Democrats trying to unseat each other III

[Harry Bosch]

Consider Clintoncare. It was a big fat mess that the Clinton Admin took a year to work on, but when it was released, the Clintonites whimpered and came close to apologizing for having introduced it. They let the insurance lobby run its "Harry and Louise" ads without running any "Gary and Denise" ads to counter them. Right-wingers called "Hillarycare" some monstrous scheme to take over much of the economy, but it wasn't some national super HMO like Britain's National Health Service.

Barack Obama tried again, and he succeeded with Obamacare. That didn't do much to stop healthcare from being grotesquely expensive.

Well they faced incredible opposition from the right. Such major legislation takes time. Then dems got busy, had other priorities and didn’t vote well in 1994. Republicans took over. And they killed the act. Obama care is awesome. It’s currently half the cost of Cobra.

 

[Derec]

Right-wingers called "Hillarycare" some monstrous scheme to take over much of the economy,

I think Clinton's biggest blunder here was to let Hillary run the show.

 

[Derec]

Opinion | How the Squad and Like-Minded Progressives Have Changed Their Party - The New York Times - April 23, 2024

Didn't you also post that Squad puff piece by Mara "what the fuck is a million" Gay in another thread?

When the far-left politicians Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley were first elected to Congress roughly half a decade ago, many moderate Democrats saw their unapologetically progressive vision for America as an albatross around the neck of the Democratic Party.

Even though he is running against Trump, and should be winning in a landslide, Biden is still underwater in most polls. This lefty albatross may prove to be a millstone instead.

That certainly seemed to be the view of Democratic leaders, who seemed intent on making the Squad, as the progressive caucus is known, a group of permanent outsiders.

Gay is wrong here. The Squad is not the same as the Progressive Caucus. It is a more select and informal group of congresscritters, and more lefty than even the CPC. The Squad came into being when AOC, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley (truly the bass player of the four) won their elections in 2018. Since then several others joined the group justifying the name (originally it was the size of a fire team). Two privates, Cori Bush and Fire Marshal Jamaal, will hopefully be sent home by losing primaries. Knock on wood.

And in recent months, the insurgent group of unapologetic leftists has gained even more sway within the Democratic Party. Some of this is clearly a reaction to the extremism of Trumpism and far-right House Republicans. But the progressives have gained power in Washington amid rising anger over the U.S. role in Gaza.

Speaking of US role in Gaza, the pier is finally getting finished. Hopefully Hamas won't attack it again.

Another reason may be the failure of Clintonism to accomplish its stated goals. Make lots of progressive promises, then wring one's hands about how helpless one is and propose weak half-measures. Also act like one has battered-partner syndrome with the Republican Party, perpetually trying to appease it despite getting lots of nastiness and hostility in response.

Clinton managed to win two terms after Dems being out of the White House since 1980. Since LBJ left office in 1968, Carter's one term was also the only Democratic one until Clinton.
And Clinton's presidency was overall successful. Sure, "progressives" did not get all they wanted, but Clinton did not run as a McGovern.

 

[Derec]

I’m glad you agree that it is better if other countries exhaust their fossil fuel reserves.

I did not say that. I said that the bulk of remaining reserves of our enemies should become stranded assets once demands plummets.
If we hamstring our oil and gas production due to misguided environmentalism, we (as well as Europe) would become more dependent on the likes of Russia and Iran. That is not good economically, and it is not good geopolitically. It is not even good environmentally, as imported oil and gas has to be transported longer distances and, besides, we would probably end up increasing coal consumption for electricity. Remember, it was the shale revolution and resulting abundant natural gas that allowed us to greatly decrease our coal use over the last two decades.

We will never agree on fracking—I am guessing you have ties to that industry.

I wish!

I see environmental damage due to fracking in a regular basis. I’m guessing you’ve never been anywhere to see the before/after effects of mining sand for fracking or fracking itself. I have.

Can't say I have. I have been close to a coal plant and also an open pit coal mine, both of which were absolutely ghastly. I have also lived very close to an oil refinery, which was much better (and also provided hot water for residential and commercial heating).
There is environmental damage connected with any extractive industry. The question is how much, and how much utility we are getting in return. I think reducing our coal consumption (and mining!) is more than enough of a tradeoff by itself. Exporting LNG to our allies and reducing their dependence on Russian gas is a big added benefit as well. And that's just benefits of natural gas fracking.

 

[Derec]

And I asked you what method you used to determine the "plethora" is too much?

In the end it's a matter of opinion how much is too much. But let's not pretend that there are not many programs that subsidize having children already.

I absolutely agree more should be done for single people. But jealousy is not a reason to not attempt to get children out of poverty.

