Archive for the ‘Progressives’ Category

Progressives focus on local-level wins to counter setbacks – 69News WFMZ-TV

CHICAGO (AP) For many progressives, the past decade has been littered with disappointments. But recent down-ballot victories are providing hope of reshaping the Democratic Party from the bottom up, rather than from Washington.

In Chicago earlier this month, a former teachers union organizer unexpectedly won the mayors race. In St. Louis, progressives secured a majority on the municipal board. The next opportunities could lie in Philadelphia and Houston, which also hold mayoral elections this year.

The focus on lower-level contests already has helped progressives gain power and influence policy at a local level, organizers say, shaping issues such as the minimum wage. It also may help the movement find future stars, with todays city and county officials becoming tomorrows breakout members of Congress and only moving further up the political ladder.

Progressives have taken a look at how to be strategic and how to build power, said Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants who was a leading national voice for Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders 2016 and 2020 presidential bids. If you look around and you say, Who is ready to run for president? If your field is shallow, what do you have to do? Youve got to build the bench.

This year's focus on state and local races follows years of incremental progress and some stinging setbacks. Sanders electrified the left with 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns that centered on bold calls for universal, government-funded health care. But he lost each time to rivals aligned with the Democratic establishment who advocated for a more cautious approach.

On Capitol Hill, progressive candidates successfully defeated several high-profile incumbents during the 2018 midterms and the election of candidates like New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. But from New York to Michigan and Ohio and Texas, prominent progressives were defeated during primary campaigns last year. And, as President Joe Biden now gears up for reelection, he faces no serious challenge from the left.

Still, Sanders and others have left their mark, pushing mainstream Democrats to the left on key issues like combating climate change and forgiveness of student loan debt while inspiring some of those at the forefront of today's movement.

That includes Chicago Mayor-elect Brandon Johnson, who appealed to a diverse and young electorate as he campaigned with Sanders and other top congressional progressives.

Lets take this bold progressive movement around these United States of America, Johnson said in his victory speech.

Our Revolution, an activist group which grew out of Sanders 2016 White House bid, endorsed Johnson and progressive candidates who recently won three of four seats on the St. Louis City Board of Aldermen. That gave progressives a slim majority in a city where the mayor, Tishaura Jones, is also a self-described progressive.

Our Revolution said it activated its 90,000 members in Chicago an average of three times each to urge them to vote for Johnson, and made 100,000 phone calls in St. Louis. The group is also backing Helen Gym, a progressive former Philadelphia City Council member who is among roughly a dozen candidates competing in next months Democratic mayoral primary.

When we win on the ground in our cities, thats actually the blueprint, because we cannot wait for Congress, Gym said during a recent call with Our Revolution volunteers.

Our Revolutions executive director, Joseph Geevarghese, said local progressive organizing, including for races like school board, is more effective now than it has been in decades.

Were building power, bottom up, city by city," Geevarghese said, adding that in major metropolitan areas youve got credible progressive slates vying for power against the Democratic establishment."

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers and a Democratic National Committee member, countered that there doesn't have to be tension between the party's left and moderate wings. She said Johnson called for addressing quality of life issues such as homelessness through consensus-building, rather than ideological confrontation.

Every one of these cities are complicated places and you have to work together to get things done, Weingarten said. You have to work with people you dont always agree with. And that is a strength and not a weakness.

It hasn't all been rosy for progressives. Moderate candidates topped progressive alternatives in last week's Denver City Council races.

But there are more opportunities ahead. In the nations fourth-largest city of Houston, Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, who has been an outspoken progressive in Congress since she got there in 1995, is running for mayor.

And the left isn't abandoning congressional races.

Progressive champion Rep. Barbara Lee and fellow Democratic Rep. Katie Porter, who was a vocal supporter of Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren s progressive campaign for president in 2020, are among those running to replace retiring California Sen. Dianne Feinstein next year.

In Arizona, Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego, a progressive 43-year-old Iraq war veteran and Spanish speaker who represents much of downtown Phoenix, is trying to unseat Sen. Kyrsten Sinema. She left the Democratic Party last year and, if she seeks reelection, would run as an independent.

Working-class Democrats are getting elected, and corporate Democrats are not, said Chuck Rocha, a key architect of Sanders 2016 campaign who heads Nuestro PAC, which has endorsed Gallego. But Rocha was quick to caution that Gallego isn't running as "a progressive or liberal savior.

"Hes going to run as I was an enlisted Marine who had to sleep on my mamas couch until I got a bed in college and has been a champion of working-class folks in the state of Arizona, Rocha said.

Questions about a resurgent Democratic left come as Biden prepares to formally kickoff his reelection campaign and will have to decide how to frame his political vision and ideology to appeal to swing voters. After besting Sanders and Warren in the 2020 primary, Biden embraced major progressive goals, promoting expanding social programs and climate-change fighting green energy.

Biden eventually oversaw passage of dramatic federal spending increases, including on health care and green technology. He tried to forgive student loans for millions of Americans, but saw the plan challenged in court.

On other issues, however, Biden has been more moderate. After major legislation to curb police brutality and institutional racism stalled in Congress, the president signed an executive order to make modest reforms. He also has said repeatedly that, rather than heed calls by some progressives to cut funding for law enforcement, the answer should be more police funding.

