Steve Timmer writes.

http://left.mn/2018/02/no-caesars-wives/

Bernie news.

Here and here, for activities. Here, for DNC stonewalling the unity reform commission recommendations; or is it foot dragging; or shuck and jive having never wanted unity anyway? And certainly not reform.

Tulsi Gabbard and Nina Turner explore Big Island grassroots.

This link, and here.

What Illinois wells will DCCC poison? Their primary is March 20. Justice Democrats backs a number of Illinois candidates.

Justice Democrats, this "candidates" link. Among others nationwide they back Randy Bryce (WI 01) and Laura Moser (TX 07), each a subject of earlier posting. They list no Minnesota candidates.

Texas progresssive candidate Laura Moser vs. the DCCC. DCCC goes negative. Moser prospers. Is there a message?

[UPDATE: After reading the entire post, quotes especially, come back to understand more of RollCall closing its report of the DCCC vs. a Bernie backer from 2016, with this paragraph:

“The idea that some faceless hacks are calling themselves Democrats while sitting in a DC office throwing bombs at a pro-choice Democratic woman in support of a lawyer who built her career at a law firm for union-busters is precisely why Democrats lost over 1,000 elected offices over the last decade,” said Annie Weinberg, the electoral director at Democracy for America.

- and will a DCCC "Blue Wave," their way, lift all boats?

FURTHER: The Texas primary is March 6. Not only did DCCC interfere, it moved with short notice. We shall see a result next Tuesday. There is no justification for DCCC screwing Moser. She had an Our Revolution endorsement a week before DCCC took aim.]
............................................

First notice of the situation by Dev Crabgrass, Alternet, this link. Causing this websearch. A sampling of returned links, Guardian, Vox, Texas Monthly. WaPo. ABC. The Intercept.



The DCCC hit piece against Moser, here. The DCCC's "red-to-blue" roster, without any presently endorsed dog in the hunt, Texas Congressional District 7. Yet absent handicapping a choice, DCCC posted:

Laura Moser

Texas’s 7th (TX - 07)

Updated: February 22, 2018
Narrative

Democratic voters need to hear that Laura Moser is not going to change Washington. She is a Washington insider, who begrudgingly moved to Houston to run for Congress. In fact, she wrote in the Washingtonian magazine, “I’d rather have my teeth pulled out without anesthesia” than live in Texas. As of January 2018, she claimed Washington, DC to be her primary residence in order to get a tax break. And she has paid her husband’s Washington, DC political consulting firm over $50,000 from campaign contributions; meaning 1 of every 6 dollars raised has gone to her husband’s DC company.

[UPDATE: Vox sets out the full remark written by Moser. Compare it to what DCCC published, and go figure:

One of the core pieces of evidence against Moser appears to be a 2014 article in the Washingtonian about DC housing costs titled, “Yeah DC is Pricey — Get Over It Already!” that ran under the heading “Rant.”

In the article, Moser wrote, “On my pathetic writer’s salary, I could live large in Paris, Texas, where my grandparents’ plantation-style house recently sold for $129,000. Oh, but wait — my income would be a fraction of what it is here and I’d have very few opportunities to increase it. (Plus I’d sooner have my teeth pulled out without anesthesia, but that’s a story for another day.)“ (Vox obtained the original article. You can read it below for full context.)

The pdf "original article" link; end of UPDATE]

SO - Wtf is the DCCC up to? Presumably they are up to something, aside from pure arbitrariness. (Angie Craig should renounce their premature [pre-caucusing] endorsement per The Intercept's detailed reporting. Ditto, Dean Phillips. DCCC is unstable.)

At any rate, NY Times published at length yesterday about the situation. An extended excerpt:

Let me try to explain, since the D.C.C.C. did not respond to phone calls or emails. On the ground, this race looked tough from the beginning, though not for obvious reasons. Three of the strongest candidates — Alex Triantaphyllis, Lizzie Pannill Fletcher and Laura Moser — all went to the same fancy private school, which meant that many well-heeled Houstonians had to go through the social agony of choosing one over the other two or giving to all three.

To make matters worse, the ideological differences among these three — and the other four candidates — are microscopic. And what’s more, they are all white. As time went on, Mr. Triantaphyllis, a Harvard Law School graduate and a consultant who left a big firm to work for a popular nonprofit, won the hearts and minds of the downtown powers — the liberal ones, that is — while Ms. Fletcher, a corporate litigator and Planned Parenthood bigwig, got the most backing from Hillary Clinton loyalists. She was thought (by them) to have the best chance of appealing to Republican women who had had enough of President Trump.

Ms. Moser, whose husband was the videographer for President Barack Obama, skewed a little farther left. Her work history was spottier: She has been a stay-at-home mom and a freelance writer. After Mr. Trump’s victory, she created Daily Action, a service that allowed the grief-stricken to barrage their public servants in Washington with angry texts. All three candidates were native Houstonians, though Ms. Moser came home from Washington to run.

By the end of the third quarter of 2017, Mr. Triantaphyllis had raised the most money — more than Mr. Culberson. Ms. Fletcher came in second and Ms. Moser third. At the same time, Ms. Moser, who somewhat resembles a taller and younger Carol Burnett, was more colorful in person and better at grass-roots organizing than her competitors. If her politics were a little squishy, she was more entertaining — supporters could take a spin class with #MeToo’s Alyssa Milano!

It wasn’t hard to figure out how threatening that could be, especially to the old-line Clinton Democrats who lost to Mr. Obama in 2008 and remembered the betrayal of Bernie Sanders in 2016. Those people undoubtedly influenced the political action committee Emily’s List to endorse Ms. Fletcher — and should have listened to the grumbling among female voters here, who thought the organization should not have chosen between two female abortion-rights supporters.

Then came the D.C.C.C., with its high-stakes gamble of attacking Ms. Moser on its website. Maybe it believed, along with The Houston Chronicle, that Ms. Moser was too liberal to beat Mr. Culberson. (The paper endorsed Ms. Fletcher and another Democratic candidate, an oncologist.) Maybe the committee thought its gripes were legitimate — it complained that Ms. Moser was a “Washington insider” who had used her husband’s firm as her political consultants. But the first wasn’t true, and the second showed only that her husband worked cheap. Ms. Moser stated publicly she wouldn’t want to live in Paris, Tex.? Wow. Most urban Texans wouldn’t either.

Besides, there is nothing Texans hate more than East Coast political operatives meddling in their business. Especially those who don’t know anything about Texas.

Virtually overnight, the story of interference from real Washington insiders went viral, and Ms. Moser became a glorious martyr, quoting Michelle Obama (“When they go low …”). Her profile is skyrocketing, her fund-raising is booming. And no doubt John Culberson is ecstatic about the Democrats being in disarray.

Note to the D.C.C.C.: Next time you think about sticking your nose where it doesn’t belong, try believing in the democratic process instead.

[italics added] Other outlets could be quoted, but readers already have links. Yet, some are worth attention.

A criticism against the DCCC annointed roster, where are blacks?

A Texas outlet reporting:

The DCCC posting, which features the kind of research that is often reserved for Republicans, notes that Moser only recently moved back to her hometown of Houston and that much of her campaign fundraising money has gone to her husband's political consulting firm. It also calls her a "Washington insider."

But DCCC spokeswoman Meredith Kelly went even further in a statement to The Texas Tribune.

"Voters in Houston have organized for over a year to hold Rep. Culberson accountable and win this Clinton district," Kelly said.

Then, referring to a 2014 Washingtonian magazine piece in which Moser wrote that she would rather have a tooth pulled without anesthesia than move to Paris, Texas, Kelly added: "Unfortunately, Laura Moser’s outright disgust for life in Texas disqualifies her as a general election candidate, and would rob voters of their opportunity to flip Texas’ 7th in November.”

Later Thursday evening, Moser obliquely responded to the allegations on Twitter, quoting former First Lady Michelle Obama: "When they go low, we go high."

Later in the evening, she expanded her comments in a statement.

"We're used to tough talk here in Texas, but it's disappointing to hear it from Washington operatives trying to tell Texans what to do. These kind of tactics are why people hate politics," she said. "The days where party bosses picked the candidates in their smoke filled rooms are over. DC needs to let Houston vote."

[...] Until this point, the DCCC so far this cycle has gone to great lengths to avoid the impression it was taking sides in primaries across the country. A Democratic source did point out to the Tribune that the campaign committee made a similar effort in a 2014 California House race.

A former Democratic operative emailed the Tribune suggesting that the posting was intended to signal to allied groups where and how to make paid attacks.

Texas' 7th Congressional District is new offensive territory for Democrats and an ancestral GOP stronghold. But Hillary Clinton carried the district in 2016, and a flood of Democrats soon raced to run for the seat.

Moser's bid has been picking up momentum practically daily. Earlier on Thursday, her campaign announced it had raised nearly $150,000 in the first 45 days of the year. And in recent months she has amassed a massive online following for a first-time Congressional candidate. She is also a favorite interview subject of national publications and women's magazines and has a passionate following among many people who supported U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign in 2016.

