart from other Democrats in the state, including two who have endorsed her: Merkley announced his opposition to the project in 2017 and DeFazio waffled on it for years but ultimately came out against it in 2019.

While Jordan Cove had support from unions, it was widely opposed by a broad coalition of southern Oregonians that spanned the political spectrum.

 

[lpetrich]

In a Contested Oregon Primary Race, Democrats Back Candidate Taking Fossil Fuel Money - DeSmog
That article then got into Doyle Canning and her history of anti-fossil-fuel activism, including opposition to the Jordan Cove project. She lost big to incumbent Peter DeFazio, but PDF's retirement gives her more of a chance.

Then a section, "Climate Champion vs. ‘Electability’"

After mentioning the TX-28 race between progressive challenger Jessica Cisneros and fossil-fuel-donation-taking incumbent Henry Cuellar,

In the Oregon race, the battle lines are perhaps a bit less stark, but the underlying dynamics are similar. The corporate-backed New Democrat Coalition, which takes donations from Wall Street banks and private equity firms, as well as oil companies, including BP and Chevron, is throwing its support behind Hoyle. Climate activists are backing Canning.

“[Canning has] been a leader in this movement for decades. And we trust her to fight for us in the halls of Congress,” Aeron Lerch, an activist with Sunrise Eugene, a climate justice organization, told DeSmog. “Val Hoyle took thousands of dollars from the fossil fuel corporation behind Jordan Cove. And that shows where her loyalties are. We need someone who has been consistent on this issue.”

“The question for the 4th District is what kind of freshwoman do you want to send to Congress? Who you ally with, and caucus with, and are backed by in this election, tells you a lot about where you’re going to land when the going gets tough inside the building,” Canning told DeSmog. “I signed the No Fossil Fuel Money Pledge. I have the backing of the Sunrise movement. I’m going to be caucusing with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, no question. I’m pretty clear about that.”

When speaking with DeSmog about why he endorsed Hoyle, DeFazio immediately turned to the “electability” argument. “We need someone who can win. Val has been elected in a purple state legislative district,” he said. “I don’t want Alex Skarlatos to win the race. He’s a climate denier. He’s a Trump acolyte,” he added, referring to the presumed Republican candidate. DeFazio also disputed the notion that the seat is in safe Democratic hands.

But Canning pointed to the recent redistricting process, which made the 4th District more Democratic than it was before, saying that this change undercuts the importance of the “electability” argument. Nevertheless, she said that in a tough mid-term election when Democratic enthusiasm is down, the most electable candidate is the one who can fire up voters.

“We beat Jordan Cove. This is the district that built a movement from the bottom up, out of nothing, with no support from the political establishment, and beat back a $15 billion fossil fuel company,” Canning said. “People haven’t forgotten about who was on our side when the going was pretty tough.”

 

[Derec]

In a Contested Oregon Primary Race, Democrats Back Candidate Taking Fossil Fuel Money - DeSmog

So? We still need fossil fuels, and large quantities of them, and will for at least a couple more decades. And natural gas is the least polluting fossil fuel there is.

 

[Derec]

Democratic critics of crypto in Congress is California Rep. Brad Sherman. This cycle, he’s being challenged by Aarika Rhodes, a school teacher organizing her entire campaign around the defense of crypto and opposition to Sherman’s critical approach, and has drawn support from crypto advocates.

She is in favor of GND and other far lefty things but is also a crypto sis. I hope she loses. Crypto is a boondogle and a very environmentally destructive one.

 

[Derec]

An Oil Billionaire Is Trying to Crush Nina Turner in Ohio

Really? You are quoting fucking Jacobin?
In reality, we need oil. Even if we moved as fast as possible toward a post-oil future, we will need oil.
Let's say US bans sales of new gasoline or diesel cars and light trucks in 2035. EVs are ~2-3% of new cars, so any timetable sooner than that is unlikely to be feasible. Modern cars can last 15 years or more even with moderate use (at 15k miles per year, 15 years gets you 225k, and there are plenty of cars and light trucks that exceed that). That means that there will be a significant number of oil-fueled cars on the road until 2050 or so. A quick exit from oil is not feasible.