More recently, the president angered liberal Democrats by failing to veto Republican-championed legislation reversing new, local crime regulations in the nation's capital and approving a major oil drilling project in Alaska.

Biden campaign aides say he's shown flexibility to best respond to ongoing political and policy challenges. And Rocha said that Gallego will benefit from Bidens 2024 campaign, which should rely heavily on promoting his administrations legislative accomplishments and how they benefited working-class families in swing states like Arizona.

But some progressives say the White House should take notice of the movement's down-ballot wins.

I hope hes paying attention, said Hannah Riddle, director of candidate services for the activist group the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. Running on economic populism is a winning strategy. And that model can be replicated all over the country.

___ Weissert reported from Washington.

What others are reading...

Originally posted here:
Progressives focus on local-level wins to counter setbacks - 69News WFMZ-TV

Progressives Aren’t Hurting the Democratic PartyIn Fact, They’re … – Current Affairs

At 11:30 p.m. on the night of November 8, 2022, New York State Governor Kathy Hochul took the stage at her packed election-night watch party to declare victory. The excited crowd chanted her name. Aretha Franklins Respect blared over the PA system. Confetti spewed on stage. The word WINNER appeared in giant bold letters behind her. All seemed well. And, truth be told, the moment was briefly relieving: Lee Zeldin, a hardline MAGA Republican, posed an astonishingly credible threat to Democrats control of Albany, with Kathy Hochuls double-digit lead having collapsed in the months prior to the general election. One poll even showed Zeldin with a one-point lead over Hochul.

Meanwhile, GOP candidates seemed poised for an extraordinarily successful night in the Empire State. Just over an hour later, seasoned Wall Street financier and Baruch volleyball star George Santos flipped a Long Island district that had been controlled by Democrats for a decade. Ex-detective Anthony DEsposito seized a district held by Democrats since 1997. Most embarrassingly, former State Assemblyman Mike Lawler defenestrated power Democrat and DCCC chair Sean Patrick Maloney. Other critical races, like the battle for the newly drawn and highly contested 19th district, seemed down to the wire. New York seemed to be the only state where the mythical red wave was actually materializing. It wasnt looking good.

Over the next week, a seemingly-endless torrent of humiliating statistics about the Democratic Partys showing flooded in. Observers quickly noticed that Hochul herself had carved out a historically weak victory, only managing to muster a 6.4-point victory over Zeldinby comparison, Andrew Cuomo had crushed his Republican challenger by over 23 points in 2018. Democratic voter turnout in New York City between the 2018 and 2022 elections crumbled by an unbelievable 30.7 percent. Every single county in New York shifted dramatically right, with Democratic strongholds like Brooklyn, Manhattan, and the Bronx voting Republican at rates upwards of twice the GOPs 2020 vote-share. Most strikingly, Hochuls margin of victory was only slightly larger than that of John Fetterman, who pulled off a 4.9-point victory in a swing state.

As votes were being counted across the countrys time zones, commentators like The Intercepts Ryan Grim noted that, if the NY Democrats hadnt performed so abysmally poorly, the party would have had a far wider path to the House majority. Phrases used to describe the New York State Democratic Party included asleep at the wheel and mind bogglingly incompetent. Soon-to-be former representative Mondaire Jones simply commented on the results: Yikes.

Who was responsible for this flop of generational proportions? Party chair Jay Jacobs, for his part, blamed the states left. According to Jacobs, progressives had shifted the party too far to the left, leaving the sensible, moderate silent majority with no choice but to vote Republican. New York did underperform, but so did California, Jacobs told City & State magazine. What do those two states have in common? Well, governmentally, were among the two most progressive states in the country.

If this sounds familiar, its because it has been the centers go-to line to shut down progressives for years. Michael Bloomberg trotted it out in 2020 during his presidential run (remember that?), claiming that Bernie Sandersdespite faring well in hypothetical matchups against Trumpwas too divisive to win and a presence who would jeopardize down-ballot candidates. It also happens to be, in a less clinical form, the bread-and-butter crypto-conservatism of ex-Democrats like Elon Musk and Tulsi Gabbard.

So, while absurd, Jacobss claim merits a thorough response. The left isnt just not the NY Democratic Partys Achilles heelits quite possibly the only thing saving the party from itself, both in rhetoric and strategy. Progressive messages on everything from public safety to inflation to tenants rights are legitimately popular and winnable, and more so than those put forth by the centrists who blame them for their failures. Theres no better testament to this than the circles New Yorks left ran around its states political establishment in 2022.

There were many races across NY where moderate Democrats ran on right-wing messages and lost, but none quite as telling as the loss of DCCC chair and power Democrat Sean Patrick Maloney.

After a judge slightly redrew his district, Maloney believed his congressional seat was uncomfortably vulnerable. So, for 2022s race, he bullied squad member Mondaire Jones out of running for reelection to his incumbent seat and ran in Jones district. In the district Maloney had scuttled, Democrat Pat Ryanrunning on decidedly progressive messages on inflation and public safetydefeated his Republican challenger. Meanwhile, in the district hed jumped into, Maloney ended up losing. It doesnt get more ironic than that.