[italics added]. Bernie hate? Is that the DCCC basis? They seem to have circled the wagons as to motive.

As to that item saying, "Until this point, the DCCC so far this cycle has gone to great lengths to avoid the impression it was taking sides . . ." ask Jeff Erdmann, MN CD2, linking here (already a posting subject on Dev Crabgrass). That anti-Erdmann decision apparently was money-talks-all-else-walks based, not Bernie hate since Erdmann's campaign seems to not be allied that way.

Moser initiated Daily Action, but it is unclear how that might be any cause for DCCC scorn. Possibly entrenched retributive DC cages got rattled by an action alert. Who knows?

In closing, with quoting, The Intercept is a best source for digging up detail illuminating, possibly, motivations or biases, as with its coverage of Erdmann by Ryan Grim, who also on Feb. 22 wrote:

EMILY’s List is dumping big money into an upcoming Democratic primary in Texas’s 7th Congressional District, pitting the women’s group against a pro-choice woman who was, in the months after the election of Donald Trump, a face of the resistance.

Laura Moser, as creator of the popular text-messaging program Daily Action, gave hundreds of thousands of despondent progressives a single political action to take each day. Her project was emblematic of the new energy forming around the movement against Trump, led primarily by women and often by moms. (Moser is both.)

It was those types of activists EMILY’s List spent 2017 encouraging to make first-time bids for office. But that doesn’t mean EMILY’s List will get behind them. Also running is Lizzie Pannill Fletcher, a corporate lawyer who is backed by Houston mega-donor Sherry Merfish. EMILY’s List endorsed her in November.

The 7th District includes parts of Houston and its wealthy western suburbs, and Merfish and her husband, Gerald Merfish, are among the city’s leading philanthropists. Gerald Merfish owns and runs a steel pipe company in the oil-rich region and Sherry Merfish, who worked for decades for EMILY’s List, is a major donor to the Democratic Party and to EMILY’s List.

Actor Alyssa Milano, another face of the Trump resistance, is backing Moser, and plans to drive voters to the polls as a campaign volunteer. “I like EMILY’s List a lot but I feel like they missed the boat on this one,” Milano told The Intercept. “Laura is a proud progressive Democrat and her values are the values of the majority of the country, which is evident by the success of her grassroots campaign and her broad base of support.”

Read the rest. A day later, Feb. 23, Grim wrote of the DCCC's trashing Moser:

“Voters in Houston have organized for over a year to hold Rep. [John] Culberson accountable and win this Clinton district,” DCCC Communications Director Meredith Kelly told the Texas Tribune. “Unfortunately, Laura Moser’s outright disgust for life in Texas disqualifies her as a general election candidate, and would rob voters of their opportunity to flip Texas’ 7th in November.”

The comment followed the release of an opposition dossier the party compiled on Moser. To date, the DCCC has made only two such memos public, one on Moser, and the other on arch-conservative Rick Saccone, a Republican running in an upcoming special election in Pennsylvania.

“Democratic voters need to hear that Laura Moser is not going to change Washington. She is a Washington insider, who begrudgingly moved to Houston to run for Congress,” warned the DCCC in its memo.

The dropping of the opposition research on Moser came after The Intercept published an article Thursday morning highlighting a rift in the race, with the pro-choice women’s group EMILY’s List backing Lizzie Pannill Fletcher against Moser. The DCCC and EMILY’s List often work hand in glove. [...]

Fletcher, a corporate lawyer with ties to a mega-donor steel magnate, worked for a firm that routinely represents employers. The firm recently defeated local janitorial workers in a labor law case by studying social media feeds to ensure the jury had a healthy number of Trump supporters, a tactic it later boasted about publicly. Fletcher said she didn’t work directly on the case. But the local AFL-CIO made a rare non-endorsement in the race, urging residents to vote for any candidate other than Fletcher, and pledging to do what it can to defeat her.

The suggestion that Moser, a freelance writer, has “outright disgust for life in Texas” takes a snippet of Moser’s writing from 2014 in Washingtonian magazine out of context. In an article about her preference for city over rural life, she wrote that she would “sooner have my teeth pulled out without anesthesia” than move to the town where her grandparents had recently sold their house: Paris, Texas. National Democrats may not be familiar with Texas — indeed, the DCCC failed to field a single candidate in a Dallas district that went for Hillary Clinton in 2016 — but in fact Paris, Texas, and Houston, Texas, where Moser is running, are hundreds of miles apart and very different places. Houston is a city.

But the more serious charge the party leveled at Moser was to imply corruption and self-dealing. “In 2017, Moser paid over $50,000 in campaign money to her husband’s D.C. consulting firm. More than 1 of every 6 dollars spent by her campaign went straight into her husband’s D.C. company’s bank account,” wrote the DCCC.

Most of that money was for ad buys, which meant that it may have gone into the bank account, but it didn’t stay there long and was instead destined for TV station or digital coffers. But setting that aside, it has long been known that Moser is married to Arun Chaudhary, a partner at Revolution Messaging, a consulting firm that is most well-known for its work on the 2016 presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. As The Intercept noted, Daily Action and Revolution had a financial relationship, as well, according to public disclosures.

That the DCCC would attack a Democrat for funneling money to a campaign consultant is itself rich, given how the organization habitually steers candidates to its own consultants. Its nickname in Washington, after all, is “the consultant factory,” as so many of its operatives go on to be campaign consultants working on the party dole. James Thompson, a congressional candidate in Kansas who nearly won a 2017 special election for the seat vacated by CIA Director Mike Pompeo, told The Intercept last month that the DCCC told him flat-out “to spend a certain amount of money on consultants, and it’s their list of consultants you have to choose from.”

This was made explicit in a memo sent to candidates seeking DCCC support last December. In exchange for that support, according to the memo, candidates must “hire professional staff and consultants who can help execute a winning campaign,” and “the DCCC will provide staff resumes and a comprehensive list of consultants as well as helpful resources to the campaign including staff trainings.” Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, said after the 2016 elections that the DCCC “need[s] to go on a consultant detox.”

The DCCC has instead done the opposite. Relationships like Moser’s and her husband’s are easy to find in Washington. A cursory look at the leadership of the DCCC, in fact, turned up a few.

The DCCC’s independent expenditure director, for instance, is Jessica Mackler, the spouse of BluePrint Interactive partner Geoff Mackler. Federal Election Commission disclosures show that Lizzie Pannill Fletcher, Moser’s opponent, retained BluePrint Interactive to help the campaign on its digital consulting work, paying the firm $7,500 in September. The firm also lists EMILY’s List, which is supporting Fletcher’s campaign, as a client.

Consultants often take a percentage of all media placement of election ads in addition to a consulting fee. That enabled consulting firm Mothership Strategies, founded by DCCC veterans, to earn $3.9 million from the failed special election campaign for Jon Ossoff in Georgia last year. Around $2.5 million of that Ossoff haul came from media buys. Mothership veterans also birthed End Citizens United, which has become something of a stalking horse for DCCC-backed candidates this cycle.

The DCCC’s new executive director, Daniel Sena, is married to Elizabeth Christie Sena. After Daniel was named executive director, Elizabeth was made a partner at Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, a prominent DCCC consulting firm. In the 2016 campaign cycle, the DCCC paid GQR $395,000 over two years. With Elizabeth Sena not just a partner at the firm but literally handling the DCCC account, according to her biography on the site, the firm has already pulled in $525,523 so far this campaign cycle.

This insight might relate to an outright crudely awful Angie Craig 2016 sound-bite-and-video-bite 30 sec promo thing noted earlier in Dev Crabgrass, where it seemed aimed at the Schumer hypothesis that not advertising appeals to the hearts and minds or progressives and "blue collar" voters could lose a blue collar suburban voter but will get two-for-one "moderate" independents and Republicans in the 'burbs to vote for corporate seeming Dems. See, this post, at the term "this insipid 2016 sound bite monstrosity," which linked to this thing on YouTube guessed then to have been the work of a DCCC favored flak shop. View it. It sucks. It was a Craig mistake, and Jason Lewis went to Washington.

(An aside - Ossoff will not run in 2018 for the Georgia seat for which The Intercept noted millions of dollars routed to DCCC allied consultants during the special election campaign where he lost.)

Final note, since first inkling of the DCCC hit-piece against Moser was from Alternet, the link to follow there is:

https://www.alternet.org/election-03918/democratic-establishment-attacks-progressive-democratic-house-candidate-laura-moser

Closing with that, may the circle be unbroken.

But wait- there's this:

https://moserforcongress.com/

That is the Moser campaign website link, for sending a check or Acting Blue.

After the crass load of shit the DCCC dumped on Moser I will be mailing her my check for a suitable multiple of $27 to help her fight stupidity in all its forms.

Feel the Bern. And with that closing note, and with The Intercept having helped explcated DCCC and Emily's List motivations in trashing Moser; this websearch, and irony, here, here, and here. Beltway strangleholds against grassroot progressivism need to be undressed to the public to show the ugliness behind the fashionable apparel. Feel the Bern.