Oil Mogul Bankrolls Attempt To Buy Democratic Primary

I get that would not be their headline if an anti-oil mogul (e.g. Tom Steyer) had bankrolled Nina Turner's campaign.

One month after Samson Energy mogul Stacy Schusterman poured $2 million into Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) PAC,

He supports Israel too? Oil and Israel? What is he, Satan himself?

Turner, who cochaired Senator Sanders’s 2020 campaign, has been campaigning for a Green New Deal and pressing the Biden administration to ban fracking.

Green New Deal is a badly thought out fauxgressive circle jerk, a minority of which even concerns climate.
Banning fracking would be a singularly bad policy. Fracking is responsible for about half the oil and 2/3 of natural gas we produce in this country. Banning it would seriously undermine US energy supplies.
Had European countries not stupidly banned fracking, but had embraced it instead, they would not be dependent on Russian gas today.

Brown has declined to cosponsor some of House Democrats’ most high-profile climate legislation, including the Climate Emergency Act — even after United Nations scientists’ recent dire warning about the crisis.

What exactly would this act do?

 

[lpetrich]

Doyle Canning on Twitter: "This lapsed Catholic turned Unitarian just might show up for this. #PrayForUkraine" / Twitter
noting
Pope Francis on Twitter: "I invite everyone to make this coming 2nd March, Ash Wednesday, a Day of Fasting for Peace: let believers dedicate themselves intensively to prayer and fasting. May the Queen of Peace preserve the world from the madness of war." / Twitter

Doyle Canning on Twitter: "Tremendously grateful for the Easter Sunday service at @UUEugene this morning. Let us roll back the rock, the darkness of the tomb is no place to stay. Let the resurrection renew us and fill our hearts with commitment to protecting all of Creation. Rejoice! #HappyEaster (pic link)" / Twitter

UU Eugene (@UUEugene) / Twitter - "Empowered by love, we transform ourselves and serve our world. The Unitarian Universalist Church in Eugene invites you to join us for worship at 10am on Sunday."


Doyle Canning on Twitter: "#EarthDay Sunday at @UUEugene (pic link)" / Twitter

Doyle Canning on Twitter: "Oh just me working on my sermon for Earth Day and looking at the latest citation from the climate observatory in Mona Loa (420 ppm) and having a #DontLookUp style panic attack at my desk. The comet is within our line of sight. #ClimateCantWait (pic link)" / Twitter

 

[lpetrich]

Continuing: the OH-11 Nina Turner vs. Shontel Brown drama llama.

Latest Newsletter - Punchbowl News - current as of this writing, will likely go into the archive in a few days.

Ohio rematch divides progressives, sparks backlash

The Congressional Progressive Caucus’ endorsement of Ohio Rep. Shontel Brown, who’s again facing off against liberal Nina Turner Tuesday, has prompted fierce backlash from liberal groups. And in the Capitol, it has also sparked new conversations within CPC leadership over whether they should change their endorsement policies to better reflect the constituencies in the left-leaning caucus.

Brown’s endorsement represents another chapter in the proxy war between establishment Democrats and progressives as they struggle over the party’s direction during the Biden era. CPC members – like the broader Democratic Party – are wrestling with key questions: How big should their tent be? And who gets to be in it?

,,,
In an interview, Jayapal defended the Brown endorsement, describing her as a progressive member “in good standing for four months” who met all the qualifications laid out by the CPC. Jayapal also noted that even with the endorsement, the CPC’s campaign arm hasn’t put any money into the race.

Jayapal denied this had anything to do with her future leadership goals. But she did confirm discussions within the CPC – particularly at a members-only executive board meeting last week – about changing its endorsement rules going forward.

So the CPC was following its usual procedures, it seems.

Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), who co-chairs the CPC PAC, defended the process for considering endorsements, saying that CPC members are expected to cosponsor priority bills, vote with the caucus and regularly participate in its meetings – all things Brown has done. “If an incumbent is in good standing, which she is, then we have criteria that we’ve never had as stringent as this session,” Pocan said.

I saw a TV-news interview with him about this issue, where he said that SB and NT are both great candidates.