Maloneys slow march toward defeat began during his primary. He ran to the right, buying into Republican-manufactured crime hysteria while antagonizing the local progressive base. To beat Alessandra Biaggi, his progressive challenger, he ran ferocious attack ads denouncing her as a a radical anti-police extremist who voted to release criminals without bail. These ads were bankrolled by the Police Benevolent Organization, a New York City police union which donated nearly half a million dollars to the Maloney campaign (and endorsed Trump in 2020). Maloneys other choice benefactors included the National Association of Realtors PAC and Team Blue PAC, a committee led by then House Democratic Caucus Chair Hakeem Jeffries that has spearheaded efforts to bury incumbent Democrats progressive challengers under an avalanche of cash.

Maloney continued to punch left in the general election, hoping that doubling down on his anti-progressive rhetoric would somehow loop around and attack his Republican challenger. Sean took on those who wanted to defund the police, vouched a police officer in a TV ad. Hes tough on crime. Maloney himself said, Its nuts to say defund the police. And he lost. The chair of the DCCC, a committee whose whole purpose is to maintain Democrats House majority, lost.

In Maloneys former, vulnerable seat, Democrat Pat Ryan ran as an unapologetic populist, embracing abortion rights and slamming corporate power in a considerably challenging, purple district. He embraced the progressive Working Families Party, campaigning with them and crediting the party for his eventual win. His priorities, per his campaign website, included going after price-gougers who are harming customers and making sure billionaires and big corporations pay their fair share. Big utility companies have a monopoly on our power, so they think they can do whatever they want, he said in one ad, standing atop a power line repair crane. I approve this message because big corporations have too much power. Its time our families had more. Rather than centering his public safety message on Republican-manufactured crime hysteria, Ryan campaigned on gun control, mental health, and addiction recovery services. People care about safety, Ryan said in an interview with the Washington Post. I have a 3-year-old and a 7-month-old. I have to drop them at day care and worry that theyre going to get gunned down by the same assault rifle I carried in combat for 27 months.

In a district expected to lean Republican that cycle, Pat Ryan beat his GOP opponent 51-49. I could write a whole article about the beautiful and painful schadenfreude-steeped irony of this race, but the most important lesson is this: you dont beat Republicans by punching left. The difference between Pat Ryan and Sean Patrick Maloney is that Maloney, like many losing Democrats across the state, parroted Republican crime-hysteria rhetoric; Ryan stuck to his principles, centered his own narrative, and was rewarded for it. You win elections by taking stances on issues that dont concede ground to the rightstances that almost always, at the very least, coincide with the lefts. Thats not to say every district in America is ready for an AOC, but centering Republican narratives about crime and socialism only helps, well, Republicans.

Pat Ryan and Sean Patrick Maloneys races are a drastic example of an otherwise statewide trend: progressive narratives on key issues beating out Republican-inspired moderate ones. Progressives across New York racked up wins in competitive August primaries, fending off moderate challengers who campaigned on law-and-order theatrics.

2022 was the year New York States special interests and political establishment decided to try their hand at primarying Gustavo Rivera, a Working Families Party, AFL-CIO, and AOC-backed state senator representing New Yorks 33rd Senate District. Riveras pro-tenant, pro-labor, and pro-police reform positions, as well as his alignment with State Senate leftists, had earned him a number of prominent enemies. Major real estate and charter school super PACs spent lavishly on attack ads, robocalls, and text messages decrying Gustavo Riveras extreme agenda. Former Giuliani-supporting NYC mayor Eric Adams himself, whose whole shtick is scaring New Yorkers with melodramatic rhetoric on surging crime, endorsed Riveras opponent, Miguelina Camilo.

Despite the aforementioned groups best efforts to bury Rivera under an avalanche of dark money, and to depict him as a radical extremist and far-leftist, he won his record-turnout August primary 52-47. It turns out, once again, that spreading right-wing narratives doesnt tend to inspirelet alone helpthose running as Democrats. (Rivera won his November general election with 99.2 percent of the vote.)

There are plenty of other examples to this point. Despite being trounced in fundraisingshe was outspent four-to-onethe DSA-backed Kristen Gonzalez easily won her primary against her Adams-endorsed, special-interest-backed opponent buoyed by outside funds. Adams also endorsed Reverend Conrad Tillard, who ran on an anti-bail reform, pro-Rikers platform (the NYC prison condemned by the Vera Institute of Justice as a torture chamber) against DSA-backed state senator Jabari Brisport. Tillard, too, lost badlyby over 50 percentage points.

To his credit, Adams-endorsed candidates did win some races. The problem for him, however, is that winning said races against socialists is the political equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel. In a Long Island State Senate primary, where you cant throw a stone without hitting a pickup truck decked out in Trump 2024 flags, Adams endorsed moderate Democrat Anna Kaplan against her Nassau County DSA-backed competitor. (God bless the Nassau County DSA for just existingI certainly dont have that patience.) You can probably guess who won in the general election. In Staten Island, the most right-wing NYC borough, Adams endorsed moderate State Senate candidate Jessica Scarcella-Spanton, who easily won a low-turnout race against a crowded field of competitors to her left.

Its quite possible that Eric Adams himself, New Yorks arch-establishment-Democrat, cost Democrats the House in November. New York is, as previously established, the only state where the much-hyped red wave really did come to be. Republicans put forth their most successful gubernatorial candidate since 2002, flipped four House seats (the second-most of any state in the country, next to only California), and flipped six of the states few competitive State Assembly seats (their biggest win since 2010). Why? Because Adams spawned the crime hysteria that lost so many races to begin with, filling the states media market with unfounded screeching about New York Citys return to the destitution of the 80s.