Minnesota's third Congressional district. Our Revolution-Minnesota and DCCC are backing the same Democrat.

Our Revolution-Minnesota online here. Dean Phillips endorsed.

Ballotpedia, here, reports in large part:

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee included the district in its list of targets for 2018.[5] Ballotpedia is currently tracking 15 races to watch for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2018, although this list is likely to evolve as election day approaches.

Paulsen had the fundraising advantage in the third quarter of 2017, raising $420,000 and reporting $1.2 million in cash on hand. Businessman Dean Phillips (D) trailed behind with $268,000 raised and $499,000 in cash on hand.[6] On January 10, 2018, Phillips was selected by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for inclusion in its "Red to Blue Program," which identifies competitive Democratic candidates challenging Republican incumbents and offers them fundraising and organizational support.[7]

The Cook Political Report changed this race's rating from Lean Republican to Toss-up in February 2018.[8]

[links and footnotes omitted - footnote indicators kept as in the original]

With CD3 thought to be a toss-up by several pundits, and with the same candidate backed by DCCC and OR-MN, that election will be interesting. At a bet, Phillips will not dodge holding town hall meetings with voters, before and ideally after the 2018 election.

https://www.phillipsforcongress.org/


Readers from there can navigate to see a bio, and ActBlue page, and a snail-mail footer, for sending checks.

Of interest, commentary under "NEWS" heading. Then, not pushing Facebook at folks resonates. The "About" page is not a page but a video; where what rang my bell was blame cast strongly at money in politics and what sounded as a sincere "fiercely independent" promise. Phillips scored a 56% on however OR-MN graded its candidate questionaire responses; yet they endorsed him.

May he win. That 56% score gives me second thoughts at contributing a multiple of $27 to the Phillips campaign. The decision, cut a $27 check and mail it, because Paulsen is such a tool. This is an interesting candidacy, and the truck is a mini version of a bus.

84 year old four-term Conservative Diane Feinstein rejected by California Democratic Party insiders: Why is this not headline national news from the studios and press rooms of American mainstream media? Because the owners do not want it to be? Nothing to see there, move on with Nunes and Mueller circus details, school shootings which have happened and will happen again, and leave Feinstein's failure along with the dissatisfaction felt with the tax monstrosity to languish unreported in a hope it will be forgotten? What is news, then?

Alternet does report:

February 26, 2018, 6:26 AM GMT

California Democrats shocked Senator Dianne Feinstein by not endorsing her for re-election at their state convention Sunday.

Conservative Democrat Feinstein won just 37 percent of the 2,775 delegates’ votes, versus 54 percent for her challenger, state Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, D-Los Angeles. Support from 60 percent of the delegates was needed to secure the party’s official endorsement.

“The outcome of today’s endorsement vote is an astounding rejection of politics as usual, and it boosts our campaign’s momentum as we all stand shoulder to shoulder against a complacent status quo,” de León said Sunday. “California Democrats are hungry for new leadership that will fight for California values from the front lines, not equivocate on the sidelines.”

“The days of Democrats biding our time, biting our tongue, and triangulating at the margins are over,” he said.

[...] It was a jolting signal to the 84-year-old Feinstein, who has been in politics for five decades and was first elected to the Senate in 1992.

“The Democratic Party tends to endorse incumbents,” said Rose Kapolczynski, a veteran California Democratic strategist who ran former Sen. Barbara Boxer’s 2010 successful re-election campaign.

“It sends a message that the Democratic Party is a progressive party and they’re going for the candidate who they view is the more progressive candidate,” said Tom Steyer, the billionaire San Francisco activist who is close to de León but has not endorsed in the race. “Both of them have long histories of service to the state, to the country and to the party. And it’s pretty clear that Kevin is positioned as more progressive than Sen. Feinstein.”

Feinstein's oppostion to single-payer health care, her anti-marijuana stance, and her repeated votes for President Donald Trump’s nominations angered many California Democrats.

The item posted a Glenn Greenwald tweet:

Dianne Feinstein, 84, has spent her 4 full terms in the US Senate with great loyalty & servitude to the CIA & NSA & various wars. She now wants her 5th full term. But the California Dem Party just refused to endorse her; they prefer her opponent by 54-37%

And this is not viewed as news? Get real. This is as relevant a barometer of shifting political weather as any actual news can be. Under reporting of this indicates something. Readers should try to figure out what is indicated. It looks fairly ugly, but better to know it than to accept glide and slide.

____________UPDATE_____________
A thought experiment: Absent Net Neutrality, what is to stop concentrated corporate broadband providers from putting Alternet into "premium package" status, where the basic plan would be FOX and CNN, and go to the library and such for more? Say hypothetically, there would be Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, and whitehouse.gov, plus your local TV outlets in a base package, but with eBay, Pinterest, YouTube, Buzzfeed, Target, BestBuy, The Intercept, Wikileaks, Yahoo, Library of Congress and Google Scholar as premium content? What stops cable TV from serving consumers such arbitrariness?

_________FURTHER UPDATE_________
Opinions differ. Strongly so. But at least Strib did cover the Feinstein vote of no confidence. In a fashion.

The no confidence vote was as she deserved, some would say. Others would counter it was bad judgment, non-conciliatory, as the Strib carried Bloomberg op-ed contends.

Opinion here; sooner would have been better for repudiating Feinstein, but now is better than later to repudiate Feinstein and her anti-people pro-money record on which her legacy stands.

BOTTOM LINE: Multimillionaires like Feinstein in office as long as she was, as mediocre as she was, stands as a sound term limits argument. She may gain reelection. For that question we have to wait and see.

________FURTHER UPDATE________
Mainstream media sampling - ABC:

Democratic activists were more eager to back her primary challenger, state Senate leader Kevin de Leon, who is touting himself as a fresh face with stronger progressive credentials, particularly on immigration.

However, he too failed to earn the 60 percent support needed to win the endorsement Saturday at Democrats' annual convention. That means neither candidate will get the party's seal of approval or extra campaign cash leading into the June primary.

With Democrats still licking their wounds from the 2016 election, some of the party's biggest stars, including U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris and U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters, urged unity ahead of the midterm elections. They reminded more than 3,000 activists gathered this weekend that President Donald Trump is their common enemy.

Though party activists rebuked Feinstein, she has millions of dollars to run a successful campaign and polling has shown she enjoys wide support among Democratic voters and independents, a critical piece of the electorate in a race without any well-known Republicans.

The top-two primary system in heavily Democratic California allows the two highest vote-getters to advance to the general election regardless of party identification.

It's the first time Feinstein has failed to win the party's backing since 1994, when she won her first full-term to the U.S. Senate, though she's lacked a credible Democratic challenger in most previous races.

[italics empahsis added - the actual vote split numbers went unreported by ABC]

CBS coverage - buying into the don't worry be happy pro-Feinstein spin; like ABC, no report of the actual size of the vote split:

U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein failed to win the official endorsement of the California Democratic Party as she seeks her fifth term in Washington, but her supporters say it won't hurt her with a broader swath of voters. Party activists were more eager to back her primary challenger, state Senate leader Kevin de Leon, who is crafting himself as a fresh face with stronger progressive credentials. However, he too failed to earn the 60 percent support he needed to win the endorsement.

That means neither candidate will get the party's seal of approval or extra campaign cash leading into the June primary. The decision came from more than 3,000 activists gathered for the party's annual convention this weekend, an event aimed at generating enthusiasm for the midterm elections.

None of the four Democrats running to succeed Jerry Brown as governor secured an endorsement either.

For Feinstein, it's the first time she's failed to win the party's backing since her first successful U.S. Senate campaign in 1994. But she also has never faced a credible primary challenger. This time around, there's no Republican running in the contest, meaning a showdown between de Leon and Feinstein was likely from the start.

The top-two primary system in heavily Democratic California allows the two highest vote-getters to advance to the general election regardless of party identification.

Feinstein backers downplayed her failure to win the party endorsement, saying she remains popular among the wider California electorate and has millions of dollars needed to run a successful campaign.

mecurynews.com:

SAN DIEGO — In a surprising show of discontent with one of California’s most enduring political leaders, the state Democratic Party declined to make an endorsement in this year’s U.S. Senate race on Sunday, snubbing Sen. Dianne Feinstein in her bid for a fifth full term.

Her main challenger, State Senate leader Kevin de León, won the support of 54 percent of delegates at the state party convention here this weekend, short of the 60 percent needed to secure the party’s endorsement. Feinstein received only 37 percent of the votes.

The rebuke of Feinstein by the party delegates comes even though the 25-year incumbent has led polls by wide margins and received the backing of political luminaries like Sen. Kamala Harris and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

[...] Feinstein’s campaign still has a huge financial upper hand over de León, as well as the built-in advantages of incumbency. Her chief political strategist Bill Carrick played down the importance of the non-endorsement Sunday, arguing it would have little tangible benefit for de León. “The reality is, he’s way the hell behind,” Carrick said.

