- reverse pyromania
- Posts
- 84 Years Young
I think the Democratic Failure tag on this blog is going to be worn out, but two readers sent me some interesting bits of information. First, if you haven’t seen this already, reader KA sent it to me over BlueSky:
Truly a perfect news alert
— Matt Novak (@paleofuture.bsky.social)2026-03-10T15:39:34.953Z
The Democrats’ brand is incredibly unpopular and anyone who gives you rationalizations and denial about it is just whistling past the graveyard.
A reader didn’t send me this, and I probably have a more substantive post to write about it, but are you aware that the Democratic brand in Montana went from having a couple of federal office holders to a good candidate running for Senate as an Independent because the brand is so fucked?
On the final day of candidate filing in Montana, former University of Montana President Seth Bodnar filed to run as an independent in the U.S. Senate race to unseat Steve Daines.
“For too long, Montanans have watched as the American Dream has been held hostage by a broken political system that allows Washington politicians to divide us and line their own pockets while families across our state face higher costs and fewer opportunities,” Bodnar said in an early morning press release on Wednesday. “I’m running for Senate as an Independent because Montanans deserve a leader who bridges divides with commonsense solutions, stands up to political elites in Washington, and answers only to Montana, not national party bosses or D.C. insiders.”
Bodnar had been rumored to be mulling a run for Senate for weeks after a text message attributed to former Democratic U.S. Sen. Jon Tester expressed support for an independent Bodnar campaign.
Bodnar’s resume: Green Beret, then successful (actually fixed things) President of the University of Montana. Tester is an example of a red state Democrat who only sucked as much as he had to in order to get elected, unlike Joe Manchin and certainly not like Sinema and Fetterbro.
Anyway, Scott H sent in an American Prospect piece about the latest Third Way strategy session:
The event featured multiple speakers and attendees from its host state [South Carolina], and offered messaging guidance to staffers and consultants who may be hired by 2028 presidential hopefuls on how to win in the Palmetto State. While this did include securing the powerful endorsement of Congressman Jim Clyburn, the advice focused on how the state’s Democratic primary voters are more conservative than average and far more religious. The state also has one of the lowest unionization rates in the country, a fact mentioned multiple times throughout the course of the event.
Biden White House veteran and former mayor of Columbia, South Carolina, Steve Benjamin highlighted the fact that the top three progressive candidates in the 2020 primary field—which he defined as Sens. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and billionaire Tom Steyer—received a mere 38 percent of the vote in the state combined, proof of the state’s status as the moderate firewall. It’s hard not to conclude that this was the reason that Third Way selected Charleston as the location for their conference in 2019, and again this year. Under the present system, their ideological enemies must pass through the state, and they aim to organize resolute defenses against the current progressive wave. Whether that will enable MAGA fascism is not a question they are willing to consider.
I don’t know exactly how much influence Third Way holds, but it’s worth looking at their strategy to see exactly what the Democrats should not do to win the next election. I guess it’s some kind of tenet of the Third Way religion1 that Jim Clyburn, who is 84, should be a kingmaker in South Carolina until he drops dead. Somehow people are offended when a rational person points out that most healthy political parties aren’t run by octogenarians with outsize influence whose best days are long in the past. Another part of the creed is that states that should decide Democratic primaries are those that will never elect a Democrat to statewide office, not to mention vote for a Democrat for President. North Carolina would be a better choice, as would Wisconsin or Pennsylvania, since they might actually vote for the Democrat that they pick in the Presidential primary.
1 I use the term “religion” here on purpose because what else do you call a group held together by unverifiable beliefs that they cling to despite empirical evidence to the contrary.
Reply