Then discussing Rep. Danny K. Davis, a long-time incumbent in IL-07, who is facing a progressive challenger, Kina Collins. He dropped out because he couldn't pay the membership dues, and he is considering re-joining again.

Seems a bit like AOC vs. Joe Crowley again. Or Jamaal Bowman vs. Eliot Engel. Or Cori Bush vs. Lacy Clay.

 

[lpetrich]

Tezlyn Figaro on Twitter: "@repmarkpocan just made it crystal clear on @MSNBC that not ONE member (out of approximately 100 members) from the @USProgressives was against Shontel Brown over @ninaturner TBC this includes #TheSquad ….if this is NOT true SQUAD then feel free to speak up. (vid link)" / Twitter

Progressives challenge Ohio candidate's credentials - another article about this drama llama.

Progressive Caucus goes full "PINO": Why dumping Nina Turner is a turning point | Salon.com - "In endorsing centrist incumbent over Bernie Sanders ally, Congressional Progressive Caucus finally loses the plot"

PINO = Progressive in Name Only. Suggests pine trees to me.

While the caucus' endorsement of Brown is a bellwether event, it is not an isolated incident. After a long history of backing down rather than using its leverage (as when it abandoned its demand, back in 2009, that a "public option" be part of the Affordable Care Act), the Progressive Caucus appeared to wield some real clout during the early months of the Biden presidency. Most importantly, its leaders insisted that it would not support last year's bipartisan infrastructure bill unless that moved through Congress in tandem with the Build Back Better legislation, which was proposed by President Biden with major input from Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Build Back Better was crucial for economic and social justice as well as for substantively addressing the climate emergency. For a while, it seemed that the Progressive Caucus, under the leadership of Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., was holding firm on the necessity of passing Build Back Better along with the infrastructure measure. That linkage was crucial because Senate obstructionist Joe Manchin badly wanted the infrastructure bill signed into law but was hostile to Build Back Better.

The Progressive Caucus leadership vowed not to back down. And then it caved, opting to wave the infrastructure bill through the House. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York was concise when she said: "I'm a No. This is bullshit."

Other members of the expanded Squad — including Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Cori Bush of Missouri, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Jamaal Bowman of New York and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts — also voted against the stand-alone infrastructure measure (and took plenty of abuse as a result).

Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Bush, Tlaib, Bowman and Pressley saw what was coming, as a result of the caucus' surrender. The infrastructure bill got through Congress, and Biden signed it on Nov. 15. Progressives immediately lost all leverage on Build Back Better — and it died.

Then noting
Meet The PINOs: "Progressive In Name Only" - Progressive Hub - "These Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Often Act More Like Corporate Centrists—And Many Deserve Primary Challenges"

Our examination of key votes, campaign donations, congressional testimony, and other records shows that many members of the caucus are “progressives in name only”—PINOs. On core progressive policies like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, cutting military spending, robust civil liberties, and more, these caucus members function more like corporate centrists—opposing significant challenges to the status quo and protecting corporate power along with endless war.

Several of these PINOs refused to cosponsor a resolution from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calling for a Green New Deal; failed to cosponsor Rep. Jayapal’s Medicare for All legislation; voted for huge unnecessary military spending increases; and opposed amendments by Reps. Mark Pocan and Ocasio-Cortez for a modest 10 percent reduction in the military budget (a proposal which, in Bernie Sanders’ Senate version last year, would have redirected $74 billion to poor and working-class communities).

Weighing factors including votes, the political hue of members’ districts (e.g., red, blue, or purple), and length of service in Congress—see Methodology below—we identified six especially problematic PINOs who are not living up to their progressive pretenses: Reps. Madeleine Dean (PA-4), Donald Norcross (NJ-1), Joe Morelle (NY-25), Jimmy Panetta (CA-20), Brenda Lawrence (MI-14), and Lisa Blunt Rochester (DE-at large).

 

[lpetrich]

From that progressivehub article, with govtrack.us ideology scores added.

Our “Top” Six: Will a Strong Progressive Please Primary These PINOs Soon?