Ouster of the entrenched money-servant millionaires will resonate, but the voters of California have yet to cast votes in the top-two primary, and beyond. We can hope.

____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
The story has grown mainstream legs, NY Times:

A candidate must garner the support of 60 percent of the delegates to win the party’s nomination. None of the candidates running for statewide election met that threshold.

Still, Ms. Feinstein’s showing was particularly stark given her status as a Democratic institution. Mr. de León drew 54 percent of the vote, or 1,508 votes, compared with 37 percent, or 1,023 votes, for Ms. Feinstein.

The vote came after Mr. de León, who has been running an insurgent campaign, delivered a blistering speech that reflects deep divisions among Democrats here — and across the nation — about how to respond to President Trump. Mr. de León questioned, among other things, remarks Ms. Feinstein had made that were interpreted by many Democratic activists here as sympathetic to Mr. Trump, and suggested she was too conventional in taking on the White House.
Continue reading the main story

“The days of Democrats biding our time, biting our tongue, and triangulating at the margins are over,” he said.

His speech also reflected a feeling among many Democrats, particularly younger ones, that it is time for the old guard of Democratic leaders here to step aside. Gov. Jerry Brown, 79, is stepping down at the end of the year because of term limits.

“California’s greatness comes from acts of human audacity, not congressional seniority,” Mr. de León said.

Ms. Feinstein, in her remarks, talked about her success in the Senate in pushing through a ban on assault weapons, which was later phased out. She pledged to do it again if elected. But the pledge was clearly not enough.

Don't worry be happy spin, absent.

WaPo, here. CNN:

In an aggressive speech at the California Democratic Party convention, De León said Democrats deserve a progressive senator who fights on the "front lines," who doesn't "equivocate on the sidelines."
"I'm running for US Senate because the days of Democrats biding our time, biding our talk, are over," said De León, who is the leader of the California Senate. "Leadership comes from human audacity, not from congressional seniority."

He faulted Feinstein for her initial approach to President Donald Trump -- which infuriated Democratic activists here -- mocking her for saying last August that she believed Trump "can be a good president" if he had the ability to "learn and to change."

Charging that Feinstein is out of step with the progressive direction of the party, De León pointed to a litany of issues where he said he disagrees with the senior senator, including school vouchers, allowing federal agents to spy on American citizens, and her past support of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He said he would never have supported prosecuting 13-year-olds as adults "in a criminal justice system propped up by institutional racism" (an apparent reference to her support for the 1994 crime bill). De León also chided Feinstein's approach to immigration, charging that he would never use the so-called Dreamers "as a bargaining chip."

"We demand passion, not patience. We speak truth to power," said De León said. "And we've never been fooled into thinking that Donald Trump could be a good president. ... Being good sometimes is not good enough."
Feinstein did not mention her Democratic opponent at all.

In the wake of the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida, she focused her remarks on her decades-long advocacy for an assault weapons ban, which was phased out in 2004. She criticized Trump for suggesting that teachers should be armed.

[...] "Now is the time to take those weapons of war off our streets," she said to applause.

De León got a far warmer welcome than his opponent on the convention floor. But he had to receive 60 percent of the delegate votes to get the Democratic endorsement, a threshold he did not meet.

De León enjoys a close kinship with many of the state delegates, who tend to be far more liberal than the average California voter.

Even had De León notched the endorsement, Feinstein is still heavily favored to win in November -- in part because of her nearly unlimited resources, and her support among California independents and some Republicans.

That's a spectrum. May De León win the good fight; passion vs money. Do not expect it, but know the contest exists.

___________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
Feinstein's OpenSecrets.org page.

Dan White gave Feinstein her big career boost, and there are several unsavory allegations of grotesque family profiteering from office. However, much of that reporting is by politically biased outlets. Aside from Breitbart and Rush Limbaugh sourcing, etc., AlterNet weighed in, the subject, post office privatization. HuffPo, same topic. Breitbart, same topic. Rush, war profiteering claim. FOX, foreclosures profiteering. Breitbart, again, three separate allegations. WND, less accusative? Even the Brainerd Dispatch picked up the USPS story:

No one in the mainstream media is even raising an eyebrow over the conflict of interest or corruption on the sale of billions of dollars worth of public assets.

How does a U.S. Senator from San Francisco manage to get away with organizing and lobbying such a sweet deal?

As for accusations of a conflict of interest and suspicions that Feinstein may have influenced the awarding of the contract to her husband’s firm, Feinstein’s office strongly denies the charges.

“Sen. Feinstein is not involved with and does not discuss any of her husband’s business decisions with him. Her husband’s holdings are his separate personal property. Sen. Feinstein’s assets are held in a blind trust,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

“That arrangement has been in place since before she came to the Senate in 1992,” said Brian Weiss, Feinstein’s communications director. In 2012, Feinstein voted for an amendment to a postal reform bill that would have temporarily halted post office closings. The amendment was defeated in the House.

LA Times, back in 1992, with a cautionary report in line with the closing paragraphs of that quote.

Bottom line: The career so long, the claims so many. Again, Feinstein is a poster child in favor of term limits. From the other side, Bernie is the strongest argument against term limits. Any term limit proposal's success would need to include impartiality; i.e., no massive set of loopholes as with the tax code.

FURTHER: One more, with an interesting comment stream.

Not eliminating Superdelegates is like a dose of castor oil. That said, a "peace treaty" has been negotiated between the Bernie/Clinton/Perez blocs and is being submitted to the DNC for approval.

An Our Revolution email from yesterday. between the dotted lines:
 ........................................................

Friends,

During the 2016 Democratic Party Convention, over 4,500 delegates unanimously agreed that the Democratic Party needed a transformation in order to regain its mantle as the party of working people.

Whether you were an independent, unaffiliated, nonpartisan, or registered Democrat many of us experienced obstacles to participation during the 2016 presidential primaries. For too long, the Democratic Party has limited participation in their elections through tactics including closed primaries and incredibly strict party affiliation rules. Through collective organizing and action, the Bernie Sanders 2016 delegates shed light on these roadblocks resulting in the Democratic National Committee’s first-ever Unity Reform Commission (URC).

Our Revolution believes that the change within the Democratic Party must occur from the bottom up. That is why we are advocating to increase participation for new voters, nonpartisan voters, and independent voters to participate in presidential primaries and caucuses.

Larry Cohen, Lucy Flores, Gus Newport, Jane Kleeb, Nomiki Konst, Jeff Weaver, Jim Zogby, and I were appointed by Senator Bernie Sanders to the URC and have been working for months with appointees of Secretary Hillary Clinton and DNC Chair Tom Perez to propose comprehensive Democratic Party reform.

After meetings and debates across the country for almost a year, the URC has presented their final recommendations. Although the Bernie 8 wanted these recommendations to go further, (for instance not just a reduction in superdelegates, but ending superdelegates entirely) these recommendations are a result of a compromise among the entirety of the URC. We believe these recommendations are an important start for us in reclaiming the party of working people.

Among the most important proposed URC reforms are:

• Reducing the number of unpledged superdelegates by 60 percent;
• Democratizing primaries and caucuses with same-day registration and same-day party switching;
• Steps toward more transparency and oversight in DNC spending.

Click here to read the full report.

These recommendations are supported by our partners—the National Nurses United, Democracy for America, Progressive Democrats of America, RootsAction, and Demand Progress—along with DNC Chair Tom Perez and Deputy Chair Keith Ellison.

Add your name to urge the DNC members to affirm their support for the URC recommendations and join millions around the country who want real reform in the Democratic Party.

Add your name

In solidarity,

Nina Turner
President
Our Revolution

...........................................

DEV CRABGRASS OPINION:
The settlement terms are set out, all presidential selection caucusing and/or primaries nationwide would be open and not requiring earlier party registration - something the DNC cannot mandate because of local perogative, but which can be declared as a national goal and policy. Berniecrats will remember Nevada, and other situations which were clearly rigged, and if DNC accepts the "peace treaty" such a repeat will be discouraged on a nationwide basis.

The superdelegate abuse will remain a big biasing thumb on the scale, but a less heavy one. It galls, but it's the contract terms the delegated individuals from the Bernie/Clinton/Perez blocs reached. "More transparency" is unclear, but it appears that a general realization among the delegates in reporting back to the DNC will be that something real will have to emerge to avoid four more years of Trump and to quell likelihood of Republican majorities in both houses going into a possible second Trump term. These are terms suggested as fitting to end the civil war.

NOTHING IS SAID IN OUR REVOLUTION COVERAGE EITHER WAY ABOUT PRIMARY CHALLENGES BY PROGRESSIVES AGAINST BLUE DOG OR "MODERATE" INCUMBENTS. SUCH CHALLENGES ARE NEITHER ENDORSED NOR DISCOURAGED, PER THE OUR REVOLUTION REPORTING. AND IT IS A MATTER OF RIGHT OF ANYONE TO BEGIN OR SUPPORT A CANDIDACY FOR OFFICE. DEFERENCE TO A PARTY INCUMBANCY IS NO LAW NOR BINDING PARTY RULE. AGAIN, FROM THE EMAIL,

Click here to read the full report.

