Despite the millions spent against her in the primary, which she won 60/40, and the millions spent in the general with a decent (by MAGA standards) Republican opponent, Peggy Flanagan won with 54% of the vote. Amy Klobuchar, who had no primary opponent, and a weak opponent in the general, got 56% of the vote. Anyone who wants to make a point about “centrists winning better” does so without context, at least in Minnesota. Here’s what Peggy said after she was elected:

Flanagan is almost always smiling, but she’s not smiling when she says “We will rip ICE apart.” This is the right answer and attitude towards ICE if you’re a Minnesota politician, or a Democrat, really. Flanagan’s primary opponent, Angie Craig, will probably be appointed by Klobuchar to replace her, but she’s not popular because she thought her Laken Riley vote was smart. It wasn’t:

The guy who replaced “moderate” Angie Craig, Matt Little, is not the kind of guy who’s going to vote for Laken Riley. His victory speech isn’t an amazing feat of rhetoric, but it is an incredible artifact of determination and resolve:

❝

All these issues that you talked about, they’re going to say, “that’s great. I know you had to do that and say those things, and we understand that. But now that you’re elected, what do you really believe? And maybe you should stop talking about certain issues.”

They don’t know me […] I can’t be bought. I’m not for sale. […] I’m not going to bow down to the AI overlords. […] Let me talk about two more issues that I’ve been told time and time again to shut up about. […] Time and time again I’ve been told (whispers) “I’m with you. Let’s just focus on affordability. These things don’t poll well.” […]

What’s happening in Gaza is a genocide. […] It’s time for the first time in my life that we stop sending weapons and military aid to Israel. (big applause). […]

When I put my kid on the bus, I don’t worry about who’s she’s going to play against in soccer. […] I worry about her safety. I worry about getting that damn text that the school’s on lockdown.

This is the winner of a D+3 district, one where the conventional wisdom is that you need to “moderate” your positions. Welp, I guess Matt Little didn’t get the memo. Little wants a fight. Flanagan wants a fight. The people who elected them want a fight. And, as Little notes, that fight starts in the Democratic Party.

I’ve seen some complaining from otherwise reasonable people that we should just celebrate this victory and not fight. We shouldn’t be fighting to get rid of Jeffries and Schumer. People are afraid of the fight, that it will cause a rift in the party that will make us less ready for 2028.

I have the opposite opinion. This fight has been happening, whether quietly in the background as in Matt Little’s case, or openly via the massive AIPAC contributions to Angie Craig that were happening even after she tried to distance herself from them. That was a fight. It was divisive. Flanagan won it, as did Little, as did El-Sayed. The fight is going to continue because people like Flanagan and Little hold positions that aren’t popular with the donors who back Jeffries and Schumer. The 40% of the Minnesota DFL who supported Angie Craig didn’t go home and not vote — clearly, they came out, and the vast majority of them voted for Peggy Flanagan. Perhaps the primary was divisive, but it wasn’t fatal.

This fight is between the donors who back some Democrats and the rest of us. The donors don’t want Medicare for All, but the voters do (73% of Democrats, according to the KFF). There is no affordability until the war in Iran is over. No matter the millions poured into AIPAC, Democrats aren’t happy with Israel in Gaza, plus a vast majority of Jewish voters think Israeli action in the West Bank and AIPAC both increase anti-semitism. The reason we’re having a fight about Jeffries and Schumer is because the Democratic base just voted for things that they have historically opposed, and also the Democratic base wants fighting words. There’s no reason to be scared of this fight, and unless we have it out in the open, the donor-driven establishment will have it behind closed doors.

Reply

Avatar

or to participate

Avatar

Kathy Quinerly2 minutes ago

Great post. I knew very little of this.

TY

Avatar

r po3 minutes ago

It's a big country. Brooklyn shouldn't have a monopoly on D Institutional leadership. Mitch was from someplace in the middle of the country that I never want to visit. That House slimeball squeaker R Leader, where is he from, again.

D Institutions got us MAGA Trump twice. D Institutions completely fucked up the political part of Biden's presidency. Just completely fucked it all up. Fail. That's on Jeffries and Schumer. OUT!

Avatar

Kay W.31 minutes ago

Are Right leaning Democrats defining “corruption” to mean just illegality? Because that isn’t how voters define it. Voters define it as “undue influence by rich people and corporations” What is the “good government” platform of the Right side of the Party? That’s what I’d demand from Schumer if I were voting on him as leader.

Avatar

Kay W.36 minutes ago

What I think we have to iron out is what is the moderate position on money out of politics/corruption. We know the Left position. It just won. Will moderates join the Left side of the Party to seriously address this and practice what we preach or not? Is it the moderate position that it is perfectly ok for Schumer to surround himself with finance industry lobbyists? Or should this behavior be discouraged in the Democratic Party? Can moderates replace corporate and pro war donations with small donor funding? Do they have the ability to raise money without those donors?

Avatar

mister mixAuthor4 minutes ago

Can moderates replace corporate and pro war donations with small donor funding? Do they have the ability to raise money without those donors?

That's the whole question, right there.

A huge part of the problem is that they all waste their money on late-in-cycle TV and social ads that we're not sure do much to move the needle. If Texas isn't a good example of that, with Paxton and Abbott dumping in infinity of money into ads that apparently did nothing, I don't know what is. A big re-think is needed here, but these people don't seem to be able to do that.

Avatar

Kay W.42 minutes ago

A huge issue in MI is DTE Energy and how they blatantly rip off Michiganders and how Whitmer never reined them in. IN ADDITION, Michiganders passed a “good government/ anti corruption” referendum by a big margin. It limits corporate spending in elections, and it was aimed squarely at Michigan’s energy monopolies. Conservatives, lobbyists and the companies themselves immediately filed to overturn the ballot measure and thwart the will of voters.

So newly elected Joelcelyn Benson appointed a DTE board member to her transition team. WTF?

I don’t get it. She just won an anti corruption election. She watched a “money out of politics” law pass by a mile. So she appoints Mr. DTE? I accept moderates. But do moderates have any commitment at all to what voters are DEMANDING on corruption/ money out of politics? They don’t seem to “get it” at all. Is anti corruption a shared value, or is only on the Left side of the Party? Because anti corruption is a majority position.

Avatar

TBone Dinosaur1 hour ago

Fear-based decision making never ends well.

Avatar

Sepideh M1 hour ago

The SNL cold open was lots of fun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Bl6gav2Ofg

Avatar

mister mixAuthor56 minutes ago

Funny. When your leadership is the biggest joke of the SNL cold open, you’ve got a problem.

Avatar

TBone Dinosaur1 hour ago

It's way past time to throw down! Great post 👏

Avatar

TBone Dinosaur1 hour ago(edited)

JPie went over some of the reasons we're way overdue (for anyone with a short memory, which is easy to have in this firehose of shit onslaught)

Non-U.S. media is picking up some of the slack.

All the way back in time to October:

https://youtu.be/SfxQSS1tVV4?si=J4NVS1wfj5gyw6fY