Madeleine Dean (PA-4. D+9): 100% 0.26, Donald Norcross (NJ-1. D+11): 90% 0.35, Jimmy Panetta (CA-20. D+23): 80% 0.33, Joe Morelle (NY-25. D+8): 80% 0.28, Lisa Blunt Rochester (DE-at-large. D+6): 80% 0.30, Brenda Lawrence (MI-14. D+29): 75% 0.19

On the Bubble: Three PINOs in Swing Districts

Steven Horsford (NV-4. D+1): 90% 0.25, Darren Soto (FL-9. D+3): 80% 0.28, Andy Kim (NJ-3. R+3): 80% 0.42

Dishonorable Mention

Sylvia Garcia (TX-29. D+19): 70% 0.20, Dwight Evans (PA-3. D+41): 65% 0.22, Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-40. D+31): 60% 0.17, Mary Gay Scanlon (PA-5. D+13): 60% 0.19, Lois Frankel (FL-21. D+8): 60% 0.30, Mike Levin (CA-49. D+4): 60% 0.28, Matt Cartwright (PA-8. R+5): 60% 0.35

On Our Radar

Brad Sherman (CA-30) 0.34, Veronica Escobar (TX-16) 0.24, Andre Carson (IN-7) 0.12.

Most of them are more conservative than the median for the Congressional Progressive Caucus: 0.20. Not surprisingly, some of them are also members of the more conservative New Democrat Coalition, with median 0.34.

 

[lpetrich]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez endorses Nina Turner in a rematch for an Ohio House seat

“Nina is exactly the kind of progressive leader we need more of in Congress,” read a fund-raising email from Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s team that was released widely Monday evening, on the eve of the primary, and was first reported by The New York Times. “She will be a powerful voice for policies that will make a meaningful difference in the lives of working people across this country — like Medicare for All, a $15 minimum wage, and a Green New Deal.”

For her part, Ms. Brown has been endorsed by President Biden and has campaigned in recent days with high-ranking party officials including Representatives James E. Clyburn and Hakeem Jeffries.

“Shontel Brown is about results, not insults,” Mr. Jeffries said in a video. “She is about bringing people together, not tearing folks apart.”

NT appreciated that.

Nina Turner on Twitter: "I’m proud to have @AOC’s endorsement.

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez is a leader in the fight for climate justice, workers rights and building a multi-generational, multi-racial working-class democracy.

Together we will change what is possible in our political system. Thank you, sister (pic link)" / Twitter

 

[Harry Bosch]

Tezlyn Figaro on Twitter: "@repmarkpocan just made it crystal clear on @MSNBC that not ONE member (out of approximately 100 members) from the @USProgressives was against Shontel Brown over @ninaturner TBC this includes #TheSquad ….if this is NOT true SQUAD then feel free to speak up. (vid link)" / Twitter

Progressives challenge Ohio candidate's credentials - another article about this drama llama.

Progressive Caucus goes full "PINO": Why dumping Nina Turner is a turning point | Salon.com - "In endorsing centrist incumbent over Bernie Sanders ally, Congressional Progressive Caucus finally loses the plot"

PINO = Progressive in Name Only. Suggests pine trees to me.

While the caucus' endorsement of Brown is a bellwether event, it is not an isolated incident. After a long history of backing down rather than using its leverage (as when it abandoned its demand, back in 2009, that a "public option" be part of the Affordable Care Act), the Progressive Caucus appeared to wield some real clout during the early months of the Biden presidency. Most importantly, its leaders insisted that it would not support last year's bipartisan infrastructure bill unless that moved through Congress in tandem with the Build Back Better legislation, which was proposed by President Biden with major input from Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Build Back Better was crucial for economic and social justice as well as for substantively addressing the climate emergency. For a while, it seemed that the Progressive Caucus, under the leadership of Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., was holding firm on the necessity of passing Build Back Better along with the infrastructure measure. That linkage was crucial because Senate obstructionist Joe Manchin badly wanted the infrastructure bill signed into law but was hostile to Build Back Better.

The Progressive Caucus leadership vowed not to back down. And then it caved, opting to wave the infrastructure bill through the House. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York was concise when she said: "I'm a No. This is bullshit."

Other members of the expanded Squad — including Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Cori Bush of Missouri, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Jamaal Bowman of New York and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts — also voted against the stand-alone infrastructure measure (and took plenty of abuse as a result).

Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Bush, Tlaib, Bowman and Pressley saw what was coming, as a result of the caucus' surrender. The infrastructure bill got through Congress, and Biden signed it on Nov. 15. Progressives immediately lost all leverage on Build Back Better — and it died.

Then noting
Meet The PINOs: "Progressive In Name Only" - Progressive Hub - "These Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Often Act More Like Corporate Centrists—And Many Deserve Primary Challenges"

Our examination of key votes, campaign donations, congressional testimony, and other records shows that many members of the caucus are “progressives in name only”—PINOs. On core progressive policies like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, cutting military spending, robust civil liberties, and more, these caucus members function more like corporate centrists—opposing significant challenges to the status quo and protecting corporate power along with endless war.

Several of these PINOs refused to cosponsor a resolution from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calling for a Green New Deal; failed to cosponsor Rep. Jayapal’s Medicare for All legislation; voted for huge unnecessary military spending increases; and opposed amendments by Reps. Mark Pocan and Ocasio-Cortez for a modest 10 percent reduction in the military budget (a proposal which, in Bernie Sanders’ Senate version last year, would have redirected $74 billion to poor and working-class communities).

Weighing factors including votes, the political hue of members’ districts (e.g., red, blue, or purple), and length of service in Congress—see Methodology below—we identified six especially problematic PINOs who are not living up to their progressive pretenses: Reps. Madeleine Dean (PA-4), Donald Norcross (NJ-1), Joe Morelle (NY-25), Jimmy Panetta (CA-20), Brenda Lawrence (MI-14), and Lisa Blunt Rochester (DE-at large).

Oh gawd. Now they are called Pinos?! We are going to get so killed in November! The religious right must just be laughing their asses off at how the left is just self-imploding.

 

[Derec]

NT appreciated that.

AOC waited until the eve of the primary to endorse NT. Should have saved her breath. NT lost. Again. Bigly.

 

[Derec]

Oh gawd. Now they are called Pinos?! We are going to get so killed in November! The religious right must just be laughing their asses off at how the left is just self-imploding.

 

[Derec]

From that progressivehub article, with govtrack.us ideology scores added.
Our “Top” Six: Will a Strong Progressive Please Primary These PINOs Soon?

That's ideological purity for you.

Most of them are more conservative than the median for the Congressional Progressive Caucus: 0.20.

Well, unless they all have the same score, any collection will have half its members be above the median. That's how medians work.
This desire to excommunicate members because their progressivism is not pure enough is very self-defeating.

 

[lpetrich]

This is what Nina Turner was up against:
Biden endorses Shontel Brown against Nina Turner | The Hill

“Shontel Brown has been an ardent advocate for the people of Ohio and a true partner in Congress. We need leaders like Shontel to help continue the fight to respond to this pandemic, lower costs for working families, and rebuild the middle class,” Biden wrote. “Shontel is committed to building a better America. I am proud to endorse Shontel Brown for Ohio’s 11th District in the U.S. House of Representatives.”

He may have been irked by what she once said:

“It’s like saying to somebody, ‘You have a bowl of shit in front of you, and all you’ve got to do is eat half of it instead of the whole thing.’ It’s still shit,” Turner, who was co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-Vt.) presidential campaign at the time, told The Atlantic.

House Democratic Whip James Clyburn D-SC also endorsed SB.

“Shontel made it very clear that she was a Joe Biden supporter,” he told The Hill on Friday. “And her opponent made it very clear that she was a Joe Biden opponent.”

 

[lpetrich]

As to why The Squad was a no-show this time around, Cenk Uygur said in a TYT broadcast the night of the election that it is a "fact" that Squad members had been "threatened". In an interview at Status Coup, Nina Turner herself also claimed that.

Though AOC endorsed NT the night before the election and a Cori Bush staffer claims that CB voted against endorsing Shontel Brown.

Progressives, “Massively Outgunned,” Ditched Nina Turner - "Justice Democrats blamed pro-Israel super PACs run by DMFI and AIPAC for its decision to stay out of the rematch with Ohio Rep. Shontel Brown."