NOTE: This post is written for notice without having read the full report. All things considered, I signed my encouragement that the peace treaty be supported as the Our Revolution position suggests, and wanting the compromise to be ratified by the DNC as its honest policy from ratification onward.

Like a dose of castor oil, it may cleanse the system. Or said differently, we can hope good faith acceptance all around and aimed toward the future will result. And that good results will come of compromise.

Next, text of the online Our Revolution petition page echoes the email:

https://go.ourrevolution.com/page/s/tell-all-dnc-members-it-s-time-to-step-up-and-support-party-reform-now-

Readers wanting to sign the petition, or to see accompanying text can follow the link. Worth noting from the accompanying text:

These recommendations are supported by both DNC Chair Tom Perez and Deputy Chair Keith Ellison, along with the following partners:

National Nurses United
Progressive Democrats of America
RootsAction
Demand Progress
Democracy for America

Join millions around the country who want real reform in the Democratic Party.

The nurses accept the compromise. Ellison accepts. Who am I to second guess progressive leadership?

It's just that a total, or 75% Superdelegate reduction would have been like great for total elimination, and a smaller spoonful of castor oil for 75; but surely there was much push and shove getting to 60%, so live with it. Tomorrow may revisit the question, particularly if after treaty negotiation one bloc perceives less than good faith from another.

For now it seems sign off and support/accept/endorse the compromise; then wait; and then see. Which is the path I chose to follow. Readers are urged to weigh things and react.

____________UPDATE___________
RE the wait and see "proof is in the pudding" dimension of things, sidebar editing may happen, but not immediately. There will be the midterm elections and then there will be the ramp-up to the 2020 Presidential election. That entails plenty of time for sidebar editing; may I live so long and may good faith actual CHANGE prove editing to be merited . . .

__________FURTHER UPDATE__________
A negotiating position needs to be staked out beyond saying the peace treaty can be, nose held, ratified by progressives, with good faith thereafter expected. If it goes unapproved by DNC it is the public employees and teachers not wanting to be Scott Walkered who will have to instill reason in the minds of inner party colleagues; lest they be.

If the reforms are not in place by 2020 it needs to be understood the acceptable superdelegate level would be 25% of 2016 levels after the 2020 election and then 0% after 2024 if DNC does not honestly and in good faith change its policy with Democratic Party rules altered to be fair. If progressives are stonewalled, what's to lose, in effect what has Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein done for us?

It is the teachers and public employees in the Koch crosshairs, and if the thought is 2018 can be weathered without peace being made with progressives, the future beyond 2018 will be rougher on those most at risk, having the most to lose. Progressives cannot be screwed much more than already, Reagan through Clinton through Trump presidencies, so hang tight and either the machine gets fixed or the inner party intransigents get abandoned by movement of everyone else toward progressive agendas.

The DCCC inner operatives and their consultant tag-alongs want spoils, and if progressive counterproposals allowing them something are stonewalled and disdained, then they face nothing and a continuation of Republicans holding sway instead of Republican-lite dressed up as Democratic Party stalwarts.

Cut through the obstructionist bullshit to have the above-outlined compromise Our Revolution is tousing become party policy, or stay home is the only option. Win or stay home on less favorable inner party terms will replace the compromise outlined above as far from ideal, and as imprecise, but not untenable. If progressives in numbers ratify the Our Revolution endorsed compromise, great. It will pressure inner party obstructionists to bend to the compromise. If not, aspects will be somber as the civil war will only escalate.

Even more than backing the compromise, an effective primary challenge to Pelosi and Feinstein will be a wake up call to their fellow Republican-lite cohorts. If it can be managed.

Make it clear. Make it large. Make it successful. The people can take only so much before things become ugly, and present stalemate circumstances are not the worse of possible outcomes. Just because the "Blue Wave" is expected in the 2018 mid-term elections with or without progressive change is not good reason for the entrenched to hold out. Waves come. Waves recede. Government by the people is not a complicated concept, but one easily undermined by bad thinking and hubris among ones who should know better. But undermining it is short term thinking, not a sound long term perspective.

Ian Todd - DFL candidate for the CD6 seat now held by Tom Emmer.

Ian Todd was a co-subject of an earlier post, here; along with commentary about concentrated big-donor money in politics tilting election contests in a bad way.

The latter truth is better known than Ian, with Tom Emmer being a known entity from years in the legislature and taking over the Michele Bachmann mantle as district gadfly.

Wes Volkenant as a comment to the earlier post noted Ian has a town hall video posted on the Todd Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/Todd4Congress/videos/392205071242091/

I do not believe there is any Emmer town hall online, since he's decided he need not report back to the district (Republican donors apparently are happy with him, and to Emmer that has to matter). It is like Paulsen in CD3, disdain (or is it fear and loathing) over going back to the voters and facing questions over tax breaks for billionaires and healthcare total nonsense. They both seem unusually reticent, bunkered in the beltway.

At any rate, watch the Todd town hall, to see the candidate but also to remember what holding a town hall looks like. Also, read what Todd has posted on the issues at his campaign website:

https://www.iantoddforcongress.com/theissues/

From there you can navigate to Todd's contribution page. That is needed given how the Republican big money machine owns its vested shareholdings in Tom Emmer, poised to invest more.

In closing, two things: First, a hat tip to Wes. V., who frequently submits comments worth elevating into a post update or in causing a new post featuring his info.

---------------------------------------------
Second, a reminder to DFL insiders and Berniecrats outside of "party regulars" status but interested in the District 35 DFL monthly meeting process and in supporting DFL candidates:

Senate District 35 Monthly meeting this Wed. Feb 28 - Same time: 7pm, Same place: Davanni's Pizza in Coon Rapids.

For those who at precinct caucus were selected to be Delegates to the SD35 Convention, remember:
DFL 2018 Senate District 35 Convention is this Friday, March 2. Relevant info is on your Delegate blue card.

"The Republican Party is the lynchpin of the free world." Don't take my word on that, I never said anything that ignorant and narrow minded.

Ignorant and narrow minded. This link.

The dude is not quoted about "cornerstone of democracy," or "keystone of our over-arching place in history," or. "our nation's exceptionalism rests on the bedrock of the Republicans in this room from the great state of Alabama and you in turn are the bedrock of our flag and nation." In Alabama, being careful about that flag part probably was sensible.

But wait.

There will be more opportunity. Cliches never sleep.

The "dawn of a new American Dream" is just a step or two away from the FOX studio cameras.

UPDATE: Another quote by the great man, about another great one:

“John Kennedy would be a conservative Republican today,” he continued. “The left has gone so far left, it’s unrecognizable. What you’re doing right now is incredibly important, in this state and across the country.”

That's about as bright and a legitimate a statement as, "If Karl Marx were alive today and saw the anarchy that socialist Nancy Pelosi stands for, he'd quit taking on airs and writing long books nobody's read through, and instead would do a terse manifesto of talking point sound bites for why he'd be taking a commentator job at FOX. Beard and all. It's not what he'd say, but how he'd say it."

"Party dues." The DCCC at its finest.

The easiest intro, pay attention since DCCC "party dues" is a passing reference, this John Oliver segment. At about 10:30 into the segment, the spread sheet of "dues" is mentioned. Reference is to a 2014 DCCC spreadsheet Buzzfeed reported in 2014.

I shudder to think of Jeff Erdmann or Leah Phifer getting elected, showing up to do the job in DC, and be given their individual quota for the DCCC. Especially in light of the fiscal help, so far, DCCC has given each (can you say "zippo?").

It is a very sick system, and given that, John Oliver does it up well. The entire segment is only twenty minutes long, all worth watching.

Past posts here have focused upon the DCCC tie-in to local Congressional campaigns; the "money rules" perspective that dominates the DCCC worldview. Sick. If a candidate cannot meet some DCCC expectation of independent money raising, the DCCC will bail out on the candidacy.

Perhaps more to post later, but it is such a depressing thing that you have to wonder why campaign reform has not been enacted, given how demeaning it is to those having to phone the patrons of the purse-strings.

____________UPDATE____________
More on the DCCC, and what is wrong and not being fixed among Washington, DC, Democratic Party politics. The grassroots has a mighty big rock to push up a mighty long and steep hill; but there is no other alternative beyond total unconditional surrender.

Feel the Bern.

_________FURTHER UPDATE________
Issue One, online, here and here (full report downloadable). Why worry about Russian oligarchs perverting our politics? We've already sold the package to homegrown oligarchs for them to pervert, so that the Russians have massive leaps and bounds to meet, merely to catch up.

More links of tears; here, here and here. Which translates to having to work bottom up. The local legislature seats, city and county offices; and would term limits help or hurt? On the other side of things, the primary challenge to Nancy Pelosi is of major import.