In my professional career, I have never witnessed crime at this level, said Adams in a May 2022 interviewdespite there being 438 murders in the city that year, compared to 2,262 in 1990 (when he was a New York City Transit cop). New York is the fifth-safest large city in the U.S., behind only Honolulu, Virginia Beach, Henderson, Nevada, and El Paso; crime is nowhere near where it was in the 80s and 90s, either in the city or the state. But you wouldnt know it if you took Eric Adams at his word.

This crime-hyping served to his political advantage, propelling him to New Yorks mayoralty, but harmed Democrats across the state. As Politico put it, It failed to animate voters in places like Pennsylvania and California, but crime proved a winning strategy in New Yorkwhere the city media markets massive reach means Gothams crime is the states crime. And, to quote Democratic consultant Mike Morey: All the suburbs in New York are watching the 5 and 6 oclock news on all the networks, theyre reading the tabloids, and theyre seeing these really high-profile incidents of someone getting pushed in front of a subway, a shooting, a stabbing, and there is somehow a fear that this could happen in their front yard.

Queue the NY voters scared to even set foot in New York City for fear of being slaughtered in the street by a zombie horde of unhoused people. Talk to anyone in New York whose parents live in the suburbs, and youll hear stories of QAnon-level crime paranoia fueled by doomsday-style ads and TV coverage.1 And, as a New York Times piece detailed, those crucial swing votersmany of whom would otherwise be reluctant to back Republicansvoted red in November.

Republicans, for their part, were extraordinarily grateful to Adams for his part in helping them wipe the states floors in November. Lee Zeldin professed his giddiness to work with Eric Adams to save the city days before the general election, while State Senate GOP Leader Robert Ortt proclaimed him an ally. They had excellent reason to be: in the words of a Democratic strategist working on NY campaigns, [Eric Adams] was an essential validator in the city to make their [Republicans] attacks seem more legit and less partisan. Some party operatives joked that Zeldin could just run clips of Adams talking about crime as his closing ads. It would be funny if it werent so true.

So, given the fact that the top minds over at the NY Dems establishment wing pretty much created this whole mess to begin with, theres a cruel irony to Jay Jacobs blame-game given that its possibleif not likelythat Kathy Hochul herself, as well as many more down-ballot democrats, wouldnt have even won if not for the efforts of progressive organizations.

While Hochul tanked in the polls, the Working Families Partywhich typically takes every available opportunity to bash moderate Democratsspent $500,000 of its own funds on an eleventh-hour push to ensure Democrats remained in control of Albany, organizing 60 canvasses and phone banks, sending 2 million text messages to voters, making 250,000 calls, and sending over 300 volunteers to NYC polling sites.

The WFP also spent months mobilizing local progressive politicians as part of a larger get-out-the-vote structure, while Hochuls team dragged its feet on organizing its own turnout efforts. NYC Comptroller Brad Lander, an influential city-wide politician who had canvassed and attended rallies on behalf of Hochul, received his first contact from her campaign just 10 days before the election. There certainly was also activity [from the Hochul campaign], but nothing like the WFP, he said in an interview with Politico.

City Council Member Tiffany Cabn, who represents a typically high-turnout district in Queens and joined the WFP turnout campaign, also described experiencing the same radio silence. High voter turnout districts dont come out of nowhere, Cabn said to Politico. Here I was sitting in a place like Western Queens, with high voter turnout, going into early voting and not being touched once by the Hochul campaign.

Meanwhile, the Brooklyn chapter of the Democratic PartyBrooklyn is an intensely Democratic county, and one which would typically be the site of a major turnout operation during a statewide racedrew significant scorn for failing to drop a single dollar on turning anyone out.

Even Newsday (a Long Island tabloid hardly considered a bastion of progressive thought) duly credited the Working Families Partys efforts as being critical to Hochuls win. Observers left and right agree that the WFPs work in steering voters toward their ballot line on behalf of Kathy Hochul and Antonio Delgado was among the only factors thatin the words of WFP national director Maurice Mitchellmade a horrible night for Democrats less horrible.

Unions like the AFL-CIO also organized the turnout muscle that helped put Hochul over the finish line. AFL-CIO members from Buffalo to Long Island knocked on over 120,000 union household doors repping Hochul, while SEIU 1199an influential health care workers unionmade 70,000 phone calls and distributed 500,000 leaflets on the final weekend of the gubernatorial race. New York State United Teachers, which donated $1 million to benefit the Hochul campaign, mailed 57,000 handwritten postcards to its members. While many of these efforts were organized months ahead of Novembers elections, these unions doubled down on their campaigns after Hochuls late-September fall from a 17-point lead to single digits.

With Hochul only winning by 377,834 votes, its not impossible to imagine a world where, in the absence of the lefts efforts to save her tanking campaign, Lee Zeldin is currently New Yorks governor. If theres one lesson New York has to offer America, its this: the left knows how to win. Its strategic, disciplined, and legitimately popular (unlike Hochul and Co., who coast off being slightly better than what Republicans have to offer at the moment).

The left knows how to run a traditional voter contact operation, organize a turnout drive, be visible in communities, and build momentum around its candidates. These things arent just establishment Democrats turf: not only is the left capable of running them, and running them effectively, butin New Yorktheyre more capable than the center. The left is practically winning their races for them.

