2026 Midterm Elections

[sunnyheel]

I’m not that well versed in the details of this race but I do think we’re seeing a bellwether of the future of the Democratic Party. Platner has cast himself as being from the “socialist” wing of the party and that’s the nub of the intraparty duel. Schumer is the standard bearer of the establishment wing with all the usual baggage - fealty to the donor class and in particular pro-Israel/Zionist interests. Platner is thus being Corbinized by those factions.

Otoh having been burned by Fetterman, Democrats are wise to take heed of extreme flakiness masked as populism although I think Fetterman’s apostasy is a product of severe mental health problems and not a feint or bait and switch as is implied by Platner’s antagonists.

My feeling is that the people of Maine, being of a pragmatic and no-nonsense New English stock, will navigate this well. Honestly I can’t think of a better place to launch the party’s shift to left populism by the broad rank and file.

 

[superrific]

This is happening in Democratic primaries across the country. Singling out AIPAC, that is. Israel is historically unpopular with Democrats right now, and AIPAC is rightfully seen as an engine driving Dem pol support for Israel’s belligerence. It’s good politics.

I can't see how it is possible that singling out AIPAC is good politics. I get mentioning AIPAC, but exclusively?

It's like buying condoms in high school. Well, at least before self-checkout. Teens rarely want to walk up to the counter with just a box of rubbers. Get a few other things and mix it in.

 

[Calheel]

See, here it is again. Why did he have to mention AIPAC but nobody else? In my experience, American Jews do not like being singled out. This is the main liberal defense of Israel: everybody violates human rights; why is everyone so focused on Israel's violations of human rights? It's anti-Semitism to put the onus on the Jews always.

I really don't like that argument about Israel, but of course nobody wants to be singled out in this way. It's not quite scapegoating, but there's a family resemblance. And it just seems so unnecessary. I'm positive I'm not the only person to notice this.

Would it have killed him to put a couple of other groups in there among the special interests he won't support? Like, I don't take money from special interests like AIPAC or NRA? AIPAC or anti-vaxers? But I suspect that he doesn't want to mention them because he thinks it will cost him votes. He probably thinks opposing AIPAC won't cost him many votes. That's why I say that Maine is beyond my expertise. Maybe this is the right electoral strategy. But it still doesn't look good to me.

AIPAC is a litmus test for many young voters. If you accept AIPAC money, then it’s an automatic no vote. So any politician catering to young voters would be wise to recognize that.

And in terms of Israel vs all other bad actors, I can’t definitively rule out the role of antisemitism. But Israel gets huge US financial support. So Americans are rightly concerned about a bad actor that we are enabling.

We don’t protest the bad actors in Sudan because we are not enabling those bad actors.

 

[sunnyheel]

Israel gets huge US financial support.

Nominated for Best Use of Understatement

 

[Paine]

AIPAC is a litmus test for many young voters. If you accept AIPAC money, then it’s an automatic no vote. So any politician catering to young voters would be wise to recognize that.

And in terms of Israel vs all other bad actors, I can’t definitively rule out the role of antisemitism. But Israel gets huge US financial support. So Americans are rightly concerned about a bad actor that we are enabling.

We don’t protest the bad actors in Sudan because we are not enabling those bad actors.

Not just young voters anymore. Rank and file liberals are furious with Israel in ways they haven’t been before.

This plays heavily into these left wing versus centrist wing proxy fights, as many centrists have historically not only been supportive of Israel as a Jewish state but have also been supportive of near unlimited arms to Israel.

So now left wing candidates have much more ammunition against centrists than they did in 2018 or 2022, for example. Left wing challengers are doing increasingly well as rank and file liberals join their coalition out of frustration with Democratic leadership, who are also heavily associated with not only the centrist wing but the Israel lobby.

That’s why AIPAC is now funneling money through various front groups, to avoid staining centrist candidates with the AIPAC label. This works decently well for candidates with no record of receiving AIPAC money otherwise, but it’s not working so well for folks like Foushee who openly took AIPAC money in previous cycles and even visited Netanyahu in Israel, on AIPAC’s dime, while he was prosecuting the genocide in Gaza.

We kind of have a formula for a lot of left wing challengers winning this cycle: if Zohran’s victory is any indication, younger voters and non voters are more activated than they’ve been in previous cycles AND the liberal rank and file voters who have high primary participation rates are supporting left wing challengers even if not wholly aligned with them ideologically.

The Michigan Senate race illustrates this dynamic very well since it’s a three way race: Stevens (the Schumer choice), McMorrow (the rank and file liberal choice), and AES (the left wing choice). Stevens may be able to pull that one out as the rank and file liberals and the left wingers are divided among two candidates.

 

[Paine]

I can't see how it is possible that singling out AIPAC is good politics. I get mentioning AIPAC, but exclusively?

It's like buying condoms in high school. Well, at least before self-checkout. Teens rarely want to walk up to the counter with just a box of rubbers. Get a few other things and mix it in.

See my response to cal. The Gaza genocide has scrambled a few of these truisms re: Israel.

 

[superrific]

See my response to cal. The Gaza genocide has scrambled a few of these truisms re: Israel.

I find it hard to believe that we can't find a couple more boogeymen. Like, how about Koch brothers? Yes, other Dems don't take Koch money either, but so? You don't have to tell them others do. Just say that you don't.