Stephen Jaffee campaign website:

https://jaffe4congress.com/

Issues page:

https://jaffe4congress.com/issues/

It is difficult to disagree with any one of them.

What is the biggest shame of the Democratic Party? That is a difficult one, picking a time and an issue set. My candidate:

The eight years of the Clinton Administration were divided into four Congresses, each lasting two years. The Democrats controlled the first one, and Republicans controlled the other three, though with their majority in the House diminishing with each election. The 104th Congress (the second under Clinton) was the first time Republicans controlled both houses of Congress since the 1950s.

In 1993 and 1994 (the 103rd Congress), the House of Representatives was about 60% Democratic and 40% Republican and the Senate was 57 Democrats and 43 Republicans. Congress was clearly controlled by the Democrats.

In 1995 and 1996 (104th Congress), Republicans pulled into the lead 53 to 47 in the Senate, and 54% to 46% in the House. Republicans clearly controlled Congress.

Both houses and the White House. That's when single payer was passed, card check for the unions, Wall Street held in check, all that good stuff, right?

Wrong. There was no progress to the point where Newt Gingrich could prosper. They were that damned bad! Bill Clinton.

Obama never had the chance to fail progressives and labor that badly.

Anoka County Board: Humor where you least expect it. Matt Look, MATT LOOK, is critical of others as having a "history of complaints, discontent and a spirit of malcontent."

Really. This Feb. 24, 2018, link to the report.

Sentinel of the self unaware.

The item reports:

But other county board members supported the agreement. Commissioner Scott Schulte said he believed the three-year contract would solve a lot of the discontentment and get everyone working in a solid effort.

What part of the discontentment would not be solved? Look's apparently.

But wait. There's more. November, 2016, reporting:

County Board votes itself salary increase -- By Peter Bodley

The Anoka County Board members will get a salary increase in 2017.

As part of a compensation package resolution for non-union employees next year, the board Nov. 22 unanimously approved a pay raise for itself from $63,614 to $65,522, a 2.99 percent increase.

[emphasis added] Some households just must have more needs, probably, while other households have wants. The Board must be alert to needs vs wants, somebody said that in the past. Now who was that? Oh, yeah. That guy, seeking reelection in 2016:

“Through innovative approaches, this County Board has become the envy of counties,” Look said. [...] according to Look, who said the focus has been on needs vs. wants, a campaign promise Look had made.

Taking the liberty, above, of condensing a message consistency from non-sequential self-congratulatory reported utterances - when you both want and need a raise for yourself a vote can be unanimous.

Isn't history great as a teacher?

_____________UPDATE_______________
Irony aside, the County reaching agreement with unions serving public works needs is good news. Also good news, electronic voting registers for use in this year's election process in Anoka County, making the largely volunteer [with a stipend too] job of election judges easier and more trouble free.

Two video items: Speakers who have a message - DFL candidates for Governor [2 having suspended campaigns since the forum]. Then, honoring a giant, 1999, Wellstone.

Prior posting dealt with CD6, CD8, and CD2. A phone canvasser called two days ago on behalf of Erin Murphy. We chatted a bit, and she asked my thoughts about CD3. I had to admit I was uninformed about the DFL candidacies there. For that reason, I leave coverage of that DFL endorsement contest to others. However, Paulsen needs to be voted out. Paulsen has been a town hall no-show, and wants the 1% to love him as much as Paul Ryan loves him for voting in lockstep with the Ryan agenda against the people. Beyond this intro disclaimer of ignorance (but not feeling CD3 unimportant), the post is about two YouTube links for DFL leaning people to see and think.

First, this hour and a half governor candidates forum held by the CD5 DFL. 506 views are too few. Not having met or spoken at any length to any of the individuals willing to run, the web is how I see who is who. As readers know, Thissen and Coleman have withdrawn, but their comments remain interesting.

Second, Wellstone on line, one hour, 803 viewings is too few to see and understand progressive ideals in a conversational context apart from candidate speeches and hot-button issues. The green bus lives on, thanks to our collective memories and our willing embrace of young progressive minds and their intents and needs.

Watch each video. It is time deserved by qualified good people.

The Republican side of things: Please always remember the bankers' servant/lobbyist with his millionaire "round table" annual salary for log-rolling for Wall Street. For one percent'ers. And who also was a "special guest" speaker on behalf of the South Carolina guy for Congress who after Trump appointed him to CFPB kills federal government lawsuits against payday lender usurers. So from the top yacht-class of lenders to the bottom feeders using payday lending to unfairly disadvantage the easiest to exploit, up and down the debt imposition spectrum, Tim Pawlenty has chosen to serve as an unwavering mouthpiece of money.

UPDATE: For the documentary on the political history of Wellstone, this YouTube link (an hour and a half; 3500 views). It resonates with where today's DFL candidates for Governor have moved since Wellstone's service for the nation. Bernie echoes much of what Wellstone stood for. This time may it take hold and progress. Each inspired the young when speaking to them. Bernie does not precisely channel things Wellstone said, but the parallel is notably close.

Criminals with guns in possession during commission of a crime - sentencing.

Dangerousness should be a measure of sentencing; and this Minnesota Lawyer item looks at the question. Surely guns in hand during a felony is a more dangerous threat to the public and to crime victims than marijuana possession, yet who gets incarcerated unjustly?

The only people who've been killed by cannabis are from the old-days hemp rope hangings. Handguns are a different story.

Ian Todd appears to be unopposed in seeking DFL CD6 endorsement. At a guess, after having never met either, he has a better mind than Tom Emmer. Mixing thoughts in a post is a privilige of blog ownership.

First a cartoon worth a thousand words about the Republican tax thing they rammed through against the public interest, explaining a wordy intricate package well. I call the package Crony Christmas Cruelty, dumping a load on the 99% long term, and while unsure of whether any actual presently living person is depicted, I tend to view it as doing so (hat tip to Lukovich):

So, are there any questions? With that said, always remember Tom Emmer played his party-loyalty role in things, dancing just as wanted as Paul Ryan and Stanley Hubbard pulled on his strings.

Again, digressing momentarily from Ian Todd to honor those honored by Tom Emmer's tax policy servitude, his vote being their bond; this image at this link. Bringing to mind, "We nobles meet in secret in Sherwood Forrest with King John, to aim to track down and Kill this 'Robin Hood'" when that invitation said, "Time and location provided on RSVP." The linked image lists those for whom Emmer voted in casting his taxation vote. If not directly then by kindred spirit and generic GOP gratitude. Helping one another achieve goals; national will be damned. Stealth donor the headline says. This is the head honcho behind the hated west metro country club group calling itself "Freedom Club," which calls to mind a big gigantic gnarled ugly club which the perps gleefully use to pound against the populace. Feeling good about themselves that way. Pounding the populace which they from on high view as the peasantry.

Strib in 2014 reported about who runs both parties in Minnesota; if not directly, then well, I could be wrong but I quote anyway, since the suspicion is that the listed folks - going each way - were satisfied with the Republican 2017 Christmas gift:

More than $4 out of every $10 that individuals have contributed to state politics since 2013 comes from the deep pockets of those who gave $5,000 or more. While parties like to tout the number of small donors they have as testament to their broad appeal, a Star Tribune analysis shows that it’s the well-off on whom they depend.

At least 30 percent of all Democratic cash for the state party and its affiliates comes from people who give more than $5,000. For Republicans, the figure is even higher — 40 percent of their money has come from high-dollar donors since they started fundraising for 2014.

{...] “You are tilting the scales [to] fewer and fewer people having influence over the political process,” said DFL Party Chair Ken Martin.

But Martin and the DFL have benefited from those tipped scales.

Among Minnesota political heavyweights, one fundraiser stands out: Alida Messinger. A Rockefeller heir and Gov. Mark Dayton’s ex-wife, Messinger has already pumped nearly $1 million into the 2014 contest. That is nearly three times as much as any other individual political donor and keeps her on pace with her 2012 giving. In that election, she donated about $3 million.

[...] “I think we have effectively restructured and rebuilt confidence,” said Republican Party Chair Keith Downey.

The big 14

For the state Republican Party, nearly 60 percent of the $1.3 million it has reported raising since 2013 came from just 14 donors. The largest among them is Joan Cummins, wife of Plymouth-based Primera Technology founder Bob Cummins. Joan Cummins has given the party $185,000 since 2013, with the first check arriving days after Downey was elected. She and her husband have given an additional $166,000. That cash was spread among Republicans’ Senate campaign committees, the conservative Freedom Club and GOP candidates across the state.

Not far behind Cummins’ party giving are Bill and Tani Austin, longtime contributors to Republican politics. Together, they have supplied nearly $350,000 to GOP causes since 2013. Of that, the state party and the Freedom Club, an independent spending group largely funded by wealthy donors, each received about $150,000.

On the GOP list, Stanley Hubbard, the head of Hubbard Broadcasting, fills out the top three. He has given the state party $135,000 so far and contributed another $171,000 to other Minnesota political committees.

