top of page
Search

There's Something Seriously Wrong With Congressional Democratic Leadership



Tuesday's TX-28 primary runoff is far from over. There are still votes to be counted (and recounted, considering the mind-boggling degree of systemic corruption in Webb, Zapata and Starr counties). 175 votes separate Blue Dog scumbag Henry Cuellar and progressive challenger Jessica Cisernos. The Republicans also feel than can make a play for the district and a former Ted Cruz staffer, Cassy Garcia, won the GOP primary runoff Tuesday night. There were 14,893 Republicans voting. 45,209 Democrats voted.



On Wednesday, many members of Congress were talking among themselves about how the role of Democratic House leadership in the race-- particularly from Nancy Pelosi, Jim Clyburn, Hakeem Jeffries and Steny Hoyer-- has made it clearer than ever that a new leadership team is needed, no matter what the outcome of the midterms are next year. "I think I read it on your blog last week," one member told me. "The shelf life of Pelosi, Steny and Clyburn expired a couple cycles ago... We need them to retire gracefully."


"The establishment wing of the Democratic is an absolute horrorshow right now," said Jason Call, a progressive Democrat in Washington who isn't in Congress yet hopefully will be after he beats corrupt New Dem Rick Larsen in November. "Not only Pelosi stumping for anti-abortion pro-NRA corporatist Henry Cuellar but the historic sentiment on the part of Pelosi and Biden and the old guard that 'we need a strong Republican Party.' We see Biden waxing poetic about his relationship with segregationist Strom Thurmond and despite all the things we know about how egregiously oppressive policing is in America, his answer is to dump more money into a bad system. And despite progressives offering very real solutions to problems of climate change, healthcare, housing, and education, the profit margins of the donors that the establishment works for seem to be the only thing that counts. The only thing it leaves me thinking is, why do they hate their grandchildren?"


Writing for The Hill last night, Julia Manchester reported that the anger from progressives is boiling over. She quoted a tweet from AOC: "On the day of a mass shooting and weeks after news of Roe, Democratic Party leadership rallied for a pro-NRA, anti-choice incumbent under investigation in a close primary. Robocalls, fundraisers, all of it." The sentiment is widespread, even if few have the cajones to say it out loud.


As of Wednesday morning, Cuellar led Cisneros by just 177 votes, according to the Texas Secretary of State’s Office. Cuellar declared victory in the early hours of Wednesday, but Cisneros has not conceded.
Cuellar thanked Clyburn “for his steadfast support” in his statement claiming victory on Wednesday.
Even if Cuellar wins, the closeness of the results so far can be seen as a win for Cisneros, who closed the gap with Cuellar after challenging him two years ago. In 2020, Cuellar defeated Cisneros by more than 2,000 votes.
“With a margin this small, it’s clear that a pro-choice, anti-NRA Democrat could have easily won if it wasn’t for the full-throated support of Speaker Pelosi and the party establishment in Washington for anti-choice, pro-NRA Henry Cuellar,” said Waleed Shahid, communications director for Justice Democrats. “But right now the election is still too close to call.”
Moderates have cautioned that Cuellar, who has already been elected by the 28th Congressional District nine times, could be their best chance at holding the seat in a difficult election year.

[NOTE: The new district lines have the partisan lean moving from D+4 to D+7.]

But progressives argue he is beholden to special interests that are out of touch with his constituents.
“They aligned themselves with AIPAC, Big Oil, gun manufacturers, and the Koch brothers to support a man who consistently undermines our party and sent a signal to voters that incumbency is more important than Democratic values,” said Sawyer Hackett, senior communications strategist at the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.
Progressives, including Cisneros, have also knocked Cuellar for his more conservative views on issues like abortion. And the incumbent congressman came under fire earlier this year when his Texas home and campaign offices were raided by the FBI as a part of an investigation into U.S. businessmen and Azerbaijan. Cuellar and his attorney say he has been cleared of any wrongdoing and is not a part of any investigation. The Justice Department has not commented on the matter.
Joseph Geevarghese, the executive director of Our Revolution, went further, accusing Democrats in Washington of turning their backs on working families.
“Democratic leadership and countless corporate interests poured endless fundraising support into the incumbent’s campaign to fit their uninspiring, anti-progress mold,” Geevarghese said in a statement to The Hill. ”It’s time for Washington to wake up and recognize that working families want a progressive agenda.”
However, establishment Democratic allies are rejecting those points, arguing that it’s a majority of voters, not lawmakers from outside of the district, that have the power to decide the election.