I don't know. This is a level of micro-campaigning that is beyond my expertise. Maybe putting Koch Brothers in with AIPAC would be even more insulting. It just seems to me that there's no harm in finding other demons to demonize at once.

 

[Paine]

I find it hard to believe that we can't find a couple more boogeymen. Like, how about Koch brothers? Yes, other Dems don't take Koch money either, but so? You don't have to tell them others do. Just say that you don't.

I don't know. This is a level of micro-campaigning that is beyond my expertise. Maybe putting Koch Brothers in with AIPAC would be even more insulting. It just seems to me that there's no harm in finding other demons to demonize at once.

Koch money isn’t particularly relevant anymore though, is it? Certainly not in a Democratic primary. It’s just that nothing is more polarizing than AIPAC and Israel among Dem voters currently other than maybe Trump himself and ICE, which is why you also see leftists challengers attacking Dems who supported ICE and and took money from the same corporate interests as Trump, especially crypto and AI.

 

[superrific]

Koch money isn’t particularly relevant anymore though, is it? Certainly not in a Democratic primary. It’s just that nothing is more polarizing than AIPAC and Israel among Dem voters currently other than maybe Trump himself and ICE, which is why you also see leftists challengers attacking Dems who supported ICE and and took money from the same corporate interests as Trump, especially crypto and AI.

Yeah! I forgot about crypto. That's what I am talking about.

 

[Paine]

Yeah! I forgot about crypto. That's what I am talking about.

Right, and you do see leftists and liberals mentioning it when their opponents have taken money from that industry, but it just doesn’t hit as hard as saying your opponent took money from interests associated with a genocidal regime that has killed countless babies over the last several years.

 

[superrific]

Right, and you do see leftists and liberals mentioning it when their opponents have taken money from that industry, but it just doesn’t hit as hard as saying your opponent took money from a genocidal regime that has killed countless babies over the last several years.

Why not both?

 

[Paine]

Why not both?

Allam did that and ZooView was pissed at her anyways. Damned if you do, dammed if you don’t.

 

[superrific]

Allam did that and ZooView was pissed at her anyways. Damned if you do, dammed if you don’t.

ZooView is chronically pissed off at everyone. Don't use him as a barometer. He's also prone to Grandma Simpson stories about his involvement in the 1984 Senate campaign.

 

[Paine]

ZooView is chronically pissed off at everyone. Don't use him as a barometer. He's also prone to Grandma Simpson stories about his involvement in the 1984 Senate campaign.

Lmao, true enough. I’m very interested to see how these races play out tomorrow. Sadly we’ll have to wait until June for Maine.

The Talarico v. Crockett race is intriguing as it seems many centrists like Talarico and many young left wingers prefer him over Crockett as well. Will be an interesting look into possible 2028 Dem presidential primary dynamics IMO.

 

[superrific]

Lmao, true enough. I’m very interested to see how these races play out tomorrow. Sadly we’ll have to wait until June for Maine.

He also called me an idiot savant twice. Really inappropriate. If I was sensitive as some posters here, I would have put him on ignore after that.

 

[superrific]

Lmao, true enough. I’m very interested to see how these races play out tomorrow. Sadly we’ll have to wait until June for Maine.

The Talarico v. Crockett race is intriguing as it seems many centrists like Talarico and many young left wingers prefer him over Crockett as well. Will be an interesting look into possible 2028 Dem presidential primary dynamics IMO.

I like Talarico because, from what I understand (which isn't that much), he has a chance to win whereas Crockett doesn't. Not really.

 

[rodoheel]

My feeling is that the people of Maine, being of a pragmatic and no-nonsense New English stock, will navigate this well. Honestly I can’t think of a better place to launch the party’s shift to left populism by the broad rank and file.

The only pushback I'd have to your last sentence is that we would have to be very careful extrapolating anything from Maine's experience out into the wider US. Maine is a somewhat singular place (well, it has some similarities to VT and NH too, but really those three together are a fairly singular region). Maine is one of the smallest, least racially diverse, and oldest states out there.

All that is to say: whatever version of "left populism" works in Maine, may not be easily adaptable to the rest of the country, especially other swing states in places like the Sun Belt and Rust Belt.

 

[nycfan]

 

[Paine]

I like Talarico because, from what I understand (which isn't that much), he has a chance to win whereas Crockett doesn't. Not really.

Makes sense. In the Times today, Ben Hoffman called Crockett the “progressive” and Talarico the “moderate.”

It’s been discussed a bit here, but I think that framing misses a lot of nuance in the race. If you have DSA types like myself supporting Talarico over Crockett, it’s pretty clear there’s more to him than just being “moderate.”

 

[Paine]

The only pushback I'd have to your last sentence is that we would have to be very careful extrapolating anything from Maine's experience out into the wider US. Maine is a somewhat singular place (well, it has some similarities to VT and NH too, but really those three together are a fairly singular region). Maine is one of the smallest, least racially diverse, and oldest states out there.

All that is to say: whatever version of "left populism" works in Maine, may not be easily adaptable to the rest of the country, especially other swing states in places like the Sun Belt and Rust Belt.

Interesting that Gallego endorsed Platner. Comparing those two candidates, you sort of get a sense for how a “populist” in Arizona would run differently than one in Maine. I wouldn’t outright call Gallego a populist, but he clearly sees himself as more aligned with someone like Platner than someone like Mills.