Fewer calls, bigger haul

In part because of Messinger’s big checks, Martin had to make fewer calls to cull his cash. For the DFL state committee, just 11 donors provided nearly $1 million, or 35 percent of the money the party has raised so far. Nearly $700,000 of that came from Messinger. She also gave $250,000 to the DFL House’s campaign arm to help keep the Legislature in DFL hands and ponied up $4,000 to her ex-husband, Dayton.

Second only to Messinger in the DFL-giving ranks was Vance Opperman, president of Key Investments and former president of Thompson Reuters. He has given the state party $85,000, according to public documents, but has been more generous with legislative campaigns. Of the nearly $400,000 he has given since last year, $160,000 has gone to the DFL House and Senate committees. The 2014 Fund and WIN Minnesota — independent committees that support Democrats — received another $100,000.

[bolding added]

Ian Todd has an issues page:

https://www.iantoddforcongress.com/theissues/

Strangely, the first issue he notes;

Get Money Out of Politics
Campaign finance needs reformation in order to quell the corrupting influence of money in politics.

It's abundantly clear that while the super rich are an extreme minority in our country, their voice is the most over represented in Congress.

In 2010 the Supreme Court made a bad call in their Citizens United decision. It is for these mistakes that we have checks and balances. Corporate money has no place in democratic elections, and the U.S. Constitution should reflect that. I support a constitutional amendment about campaign finance reform that overturns Citizens United, clarifies that corporations are not people and money is not speech.

Trouble maker. Tom Emmer asks Stanley Hubbard about such thinking, Hubbard replies, "Boat rocker." Yes, they are going to trickle down a rising tide, that is what Ryan and Emmer will tell us, and you know the cliche from there. Never worked, will not. End of story.

Certainly I might have said more about Ian Todd, but why steal his thunder. You have the link. Explore the website. I have to go now to write the guy a 2 x $27 snail-mail check, my little thing to give a kind of salute to Emmer and Hubbard.

One loose thread, the part of the headline "... better mind than Tom Emmer." Read the Ian Todd bio page, or the ECM report, the thought being acquiring expertise to be an Air Force geospacial analyst takes more horsepower between the ears than being a college hockey player in Alaska. Opinions can differ. Also; and opinions can differ here; serving the country in the Air Force is a higher reach than serving a coaching staff on an ice rink. Admittedly, I guess that having done neither.

UPDATE: Start with a theme, end with that theme. Dickens gets a Rand/Ryan.

FURTHER: Freedom Club brain trust; Brandon Sawalich, best and brightest, here and here. Smart money corrupting politics has been a long-standing theme. Freedom Club has a grasp of the other end of the money spectrum, if you believe court testimony.

Billy Graham died at age 99.

It is being reported. I post this image link. No words of context or otherwise, no other links, just this one.

Yeah, penny wise, pound foolish can surface in the ways and means of Anoka County decision making. Squeeze that penny until Lincoln squeals, while breaching a contract costing the county four hundred grand. Great job, folks.

This Strib link. The county government was road-kill in taking the gamble. And the carcass hauler hauled in the chips.

UPDATE: The Court of Appeals decision is online. Read all about it. This online decision is the decision the Supreme Court allowed to have repose without granting discretionary review. David stoned Goliath on this business, and the County should never have spitefully dragged things out. The Board should have quit after losing at the District Court stage, Judge Rodenberg upon appeal being affirmed. The County was the deep pocket, and acted that way. Bless Plaintiff Johnson for standing up for his rights.

FURTHER: Related Strib coverage, from earlier, here.

Schmoozing in among his peers. The Hegseth of the United States, attracted to Alabama. To hit the podium and share a few kindred thoughts. Roy Moore might even attend. Jeff Sessions. But Hegseth is a man of many visits. Few ideas, many visits.

This link. And here, raising cash for the cause.

Hegseth is who he is. He will lay it on with a trowel. Pawlenty next, for the cause?

A second junket, JP reports:

When Pete Hegseth goes on air, he knows there’s a good chance the president of the United States might be watching. And Hegseth, a weekend anchor on President Donald Trump’s favorite TV show, Fox & Friends, is happy to hear it.

“We’re conscious of it and we’re proud of it,” Hegseth said in an interview at The Jerusalem Post’s offices on Monday, during his third trip to Israel. “We’d rather have him watching us than CNN.”

He added: “Obviously you’re conscious of the fact that the man sitting in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue might be watching, but you don’t do the show just in case he’s watching. It does add another level of responsibility to make sure you’re at your best.”

Yeah, Pete. However the man at 1600 Pennsylvania might be otherwise occupied. He loves you Pete, but the story so far is he only gropes women.

Did I say, with a trowel?

There's more:

“Every trip reveals more layers but also deepens my connection to the people and the country of Israel,” he said. “As a person of faith myself, as a Christian, who believes that Jerusalem is the eternal and undivided capital of Israel... the better grasp I can have of all the aspects of what goes on in Jerusalem and in Israel, the better I can bring a true and clearer picture which is often very muddied in the American media.”

And there’s no doubt that Hegseth’s trips to the region have exposed him to more of Israel than the average American. But there is also no doubt that he is seeing a very specific view of the country. In addition to visiting the Western Wall, Hegseth visited Jewish families living in the Muslim Quarter in the capital’s Old City, made a trip to the Orthodox West Bank settlement Beit El and visited the Achva halva factory in Ariel. He also took part in a conference in Jerusalem sponsored by right-wing news outlet Arutz Sheva, where the keynote speakers were Education Minister Naftali Bennett, Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked and Deputy Defense Minister Eli Ben-Dahan, all from Bayit Yehudi.

The man has a sixth sense - a psycho-compass always pointing to the right, for finding right-wingers with whom to hob-nob. Even if he cannot speak Hebrew, he finds them or they find him. With a little luck Minnesota's loss might be Alabama's gain.

DCCC backs Angie Craig for MN CD2. Despite this, she is a good candidate, one from the corporate bloc of the Dem Party, a multi-millionaire with ties to the medical device industry, but Craig is no blue dog. Do read the entire post, please.

As a preliminary matter: Jeff Erdmann as a favorable candidate in MN CD2 was posted earlier, within the last week, with a link there to this video, an in-depth interview with Erdmann posted to YouTube by The Uptake. (That same post had few kind words for DCCC, which was an earned scorn).

Jeff Erdmann is not wealthy enough to self-finance a Congressional campaign without DCCC help, which was refused. Every Dev Crabgrass reader is urged to view that video. Especially any reader in CD2 (or elsewhere looking for a candidacy deserving a contribution):

https://erdmannforcongress.com/

The DCCC prematurely - before any voter caucusing in CD2 - picked Angie Craig for its backing. Angie Craig made a fortune within senior ranks of a medical device company. Again, Jeff Erdmann is a regular person - a teacher for 27 years and, hence, no millionaire from such a difficult job which Erdmann successfully performed for decades. As will be seen in completing this post wealth seems the main differentiating factor key to the DCCC premature focus.

Precinct caucusing was early February of this year.

For a flavor of the DCCC approach to handicapping a race,  look to a Nov 15, 2017 RollCall web post where the DCCC's Craig endorsement is reported along with ten other candidates that DCCC shines its light on [links omitted, italics added]:

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is naming 11 candidates Wednesday in the first round of its Red to Blue program, which highlights strong Democratic recruits.

[...] Being named to Red to Blue opens doors for candidates who can tout their inclusion on the list to donors. Candidates also benefit from guidance and staff resources from the DCCC, which has been in contact with all Democratic House candidates who have been willing to collaborate and communicate with the committee this year.

The DCCC evaluates candidates’ fundraising, grass-roots engagement, local support, ties to the community and campaign infrastructure when deciding who makes the cut for the program.
[...]

Red to Blue candidates

Arizona’s 2nd District: Former Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, [...] Kirkpatrick ended the third quarter with $269,000.

Colorado’s 6th District: Jason Crow, a retired Army Ranger, [...] Crow had $393,000 in the bank.

Iowa’s 1st District: State Rep. Abby Finkenauer has won strong labor support and the backing of EMILY’s List [...] She had $169,000 in the bank.

Illinois’ 12 District: Brendan Kelly, the St. Clair County state’s attorney [...] Kelly had $305,000 in the bank.

Kansas’ 2nd District: Paul Davis, the former state House minority leader [...] He had $344,000 cash on hand.

Michigan’s 8th District: Elissa Slotkin, a former assistant secretary of Defense and a CIA analyst, [...] She had $377,000 in the bank.

Minnesota’s 2nd District: Angie Craig, the 2016 nominee, is back for a rematch against freshman GOP Rep. Jason Lewis [...] Craig ended the third quarter with $2500 in the bank, leftover from her 2016 campaign. [having dumped $4 million in losing last cycle, having that clout]

North Carolina’s 9th District: Dan McCready, a solar energy financier and Marine veteran, [...] McCready had $700,000 in the bank.

Nevada’s 3rd District: Susie Lee, a philanthropist who finished third in the 2016 primary [...] She had $308,000 in the bank.