But its not all about turnout infrastructure and political machinery. The lefts success is also owed to the fact that if voters wanted Republicans, theyd vote for, well, Republicans. The Democratic candidates in New York who centered their own narrativeswhether they be around abortion, public safety, democracy, or inflationreaped the benefits at the polls. Meanwhile, those who invoked Republican narratives around defund, crime, and policing in vain hopes that it would somehow benefit them lost bigboth in primaries and in generals. Tacking right hurts. Big-money politics is alienating. The data showed this in New York from the beginning, and only the left heeded it.

New York, aside from being an important case study in the winnability of leftist ideas, is also ground zero for the question of how the left should think about leveraging its power. Its an open question as to whether, and to what extent, the left really needs the DemocratsKathy Hochul, for her part, doesnt particularly seem to care that she owes her current gig as New Yorks governor to the unions, progressives, and socialists who did the lions share of work on her behalf.

In December, Kathy Hochul made the bizarre choice to nominate Hector LaSalle, a judge with a questionable history of troubling rulings on labor rights, abortion access, and criminal justice, to lead New Yorks highest court. LaSalles nomination drew backlash from a huge array of unions, abortion rights, immigrant advocacy, and progressive organizing groups, who demanded that the Senate Judiciary Committee sink his nomination. They did. Nevertheless, Hochul pushed forward, at one point threatening to actually sue the State Senate if it didnt put LaSalle to a floor vote. LaSalle eventually got his floor vote, which, predictably, he lost.

God only knows why Hochul did any of thateven moderate Democrats and LaSalles own supporters are baffledbut its pretty clear that Hochul isnt particularly predisposed to working with, let alone listening to, the progressive left.

At the moment, shes trying to push through an austerity budget that promises to not raise income taxestheres one small problem, though, if you commute, study, rent, or have kids who go to a public school. Her budget is basically a giant middle finger to every progressive priority, gutting New Yorks wildly successful bail reform, handing more money to charter schools at the expense of underfunded public schools, hiking CUNY and SUNY tuition by up to 30 percent, and refusing to include the rent-increase cap and good-cause eviction law demanded by the state legislature. Fear not, though: Hochuls budget includes billions in tax credits and corporate subsidies, slammed by even moderate advocates as ineffective and wasteful.

Additionally, Hochuls budget includes a version of the Build Public Renewables Act, a bill that would empower the New York Power Authority to build publicly-owned wind and solar energy. Her version, however, is worse in every way. Axed from the original bill are mandates that the state must actually build enough renewable energy to meet benchmarks, a timeline for shutting down NYs dirtiest power plants (many of which are in marginalized communities of color), and the laws extensive labor union protections. Was it payback for the unions sinking of the LaSalle nomination? A 4D chess negotiating tactic? Or a half-baked attempt to emulate Andrew Cuomos authoritarian power politics? Who knows! But Kathy Hochul doesnt seem to care about the unions support for hermuch less feel like she owes anyone, aside from big-money donors, anything.

Its worth pointing out that none of the above political battles have been going too well for Hochul lately. Hector LaSalles candidacy was basically dead on arrival, and the state legislature remains at an impasse over her budget. New Yorks left is learning to leverage its power in the legislature to deliver real wins, or, at the very least, stop the more evil points on her agenda. But this tit-for-tat strategy has limits. You can only get so far by backing austerians like Hochul with zero strings attached in hopes that youll get access to their ears later on.

At the very least, the lefts support shouldnt be free.

Consider the 2014 battle for the Working Families Partys gubernatorial endorsement, when the party seriouslyand publiclyconsidered endorsing insurgent left-wing candidate Zephyr Teachout over Andrew Cuomo. Polls had indicated that an unnamed WFP candidate would snatch up to a quarter of the vote, and Cuomothen seeking a second term (and polishing his brand for a possible presidential run)knew that he needed the WFP more than they needed him.

WFP leaders made a point of being coy in responding to said polls, and made no effort to hide the significant anti-Cuomo sentiment in the partys ranks. Just days before the party was set to announce its endorsement, Cuomo blinked, making a number of crucial concessions to the left in exchange for their support. The matter was pretty incredible in the moment: the 200-some activists on the WFPs state committee had just wrung a commitment to public financing of elections, access to financial aid for undocumented students, and a minimum wage increase out of an effectively center-right governor.

The Democrats failed to take the State Senate that year, making the whole affair practically moot. Cuomo couldnt have done any of the things hed promised, even if he wanted to (which itself was debatable). But that was 2014. Since, the left has massively increased its clout in New York; their machine is bigger than ever. They could thus afford to take a page from the 2014 playbook, and try to extract meaningful concessions out of the Hochuls of this world before proffering their support.

One might protest that backing Hochul with no strings attached gives the leftand particularly unions, whose entire political strategy revolves around this principlea seat at the table. Yet, its quite possible that, in light of the LaSalle nomination and Hochuls anti-union austerity budget, unions voices have never mattered less to a governor of New York. In the words of iron workers union president Jimmy Mahoney, that seat at the table has more closely resembled being on the menu. If there was ever a time when seat-at-the-tableism worked, its long gone.