His establishment Democratic allies are lying. It's almost impossible to beat an incumbent with the kind of money Cuellar's corrupt funders threw into the race. That Cisneros managed statistical tie against his shady Machine and that kind of cash is breathtaking. Although the figures haven't been updated since May 4-- and AIPAC and Mellman's DMFI are know to spend biggest in the last 10 days of campaigns, by May 4 conservative SuperPACs had already spent $1.4 million smearing Cisneros and $1.5 million making up utter nonsense about what a champion of progressive values and policies Cuellar is. Looking through FEC.gov from May 4 til May 20, the most recent update-- so there will be much more to find-- AIPAC's United Democracy Project alone spent an additional $700,000 attacking Cisneros.



UPDATE From San Diego


The progressive candidate taking on corrupt New Dem Juan Vargas this cycle is Joaquin Vazquez. This morning, he told me that "The previous two election cycles have seen the left increase it's numbers in Congress, challenging the establishment at every turn and changing the national conversation to prioritize things like Medicare For All, a Green New Deal, taxing the rich and student debt cancellation. Issues that scare the hell out of corporations that will see profits take a nose dive when passed. It makes sense to see these same corporations lobbying House Democratic leadership nonstop, with millions in contributions to conservative Democratic incumbents through political action committees like AIPAC, New Democrat Coalition, and the Blue Dog PAC. Pelosi's goal is not to ensure that voters elect who they believe could best represent them, but to secure their hold on power in Congress by stopping the election of more progressives. We do need new leadership in the House of Representatives, but seeing how the vast majority of voters support progressive policies like Medicare For All, the new leader must be someone much to the left of the current leadership. This can only happen with more progressives in Congress."

9 Comments


I always vote. And I vote for democrats only because I know how much worse the republicans are. But it just makes me want to cry. And another gun massacre in Texas of 21 people and nothing but a weak, wishy-washy response from the "leaders" in Washington. And yes dcrapguy, you have been right all along. It must get very discouraging, yelling into the void.

Like
dcrapguy
dcrapguy
May 27, 2022
Replying to

indeed it is. not quite a void, but close.

what is more discouraging is being silenced by the fraction of the void that is supposedly not void.

Like

This article sums it all up for me:


https://newrepublic.com/article/166600/henry-cuellar-steny-hoyer-clyburn-democrats


As Bernie was harshly reminded in March 2020, the mandarins are far more concerned about preserving their business model than they are about meeting the needs of their purported constituents. Or, as the linked piece put it:


"Whether these politicians actually care about the causes they claim to care about is unknowable, and it isn’t the point. They might care, they might not; no amount of asking them to comment on this question is going to clear it up. What’s clear is that the consequences of Democratic timidity won’t actually affect the people who make sure Washington works this way."

Like
dcrapguy
dcrapguy
May 26, 2022
Replying to

timidity is not the correct word. corruption is more accurate.

timidity (cowardice... pussification) is why the party refuses to address issues about which the money is agnostic (women's rights, LGBTQ rights...). The rest is corruption.

Like

dcrapguy
dcrapguy
May 26, 2022

saith Joaquin: "Pelosi's goal is not to ensure that voters elect who they believe could best represent them, but to secure their hold on power in Congress by stopping the election of more progressives."


Now where have I written this very thing endlessly on this very page... to have many of them censored by DWT who also writes this very thing often on this very page?


However, Joaquin's conclusion is wrong and has been proven wrong over the past 50 years and by his own statement.


if the PARTY "graysons" progressives, how the fuck does he think "we" can elect more progressives.

AND, as CNYO ably points out, even when "we" DO elect progressive-sounding "better" democraps... nothing at all gets…


Like
dcrapguy
dcrapguy
May 27, 2022
Replying to

yes, hatewatt11, I note the ad hominem hatred.

But I will observe some things anyway.

1) clearly this page has nothing to do with tyranny. as far as I can tell, just by what gets posted here, it has two purposes:

a) bitching about nazis. ok for what it's worth.

b) trying to get more democraps elected.

2) often, democraps, both individually (most of the time) and the party as a whole (far less often) are accurately excoriated by authors. Not just by me.

3) The fact that this page does excoriate the democrap party while concurrently (usually in the same column) shilling for more democraps is perhaps schizophrenic.. or hypocritical... possibly both. It is at the very least, logicall…


Like

CNYOrange
CNYOrange
May 26, 2022

So what is the "squad" going to do about it? Absolutely fuck all. If they're really serious they'll challenge Pelo$i or Jeffrie$ for leadership in 2023, they probably won't.

Like
dcrapguy
dcrapguy
May 26, 2022
Replying to

just review who they all voted for at the last leadershit vote.

Like
bottom of page