1. As I said before, the eligibility for the expanded child tax credit is so extensive, most of the beneficiaries are not even in poverty.
2. The expensive expanded child tax program would be paid for by the child free, either directly through higher taxes or indirectly through higher inflation and/or interest rates.

For fuck's sake, show us any family making $400k receiving the above benefits.

Not the other benefits, but the cutoff for the expanded child tax credit is $400k.

 

[Toni]

I’m glad you agree that it is better if other countries exhaust their fossil fuel reserves.

I did not say that. I said that the bulk of remaining reserves of our enemies should become stranded assets once demands plummets.
If we hamstring our oil and gas production due to misguided environmentalism, we (as well as Europe) would become more dependent on the likes of Russia and Iran. That is not good economically, and it is not good geopolitically. It is not even good environmentally, as imported oil and gas has to be transported longer distances and, besides, we would probably end up increasing coal consumption for electricity. Remember, it was the shale revolution and resulting abundant natural gas that allowed us to greatly decrease our coal use over the last two decades.

We will never agree on fracking—I am guessing you have ties to that industry.

I wish!

I see environmental damage due to fracking in a regular basis. I’m guessing you’ve never been anywhere to see the before/after effects of mining sand for fracking or fracking itself. I have.

Can't say I have. I have been close to a coal plant and also an open pit coal mine, both of which were absolutely ghastly. I have also lived very close to an oil refinery, which was much better (and also provided hot water for residential and commercial heating).
There is environmental damage connected with any extractive industry. The question is how much, and how much utility we are getting in return. I think reducing our coal consumption (and mining!) is more than enough of a tradeoff by itself. Exporting LNG to our allies and reducing their dependence on Russian gas is a big added benefit as well. And that's just benefits of natural gas fracking.

Mining for sand used in fracking looks similar to open pit mines. And the dust created contaminates the air in surrounding areas, creating health hazards for people who simply want to live their lives. You are right: It s ghastly.

You are also correct that all extraction methods fit whatever energy source create environmental damage. What we need to do is to follow in the footsteps of Europe and work harder to conserve as much energy as possible, improve energy efficiency and… to stop being so materialistic.

 

[Derec]

You are also correct that all extraction methods fit whatever energy source create environmental damage. What we need to do is to follow in the footsteps of Europe and work harder to conserve as much energy as possible, improve energy efficiency and… to stop being so materialistic.

If you look at the chart, US managed to reduce CO₂ emissions more than European countries like Germany or UK. I do not have anything against improving energy efficiency, but it only goes so far. Europe had a big problem in 2022 - their dependence on imported gas from Russia. If US was not there to supply Europe with our abundant fracked gas, Europe would have been in deep trouble.
Where does the EU’s gas come from?

 

[ZiprHead]

And I asked you what method you used to determine the "plethora" is too much?

In the end it's a matter of opinion how much is too much. But let's not pretend that there are not many programs that subsidize having children already.

Who's pretending?

I absolutely agree more should be done for single people. But jealousy is not a reason to not attempt to get children out of poverty.

1. As I said before, the eligibility for the expanded child tax credit is so extensive, most of the beneficiaries are not even in poverty.
2. The expensive expanded child tax program would be paid for by the child free, either directly through higher taxes or indirectly through higher inflation and/or interest rates.

About 16 Million Children in Low-Income Families Would Gain in First Year of Bipartisan Child Tax Credit Expansion | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Half a million or more children would be lifted above the poverty line when the proposal is fully in effect in 2025.

www.cbpp.org

Impacts by the Numbers​

The bipartisan Child Tax Credit proposal released by Senator Ron Wyden and Representative Jason Smith, while smaller than the American Rescue Plan expansion, would provide meaningful help to millions of children in families with low incomes, starting in the first year.