Justice Democrats, the group that has launched several progressive members of Congress, said it’s being “massively outgunned” by Republican donors giving millions to attack progressive candidates in several competitive races. One of those was Tuesday’s Democratic primary in Ohio’s 11th District, where incumbent Rep. Shontel Brown won with 66 percent of the vote. The defeat of Nina Turner, the former co-chair of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s 2020 presidential campaign, deals a repetitive blow to progressives who backed her run — the second Turner waged against Brown in nine months.

“Nina is a giant in the progressive movement and we’re proud to have gone all in for her campaign last year,” Justice Democrats said in a statement. “The reality is our organization has to be strategic about our priorities as we are getting massively outgunned by Republican donors funneling millions to SuperPACs like AIPAC [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee] and DMFI [Democratic Majority for Israel] against our existing candidates.”

...
Several prominent CPC members who backed Turner’s race last cycle — including Chair Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash.; Whip Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.; Deputy Whip Cori Bush, D-Mo.; and Reps. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass.; Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.; Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y.; and Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y. — did not make endorsements in the race this year. The caucus, which has endorsed more than 20 incumbents so far, is reportedly reviewing its endorsement process after backlash over its endorsement of Brown.

...
The race has been characterized by relative inaction by national figures on the left — either in spite or because of the coalescing of power and resources behind Brown by the Democratic establishment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and President Joe Biden backed Brown, while Turner’s former boss, Sanders, endorsed the challenger. On Monday, just hours before polls opened, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., backed Turner.

One has to ask why the Democratic leadership was so desperate to protect Shontel Brown. She's not a long-time incumbent, and she is not anywhere close to being in the party leadership.

 

[lpetrich]

Why Big Money Is Pouring Into A Safe Democratic Seat In North Carolina | HuffPost Latest News - "National groups’ efforts to buoy Valerie Foushee – and sink Nida Allam – are angering local progressives."

If elected, the 28-year-old Allam, an observant Muslim, would be the youngest woman ever elected to Congress and its first Pakistani-American member.

Thanks in part to her status as a dyed-in-the-wool progressive who got her start in politics working for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2016 presidential race, Allam announced another banner fundraising quarter on April 1 that put her well ahead of her top two competitors, state Sen. Valerie Foushee and “American Idol” singer-turned-activist Clay Aiken. An April 8 endorsement from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) added to Allam’s momentum.

Then the dam burst. Foushee picked up a flood of influential endorsements, donations and super PAC investments that have upended the dynamics of the race in a solid Democratic district where the May 17 primary is the only contest that matters.

The influx of big national money into the race for an open progressive seat that includes Durham and Chapel Hill speaks as much to fears of Allam’s ascent as it does to Foushee’s strengths.

...
The drumbeat of good news for Foushee has picked up steadily in the past two weeks. The deep-pocketed EMILY’s List, which supports female candidates who back abortion rights, endorsed Foushee on April 11; the Congressional Black Caucus PAC lent her its blessing two days later.

When Foushee revealed her first-quarter fundraising on April 15, she disclosed that the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the famously influential pro-Israel lobby, had bundled more than half of her $320,000 haul.

...
Last week, Protect Our Future, a super PAC funded by a cryptocurrency billionaire who claims to be motivated by an interest in improving the country’s pandemic preparedness, also began spending heavily on Foushee’s behalf. The group has spent more than $830,000 bolstering her, with the vast majority of it on television.

Weird. What's going on here?

 

[Derec]

Why Big Money Is Pouring Into A Safe Democratic Seat In North Carolina | HuffPost Latest News - "National groups’ efforts to buoy Valerie Foushee – and sink Nida Allam – are angering local progressives."

Weird. What's going on here?

Not weird at all. The moderates are trying to stop an extremist candidate.
What is weird is how disproportionally many religiously conservative Muslims are in the ranks of the fauxgressive wing of the Democratic Party.

 

[Derec]

As to why The Squad was a no-show this time around, Cenk Uygur said in a TYT broadcast the night of the election that it is a "fact" that Squad members had been "threatened". In an interview at Status Coup, Nina Turner herself also claimed that.

LMAO. Threatened with what? Did the "establishment" send Vinny the Squid to threaten to break the squaddies' knees if they endorse NT?