Its also a possibility that establishment Democrats hostility runs so deep that theyd risk outright loss over a pragmatic deal with progressives. In that case, the DSA, WFP, and New Yorks unions should put real power behind an insurgent candidate, either during the Democratic primary or on the WFPs general election ballot line. While past insurgent candidates havent fared too wellin part because of said groups refusals to put their full weight behind onetheres ample evidence to suggest that doing so would be a real, strategic option. Aside from definitively dispelling the notion that progressives are bluffing, an insurgent candidate with the lefts turnout infrastructure behind them would energize its base, demonstrate its status as a political force in New York, and, most importantly of all, move the debate and push critical points on its agenda toward the mainstream.

Such was the case in 2018, when former Sex and the City actress Cynthia Nixon took on Cuomo for the Democratic nomination, identifying herself as a democratic socialist while running on a strong progressive platform. Nixon didnt do awfully well at the pollsin no small part because the left was divided as to whether it should support her or pursue the mythical seat at the table by backing Cuomobut managed to bring progressive ideas like ending cash bail, tackling climate change through massive public investment, and public-sector workers right to strike to the literal debate stage of New Yorks Democratic party. That, too, came to pass in 2014, when Zephyr Teachout helped mainstream the demand for a $15 minimum wage during her insurgent candidacy against Cuomo, which he finally acceded to two years later.

Finally, an insurgent candidateprovided they receive proper support from the lefts political infrastructurewould likely fare quite well against an establishment Democrat. Nearly three in four New Yorkers favor taxing the rich to pay for budgetary shortfalls over austerity, while voters are overwhelmingly dissatisfied with Hochuls failure to deliver on promises to lower the cost of living in NY and improve public universities. As the Hochul administration makes it easier for landlords to raise rent and harder for CUNY and SUNY students to pay tuition, one would imagine that shes opening up political opportunities for the left to walk right into.

Its also worth noting, that, despite Cynthia Nixons 2018 campaign for governor typically being seen as an unmitigated failure, she won over 500,000 votesmore votes than Cuomo garnered in his previous primary. While theres no single explanation for why turnout was so high in 2018, when you have a candidate like Cynthia Nixonsomeone who challenges the status quo and envisions a different way of doing politicsit universally seems to energize people who otherwise wouldnt show up to vote.

Nixon also won a third of the vote without the kind of turnout operation the left is now capable of in New Yorkimagine what the infrastructure that exists now, let alone will exist in four years, would have been able to do for a left-wing challenger. While its unlikelyat least for the foreseeable futurethat such a candidate would outright win, a close primary or general election with a sizable vote to the left would considerably damage the establishments brand and credibility, and only contribute to progressives growing power.

Theres enormous potential in New York, but it all depends upon whether the left is willing to play hardball. It has established itself as a popular, strategic force to be reckoned with, but the real test is whether itll be able to leverage that power to deliver for New Yorkers. The left has its machineit just needs to use it.

PHOTO: Jabari Brisport protests outside Governor Andrew Cuomos office on the eviction moratorium on Wednesday, Aug. 4, 2021, in New York.

Read the original:
Progressives Aren't Hurting the Democratic PartyIn Fact, They're ... - Current Affairs

Breed Hits Back at Progressives, Touts Conservatorship with Jon Stewart – The San Francisco Standard

On his podcast The Problem, Jon Stewart got a surprising response when he asked Mayor London Breed about her approach to fixing the citys issues.

The comedian asked Breed whether shes seen a particularly promising system for bringing back folks struggling with mental health issues or addiction.

Not necessarily, Breed replied. Stewart took it as an honest admission of the difficult problems at play.

In the interview, Breed discussed how her upbringing colored her approach to criminal justice, her problem with San Francisco's stated progressives and where she thinks the city is handcuffed in its ability to deal with the intertwined crises of mental health and homelessness.

Stewart, who also shared memories of playing at the Punchline after the Loma Prieta earthquakewhen a visible crack adorned the comedy clubs wallsintroduced Breed as criticized, I think, by everybody, for being too soft on crime, too tough on crime.

Breed, who grew up in public housing and whose family was deeply impacted by addiction and the criminal justice system, credited her grandmother with helping her survive that gauntlet. She said it was her upbringing that has shaped her views on public safety and drug addiction.

Breed described her grandmother as really hardcore and posited that she was harder on her than her brothers. That meant Breed had to do all the chores, run her errands, pay the rent in an early lesson on accountability.

You were saved by sexism? Stewart joked.

The conversation touched on Breeds frustration with progressivism as it is conceived in San Francisco. The mayor took the opportunity to voice some of her regular criticism of the Board of Supervisors.

There are members of that body who feel that they are the carriers of the torch for progressive values in San Francisco, Breed said.

To be clear, these are people who don't know what it feels like to live in these conditions, and they are constantly pushing against the recommendations that are being even made by the people who are living in the conditions that are so frustrating, she added.

When trying to parse out intersecting issues impacting the city, Breed drew a straight line between homelessness and substance abuse and touted the need for safe consumption sites and a tiered system of addiction programs.

The problem is, of course, the behavior and the challenges that exist from my perspective from a lot of the use of drugs and the psychosis that happens as a result of the use of drugs, Breed said. Oftentimes, thats not reversible. So we have people who are more erratic, people who are more combative, people who are more engaged in the kind of behavior where people are afraid.