• Roughly 16 million children in families with low incomes would benefitfrom the expansion in the first year.
  • That’s more than 80 percent of the 19 million children who currently receive less than the full credit, or none at all, because their families’ incomes are too low. (See Table 1 for state-specific estimates overall and by race and ethnicity.)
  • Nearly 3 million children under age 3 would benefit in the first year.
• The expansion would meaningfully reduce child poverty.
  • In the first year, the expansion would lift as many as 400,000 children above the poverty line. 3 million more children would be made less poor as their incomes rise closer to the poverty line.
  • When the expansion is fully in effect, it would lift some 500,000 or more children above the poverty line. About 5 million more children would be made less poor.
• The expansion would help children of all races and ethnicities. It would particularly help groups where parents are overrepresented in low-paid jobs due to historical and ongoing discrimination and other structural barriers to opportunity. In the first year:
  • Overall, more than 1 in 5 children under 17 would benefit from the expansion.
  • More than 1 in 3 of all Black and Latino children under 17 would benefit.
  • 3 in 10 of all American Indian and Alaska Native children under 17 would benefit.
  • 1 in 7 of all white and Asian children under 17 would benefit.
• The expansion would meaningfully helpmillions of children in families with low incomes. Of the about 16 million children who would benefit in the first year:
  • Half live in families that gain $630 or more.
  • 40 percent live in families that gain $1,000 or more.
  • 25 percent live in families that gain $1,400 or more.
  • Half of the children who benefit and who live in families with more than one child would see their families gain $1,000 or more.
• Consider the following examples of families that would benefit from the expansion:
  • A single parent with two children who earns $13,000 working part time as a home health aide would see their credit double (a $1,575 gain) in the first year.
  • A single parent with two children who earns $22,000 as a child care worker would gain $675 in the first year.
  • A married couple — with one parent earning $32,000 as a nursing assistant and the other parent staying home to take care of their three young children — would gain $975 in the first year.

Good heavens! How do they deserve such a fortune?

For fuck's sake, show us any family making $400k receiving the above benefits.

Not the other benefits, but the cutoff for the expanded child tax credit is $400k.

Families making $400k probably pay far more in income taxes than they would receive in the extremely small amount of the tax credit such a family would receive. The higher the income, the lower the credit.

 

[lpetrich]

AIPAC spent big on on the MD-03 Democratic primary and got a victory.

Elfreth foes cry foul as AIPAC money seeps into 3rd District congressional race - Maryland Matters - April 4, 2024
Why Is AIPAC Pouring Money Into This Maryland Race? - May 11 2024, 8:00 a.m. - "Neither Candidate Has Much to Say About Israel. So Why Is AIPAC Pouring Money Into This Race?" - "The powerful lobbying group is going against a Capitol Police officer who fended off January 6 insurrectionists."

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee said its top priority this cycle was to oust members of the progressive Squad. But the group has also been quietly pouring money into another Democratic primary: a competitive race for an open congressional seat in Maryland. AIPAC’s target? Former Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn, who was in the Capitol during the January 6 attacks.

Neither Dunn nor his rival, state Sen. Sarah Elfreth, has been particularly outspoken in support of or against Israel, raising the question of why AIPAC is involved in the race at all.

In the last month, AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project, has poured $4.1 million into the race to support Elfreth. Some 20 candidates are running for the open seat in Maryland’s 3rd Congressional District, where incumbent Rep. John Sarbanes announced in October he would not seek reelection. Dunn and Elfreth are leading fundraising.

In individual campaign contributions, Dunn has outraised Elfreth almost 4 to 1, with $4.5 million to her $1.4 million. But considering the outside boost from AIPAC, the group has given Elreth’s campaign a significant leg up: The pro-Israel group’s super PAC has spent almost as much as Dunn has raised. Elfreth has distanced herself from AIPAC’s support and said she was unaware that the group’s super PAC would be spending on her behalf.

Elfreth’s campaign is also getting support from at least 12 donors who’ve given between $1,000 and $6,600 who have also given major support to far-right Republicans including former President Donald Trump, according to campaign filings reviewed by The Intercept. At least five of the donors are registered Republicans.

AIPAC-backed Sarah Elfreth wins primary for open Maryland congressional seat - POLITICO - "The pro-Israel group boosted a state senator against a nationally known Jan. 6 Capitol Police officer — and won."

With 82% of the vote counted, Sarah Elfreth 35.9%, Harry Dunn 25.3%, others 11.6%, 6.5%, 5.1%, 2.8%, 2.8%, 1.7%, 1.6%, 1.5%, 1.2%, 0.7%, 0.6%, 0.5%, 0.5%, 0.5%, 0.4%, 0.3%, 0.2%, 0.2%, 0.1%, 0.1%

If I ever get a database of election results in convenient form, I could look for a power law or something similar in the behavior of those trailing votes.

 

[lpetrich]

Elsewhere in Maryland, incumbent Glenn Ivey won the D primary for his district, MD-04, and he is likely to get re-elected there.

In MD-05, Mckayla Wilkes lost again, with only 10% of the vote, less than fellow challenger Quincy Bareebe at 10.3%, though more than another one, Andrea Crooms at 7.1%. Steny Hoyer, the 84-year-old incumbent, won big there.

In MD-08, incumbent Jamie Raskin won all but 1/20 of the vote.

The Senate race was interesting. Cardin Announces Plans for 2024 - U.S. Senator Ben Cardin - the 81-year-old, three-term Senator decided to retire.

Entering the race to succeed him was David Trone and Angela Alsobrooks.

