Slog
News & ArtsThursday, January 12, 2012
2012 / Election The High Price of Moderation
Posted by Goldy on Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:34 PM
So, the game is on. As Eli reported, Department of Revenue director Suzan DelBene—who lost a close race to Republican Representative Dave Reichert in 2010 in Washington's 8th Congressional District—has officially thrown her hat into the ring in the crowded race to replace Representative Jay Inslee in the newly redrawn, and extremely swing 1st Congressional District. Her Democratic opponents include state Representative Roger Goodman, state Senator Steve Hobbs, former state representative Laura Ruderman, and progressive organizer Darcy Burner, who lost two close races to Reichert in 2006 and 2008.
It's probably fair to say that DelBene's entrance instantly makes her the consensus favorite to win the Democratic nomination. DelBene is a smart, likable, centrist candidate, but more importantly she's got money, and there's nothing establishment types of either party like better than a self-funder. In 2010, DelBene put $2.2 million of her (and her husband's) own money into her campaign, out of her total $4 million raised, only to lose by about 14,000 votes, or roughly 4 percent. Had she ponied up another million dollars she might have won. Had she put in a million less, the final tally likely wouldn't have been nearly as close.
It's DelBene's presumed money advantage, plus her more centrist demeanor, that leads many political insiders to consider her the nominal Democratic favorite. DelBene is simply going to be able to spend more in the primary than her rivals. And according to a recent study from the Progressive Politics Institute, she's going to need it:
- Moderate Democrats and their opponents spent more than twice as much on their campaigns in 2010 as their counterparts in liberal districts.
- Moderate candidates were much more likely to draw outside spending in their districts.
- “Safer” moderate members still pay a premium.
Of course, districts that elect moderates tend to be more competitive, and competitive campaigns tend to be more expensive to run. But the fact remains: Blue Dogs, New Democrats and their opponents spent an average of $3.3 million on their campaigns in 2010, compared to an average of $1.6 million spent by candidates and opponents in Progressive Caucus districts.
No doubt DelBene's wealth—and her willingness to use it—can work to her advantage. Indeed, it's hard to imagine she'd be considered a favorite without it. But I don't buy into the conventional wisdom that running toward the center is the key to victory. Blue Dog and New Democrats suffered much bigger losses in 2010, a Republican wave year, than their Progressive Caucus counterparts, who now outnumber them in Congress. And against a conservative extremist like John Koster, the likely Republican nominee, there's as good an argument to make for strongly differentiating yourself from your opponent as there is for running toward the nondescript center.
2
4
Moderate and swing districts in any state don't like people who are too liberal or too conservative. If the GOP is, in fact, running a conservative extremist (and assuming the new WA-1 district is a swing one), a moderate is much more likely to win than a liberal.
Conventional wisdom? More like the actual results of the past few election cycles. Is the time right for a progressive to seize the opportunity? I wouldn't bet on it unless the newly redrawn WA-1 has a nice registration advantage for the Democrats, and if they're known to be as progressive as the ones in WA-7.
9
11
I'm having trouble understanding my new 8th district (assuming I'm still in it, since I've always lived near its Western boarder). Seems like they've extended really far East, which would play less towards a slick Dem and more towards a country Repub.
It looks like the great majority of Kent will be in WA-09. You can see which CD you're in by drilling down to close-up detail in this Google map at the Redistricting Commission's website.
How about if Gingrich gets nominated, Obama could just get some balls. Come to think about it, maybe that would be a good idea in any case.
As if the neoliberal agenda of blue dogs was moderate. Moderate doesn't mean in between Rs and Ds when both parties have been captured by the oligarchy.
"Ever heard of a party line vote in Congress? Having a "D" or a "R" does matter."
D party line votes occur after the blue dogs have gutted bills out of their progressive content. Why push for the so-called moderate, pre-approved by the blue dog-DLC-3rd way Democrats, when we can still fight for a progressive candidate?
I tend to be a fan of the moderates
With the cash she'll bring and draw to the table you can do a lot of getting people to listen to you say what they want to hear. But if she and her H are going to take it to the next level and get invited to the next level of parties, they are going to have to really do some things for people that matter, and you can't do that in the Department of Revenue or by lending people money to get a new milk cow or herd of cheese milk pygmy goats.
18
Moderate candidates were much more likely to draw outside spending in their districts."
Corporatists are more likely to get massive corporate donations?
I say!
19
But be realistic. Moderates in The old WA-1 wasn't the liberal stronghold WA-7 is, and I get the feeling that the new WA-1 isn't either.
I actually believe that a majority of eligible voters are on the left of DC democrats on most critical issues. The role of a party is to lead. If Democrats won't lead progressive voters, it's likely time for somebody else to do it. Electing another 3rd-way opportunist will accomplish exactly the opposite.
21
Um, you must not get out of Seattle much. Or even to the less hip neighborhoods like Lake City, Arbor Heights, or the like. There's no other explanation for such a myopic viewpoint.
22
I am not making it up. Just look at national polls on many major issues and see how majorities are on Obama's left: public option health care, withdrawal from wars, taxing and re-regulating the financial sector, no privatization of public education, etc. Sure, the public may be bamboozled when election time comes around but that has more to do with propaganda and disenfranchisement combined with the lack of a clear progressive alternative.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (23) RSS