In line with that take, Breed pushed for more tools to compel people into treatment if they are unable or unwilling to do so voluntarily. Earlier this month, Breed joined a coalition of lawmakers in pushing for updates to Californias conservatorship laws.

We have to have a level of force associated with that to really get people on the right path, Breed said. If you have mental illness and you're out on the streets and you're walking in and out of traffic, you know, we can do a 72-hour hold. But through our legal system, if you say, I'm okay and you want to go back on the streets, you are allowed to do that.

She used the example of an older woman who walks around naked, dragging a blanket behind her, who becomes violent when approached.

The only thing we can do is detain her. She goes through the process, and she says I'm okay. I can take care of myself. And that is not a solution, Breed said. That is doing the same thing over and over, expecting to get a different result, which we will not get unless we're willing to put in a level of force that sometimes also makes people uncomfortable.

When we're trying to change the policies, we start talking about [forcing] someone into treatment. Then all of a sudden, people are like, Well, wait a minute, conservatorship. Look at what happened with Britney Spears. We don't wanna take away someone's rights."

If it were me, I would want someone to force me into whatever treatment possible, Breed said.

Part of the problem, Stewart pointed out, is a lack of available treatment beds.

Breed said she believed that resources could be diverted from jails and prisons into mental health facilities that could meet the needs of those suffering from schizophrenia or dementia or issues where they can't necessarily take care of themselves.

As for why San Francisco has become such an avatar for urban decline? Breed pointed the finger at President Donald Trump, who turned the liberal city into a useful foil, as well as social media, which can create viral moments that take hold in the popular imagination.

I think people see those videos and think, 'Oh my goodness, San Francisco is such a scary place, Breed said.

One of the most striking aspects of the interview was the clear admission by Breed of the limited impact that an individual city like San Francisco can make in tackling its problems of homelessness and drug abuse.

I think what were doing in San Francisco is trying to stop the bleeding, Breed said. We cant do this alone. We cant arrest our way out of this problem. We can't get enough people into treatment to make a dent.

Kevin Truong can be reached at [emailprotected]

Read the original post:
Breed Hits Back at Progressives, Touts Conservatorship with Jon Stewart - The San Francisco Standard

TikTok vs Palantir: China and the progressives – TheArticle

Shou Zi Chew, the Chief Executive Officer of the social media app TikTok, did not have a pleasant Thursday 23rd March. A member of the global elite, with an MBA from Harvard and Goldman Sachs on his CV, the Singaporean businessman would not have been used to the hard time he received live on American TV.

Chew spent it being grilled by members of the United States Congress. In a rare case of bipartisanship, Republicans and Democrats were equally rude to him and dismissive of his defence of TikTok. Almost all questioned whether or stated that it was a security threat to the United States, due to its Chinese origins and ability to extract user data. It was referenced how Byte Dance employees, Byte Dance being the owner of TikTok, had accessed two journalists TikTok data, seeking to find the source of leaks at Byte Dance.

One of his weaker arguments was that Tik Tok was not in fact Chinese, being headquartered in Singapore. This argument is rather undercut by the Chinese governments vigorous defence of TikTok and Byte Dance. After all, if TikTok is not Chinese, why would the Chinese government care? What is interesting is not the hostility of Congress, which is understandable as Chinese-US rivalry grows, but rather the progressive media/legal/activist forces that seek to defend TikTok. There are various groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, who are likely to go to court to fight a ban on TikTok if one is imposed by Congress. These are the same progressive types, especially in the US and UK, who have a pathological aversion to the US software company Palantir.

So why would progressives defend or overlook an app from an authoritarian state, which governments around the world are banning from government devices, but target a US-originated company that works with governments across the West and has specifically set out not to work with authoritarian regimes? The original sin of Palantir in the eyes of progressive opinion was to be founded to work with Western security forces. For these progressives the fact that the CIAs venture capital arm was an early investor and Peter Thiel was a founder is not proof that Palantir is a serious firm, but rather that it is tainted by the deep state and a sinister billionaire. Thiel is a tech billionaire who does not follow the woke Silicon Valley consensus. Palantir has even moved its headquarters out of Silicon Valley and relocated to Colorado, due in part to constant protests outside its old offices by progressive activists.

Ordinary people, who are not progressive activists, might point out that the West needs world class software engineers working on national security and not more software on how to make cat videos on YouTube more appealing. In a world of a rising China, an aggressive Russia and disruptive Iran, surely the West needs companies like Palantir even more than ever, just as the West needs spy agencies and satellites? Some people might suggest Peter Thiel is not actually a sinister billionaire, but rather a visionary who foresaw the need for a Palantir type company before anyone else. Even the progressive activists tacitly acknowledge the force of the national security argument by not taking on Palantir head on in relation to its defence work but seeking other ways to undermine it.

One example is Palantirs involvement in the NHS. There is a dedicated No Palantir in our NHS campaign. This campaign is supported by Liberty, War on Want and a group called Coventry against Racism. The progressive activists seem content for uninformed journalists to write articles about Palantir secretly seeking health data, when they must know full well that Palantir is not a social media company that harvests information. In fact, its national security background means that data security is part of its corporate DNA.