 David Trone

David John Trone (born September 21, 1955)[1][2] is an American politician and businessman serving as the U.S. representative for Maryland's 6th congressional district. The district includes most of the western third of the state, but the bulk of its population is in the outer northern suburbs of Washington, D.C. Trone founded and co-owns Total Wine & More with his brother, Robert L. Trone, and served as the company's president until December 2016.[3]

In 2016, Trone spent more than $13 million of his own money on his unsuccessful Democratic primary campaign to succeed Chris Van Hollen in Maryland's 8th congressional district, setting a record for the most expensive self-funded House campaign.

That makes him 69 years old.  Total Wine & More - "Total Wine & More is a family-owned privately held American alcohol retailer founded and led by brothers David and Robert Trone."

Spending that much money?

 Angela Alsobrooks

Angela Deneece Alsobrooks (born February 23, 1971) is an American lawyer and politician serving as the 8th and current county executive of Prince George's County, Maryland. She is also the first female county executive of Prince George's County, as well as the first African American female county executive in Maryland history. A member of the Democratic Party, Alsobrooks previously served two terms as the county's state's attorney from 2010 to 2018.

Not long before the election: Maryland 2024 Poll: Alsobrooks 42%, Trone 41% - Emerson Polling - "When undecided voters are asked which candidate they lean toward and are accounted for in the candidate’s total support, Alsobrooks’ support increases to 47%, and Trone’s to 44%."

With 87% counted, it's AA 53.4%, DT 42.8%, others 0.7%, 0.7%, 0.5%, 0.5%, 0.5%, 0.3%, 0.3%, 0.2%

AA won in the more urban areas, DT in the more rural areas.

On the Republican side, with 93% counted, former governor Larry Hogan got 63.4% and the others 28.6%, 3.2%, 2.0%, 1.7%, 0.7%, 0.3%.

 

[lpetrich]

Dems’ ugliest Senate primary ends with a bad grand prize: Facing Larry Hogan - POLITICO - "If the party wants to coast to winning the Maryland seat, it will have to mend the scars left by the battle between Rep. David Trone and Angela Alsobrooks."

Trone belittled Alsobrooks’ experience and endorsements from Prince George’s County, attacked her “special interest” fundraising and briefly ran an ad as part of his $60 million campaign that implies she’d need “training wheels” as senator. Alsobrooks sniffed at Trone’s “temperament” after he tore into a TV reporter and whacked him for donating to “radical Republicans” who are anti-abortion rights.

Plus, Alsobrooks’ allies have repeatedly brought up Trone using a racial slur demeaning to Black people during a congressional hearing in March, which he said was a mistake.

“I was not happy with some of his statements. And I thought it lacked cultural sensitivity. I thought they were inappropriate,” said Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio), a former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus who has endorsed Alsobrooks. “It was disappointing that a member would do that. And in a campaign where you’re running in a community that has a lot of folks that look like me.”

Maryland Senate primary: Alsobrooks defeats Trone in race for Democratic nomination; Hogan wins GOP nod - WTOP News

Hogan, one of the most vocal Republican critics of former President Donald Trump, is seen as a moderate member of the GOP and has said he is running for Senate to take on political gridlock in Washington.

He made it a point in his victory address to supporters Tuesday night to suggest that as a Republican senator he would not seek to curtail abortion rights.

Alsobrooks has made preserving abortion rights a key part of her campaign, and in her victory speech Tuesday blasted Hogan for his remarks earlier in the campaign in which he called abortion rights “an emotional issue” for women voters.

Was LH trying to argue that abortion is a non-issue? Seems like he won't get much support from either side.

Angela Alsobrooks Defeats David Trone in Maryland Democratic Senate Primary - The New York Times

The primary between Ms. Alsobrooks and Mr. Trone turned negative as it tightened, splitting Democrats in Congress and beyond. A competitive primary has been a rarity in Maryland, which has not had a Republican senator in nearly four decades. Mr. Hogan’s decision to enter the race changed all that.

Mr. Trone scored endorsements from congressional leaders, who were eager to have a wealthy candidate who could fund his own Senate run as they embark on a costly battle in several competitive states to keep control of the chamber. But all but one Democrat in the state’s congressional delegation backed Ms. Alsobrooks.

Angela Alsobrooks prevails in Maryland Senate primary: Five takeaways - "Trone’s deep pockets weren’t enough to win"

 

[Derec]

Some good news from Oregon. Both Pramila Jayapal's sister and Mike Schmidt, the fauxgressive Multnomah County DA, lost their primaries.

Maxine Dexter beats Jayapal’s sister in Democratic primary for Oregon House seat

Centrist challenger ousts progressive DA in Oregon