The merits of whether Palantir should be involved in the NHS seem never actually to be discussed. Namely after a failed twenty-year model of the NHS hiring consultants to produce bespoke IT that has not worked, but been very lucrative for those consultants, surely an outside expert provider should be tried? This never seems to be addressed in the media, being lost in inaccurate stories about how a wicked and sinister software company is coming to steal your health data and privatise the NHS. The idea that using Palantir software is akin to privatisation is laughable, but reflects the progressives bias. It is a bit like claiming that hospitals buying MRI scanners, instead of building their own from scratch, is really a plot to privatise the NHS. If Palantir has something to offer the NHS, it should be considered on its merits. The progressives fight with Palantir should not interfere with anything that helps the overstretched NHS modernise, digitise, and tackle its problems.

Why do these double standards in relation to TikTok and Palantir matter? China is a rising global power and there is growing concern in the West that its authoritarian politics is not compatible with liberal democracy. If the West is to face this challenge it will need software and technology companies to match Chinas growing expertise in these areas. In short, progressives should grow up, stop obsessing about Palantir and be more concerned about the threat that China and its tech companies pose to global freedom.

We are the only publication thats committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one thats needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation.

Visit link:
TikTok vs Palantir: China and the progressives - TheArticle

Greg Casar leads attack on Gov. Greg Abbott’s Operation Lone Star – The Dallas Morning News

WASHINGTON Rep. Greg Casar, D-Austin, helped lead progressives Wednesday in promoting federal legislation they say would bring more humanity to the countrys treatment of immigrants and push back on Republican efforts to have state and local authorities or even everyday citizens assume the role of immigration law enforcers.

The path weve been on for decades of building more private prisons, putting more kids in cages, spending tens and hundreds of millions of dollars on border militarization, hasnt worked, Casar told reporters Wednesday.

Their proposal would end mandatory no-bond immigration detention, repeal laws allowing for criminal prosecution of unauthorized entry into the United States and limit the time in which federal authorities can initiate removal proceedings for civil violations.

It would provide an opportunity for those already deported to return and it would repeal laws used to justify having local authorities enforce immigration rules.

Casar said that would chip away at the foundation for Operation Lone Star, Gov. Greg Abbotts multibillion dollar immigration-and-drugs dragnet at the southern border.

This law would make it very clear that federal immigration officials should be doing immigration and our local police forces, state police forces should be focused on keeping us safe from violence, Casar said. They shouldnt be chasing immigrants all around the state.

Abbotts office did not respond to a request for comment but in a news release last week said Operation Lone Star has turned back thousands of migrants seeking to enter the country illegally and resulted in more than 26,000 criminal arrests.

It said the operation continues to fill the dangerous gaps left by the Biden administrations border policies.

Figures on arrests from the operation have included some individuals busted for low-level drug offenses unrelated to the border.

Casar said the progressives proposal also would shut down efforts such as Texas House Bill 20, which would create a Texas Border Protection Unit and allow citizen volunteers after mandatory training to make arrests.

Casar described that as bounty hunter vigilante squads.

The legislation hes promoting wont go anywhere this session with Republicans in control, but it represents a response from left-leaning Democrats to a slew of hardline GOP immigration proposals.

It also comes as the Biden administration has sought to stem the flow of migrants across the border with new policies that some have compared to those of President Donald Trump.

House Republicans made combatting illegal immigration a central part of their 2022 midterm campaign message but have struggled to get on the same page in writing bills since taking over the majority.

Nearly all Republicans in the Texas delegation backed a package of proposals focused on physical barriers and tougher enforcement. That plan includes a bill sponsored by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Austin, that would require Department of Homeland Security to turn away all individuals at the border that cannot be detained for the pendency of their proceedings.

Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio, has vowed to fight Roys proposal.

Bring unchristian anti-immigrant bills to the floor and I am a NO on the debt ceiling, Gonzales tweeted Wednesday.

The debt ceiling represents a powerful leverage point because the economic fallout from not addressing it would be significant and the razor-thin House GOP majority makes every vote crucial.

While the details of their legislation remain in flux, Republicans continue to hammer the Biden administrations handling of the border.

Both of Texas Republican senators lit into Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Tuesday when he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Sen. John Cornyn pressed Mayorkas to apologize to the parents of children who have died from fentanyl overdoses.

Senator, my heart is with the family of every victim of a drug overdose death, Mayorkas responded.

Cornyn accused the secretary of evading responsibility and said he has lost all credibility.

You should be fired, but you havent been fired because you were carrying out the policies of the Biden administration, and weve seen nothing but death and destruction as a result, Cornyn said.

Mayorkas touted record seizures of fentanyl at ports of entry and efforts to do more.

Democrats on the committee noted the U.S. immigration system was broken long before the Biden administration, but Republicans kept venting their frustration at the secretary.

Sen. Ted Cruz fired off a series of yes-or-no queries and repeatedly cut off Mayorkas attempts to offer broad responses, accusing him of filibustering to avoid answering the questions.

Cruz told Mayorkas his own Border Patrol agents feel hes undermining them.

They despise you, Mr. Secretary, because youre willing to let children be raped to follow political orders, Cruz said. This is a crisis. Its a disgrace. And you wont even admit this human tragedy is a crisis.

The committees chairman offered Mayorkas a chance to respond to Cruzs statement.

What the senator said was revolting, Mayorkas said. Im not going to address it.

Your refusal to do your job is revolting, Cruz shot back.

See more here:
Greg Casar leads attack on Gov. Greg Abbott's Operation Lone Star - The Dallas Morning News