New York’s 22nd District: Anthony Brindisi, a state assemblyman, [...] Brindisi had $399,000 in the bank.

Pennsylvania’s 6th District: Chrissy Houlahan, an Air Force veteran, [...] had $662,000 in the bank.

With DCCC you show pay to play, or take a hike: Yes, money is what talks to the assholes DCCC decision makers, however, that's the DCCC's misguided fault, not Craig's. That bias is in line with the DC Dem beltway consultancy money consumption boutiques. It is in line with the troubling fact that both houses of Congress are filled with millionaires, independent of party, Democrats as well as Republicans.

Bottom line with the DCCC: Their putting their fat thumb on the scale, prematurely, can be a candidacy killer for all but the wealthy and the well-connected - those with wealthy contributing friends, whereas the money of the wealthier candidates already tilts the playing field improperly, the DCCC aim is to tilt it further to tilt progressive candidates lacking money off the field altogether. They dismiss more than the Romney 47% as irrelevant. They go against say that percentage having only the wallet of a career high school teacher raising a family.

Again, not Craig's fault. They, the DCCC beltway influence machine, are poisonous weeds. But Craig is better than that, just moneyed, which itself is not a fault in one who started out in a single parent working family setting, and scored a bundle suggesting a talent to be respected. Again however, Craig's success becoming wealthy is rooted in the medical-industrial complex where single payer fights and loses over and over with that industry, as a whole, stinking of lobbying and influence buying. This is cause to look carefully at Craig.

Again, the faults of the medical-industrial complex are not Craig's fault. What she can be faulted for is having been the CD3 DFL candidate who lost in 2016 against talk radio mouth and John Galt loving Republican candidate Jason Lewis; 173,970 Lewis votes to 167,315 Craig votes after Craig's having outspent Lewis 4-to-1; over a million spent, each side. That's not much of an argument for getting a second bite at the apple.

The 2016 race was for an open seat, Lewis now being an incumbent in 2018, and in 2016 the Craig campaign spent $4,012,823 to motivate 167,315 votes, or twenty-four bucks per vote, compared to the Lewis campaign spending $1,020,649 to motivate 173,970 voters, or $5.87 per vote.

Whatever explanations or excuses can be made, including outside PAC money, and including Bernie being screwed by establishment Dems who ran a joke of a wealth-indebted candidate top-ticket who could not beat a dunce, Donald Trump.

Nonetheless, the Lewis campaign was more efficient. Now Lewis has the benefit of incumbency (which some may consider a negative benefit where polling answers on that possibility would be interesting to see, even were it early polling now, which can reach early conclusions not borne out in November voting.)

Yes, it was a presidential year the Republicans won - Presidency, House, and Senate; Craig being road-kill down ballot, along with and arguably in large measure because of Clinton's uninspiring demeanor and approach atop the Dem offerings.

The apparent beltway pundit thought is that now, after two years of Trump/Pence/Ryan/McConnell/Lewis, the mood of the electorate might be changed and so Craig if again spending a fortune might win this time, (and Erdmann is just a non-moneyed impediment in the way).

Again, that attitude toward Erdmann is the DCCC's. At a guess, it is not Craig's. More likely, she's smarting from the loss and wants a second shot. History teaches, Clinton lost in 2008 to Obama, and got a second shot; which ended like Sonny Liston's second shot against Ali, while neither Trump nor Jason Lewis is Ali.

All of that said, a few links, before getting to the heart of the matter; the Craig ballotpedia page, the Craig campaign webpage issues statement, the Craig view of GOP tax policy, her bio page, and the homepage itself; all Craig defining herself and her aims.


THE HEART OF THE MATTER: THE CD2 DFL HELD A CANDIDATE FORUM WHICH THE UPTAKE POSTED ON YOUTUBE SO THAT YOU CAN COMPARE AND CONTRAST CRAIG AND ERDMANN IN ASSESSING SINCERITY AND IN FIGURING WHICH IS MORE LIKELY A WINNER.

A 2016 SESSION BETWEEN CRAIG AND LEWIS IS ALSO ONLINE, HOW SHE PERFORMED THEN, AND MIGHT A LEARNING CURVE EXIST, DEVELOPED OVER THE TWO YEARS LEWIS BUILT HIS RECORD, SUCH AS IT IS, IN CONGRESS. AT THE OUTSET CRAIG DODGED SINGLE PAYER AS THE OBVIOUS HEALTHCARE ISSUE, WHERE SHE CAME CLOSER TO THE OBVIOUS AS ERDMANN FROM THE START ADVANCED. SHE DEFENDED A CLEARLY FAILED PROGRAM, ROMNEYCARE-OBAMACARE, "MAKING IT BETTER" WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULACE SEE: SINGLE PAYER AS THE ANSWER. (NOTE ALSO HOW LEWIS RUNS AGAINST "NANCY PELOSI.")

HOPEFULLY CD2 ENDORSEMENT-DECIDERS WILL VIEW BOTH, AS WELL AS THE ERDMANN VIDEO MENTIONED AT THE OUTSET.

BOTTOM LINE:
It is in the hands of people besides me. Erdmann is the candidate I would favor if caucusing in CD2. Not having a vote there, I shall watch the chips fall as they do.

Craig and Erdmann each stated she/he would abide by the endorsement.


Jason Lewis often guested Michele Bachmann on his talk radio, and the commonality between those two tells the entire story. There is no hesitation in saying that if the CD2 DFL wants to give Craig a second shot at Lewis, she should be backed in every way to win. She, as well as Erdmann, would not only be a lesser evil, but instead each would be an excellent candidate to send to the House. I state that without qualifications. Hatred of the ways and means of the DCCC does not interfere with seeing each as a quality candidate and wishing unqualified success to whichever of the two the CD2 caucus process chooses. Craig appears to have the fire and will to want to improve second place in a two horse race; so should CD2 DFL caucusing give her the chance, then it is all in, and win, Angie, win.


Jason Lewis is a studied, intentional loud-mouthed but glib charlatan. Not dumb, but Nixon-like, while not looking like a weasel. Jason Lewis has been a pliant tool of Paul Ryan. Jason Lewis needs to be replaced by an independent minded person. How anyone, not to mention a voting majority, ever opted to put him in the House in the first place mystifies me.

Finally, in 2016 Craig and another woman, Mary Lawrence, were seeking the DFL candidacy and consistent with the above, my guess was Craig then represented the better candidate of the two, as was posted. Dave Mindeman wrote then also.

Now truth time - the passion Craig showed in the Erdmann-Craig forum got DCCC'd into oblivion within this insipid 2016 sound bite monstrosity, and hopefully if Craig gets endorsed in 2018, she will have the learning curve to avoid the stupid people who did that to her. Those hucksters were selling Wonder Bread, it's good for everyone bullshit, and not showing a candidate with any resonance or appeal. It was cookie cutter beltway consultancy cash-sucking without anything of any worth to show for what they charged. She'd do better to run short segments from her forum Q and A session than again being steered by ignoramuses into any repeat of that losing failure to message a cause to vote Craig. It was a failure to show a real human with real passion about things the nation needs done and a dedication to doing them. John Podesta could have produced that god-awful thing for all his campaign management skill.

 More Craig half-minute soundbite advertising: here, here, here, and here.

Are you impressed? Is this an indication to Craig to change team membership for 2018? Do any of those ads show you a thing about who Angie Craig is and what she wants to advocate in Congress? Should that be the message? Or should it be "I will not be in lockstep with Paul Ryan's and Mitch McConnell's agenda against America," if a choice is to go negative? That message could be advanced favorably by either Erdmann or Craig.

If Craig is endorsed and trusts her instincts and avoids DCCC "message management" Lewis might be a one termer. Erdmann also would not fall into such a crap trap as putting out that manner of sound-bite beltway consultancy production. He's shown he has sense.

Then, look at the policy-empty garbage WCCO shoveled onto Craig. Not what economic things would you advance to help people; but less. A candidate deserves better.

It looked to be a soft-handed ambush hit piece. Erdmann seems he might be more terse with limited time, and Craig, given a second shot may be more cautious - a sound-bite negative ad when handed back to you is difficult to give an interview wrap-up response that ends the session favorably.

Now Lewis has a voting record to discuss, and Erdmann and/or Craig need not go into his talk radio stupidity for fools. He has voted as Paul Ryan's tool. And whichever candidate the CD2 DFL endorses will be running against Paul Ryan and not against Donald Trump. Making Trump the issue, and not Ryan, would be error. It appears the DCCC will for 2018 aim to package a one-size-fits-all anti-Trump message, and it should be anti-Ryan, where Lewis voted as Ryan ordered and dodged holding in-district town halls exactly as Ryan himself has, with Randy Bryce correctly pointing that way.

Ryan is a heartless bastard going after taking away your Social Security, with Jason Lewis as his enabler, which is worse than any Nancy Pelosi thoughts and actions. That is the Lewis track record. And trickle down taxation change is not, and has proven to have never been, a rising tide lifting all boats. Trickle down lifts the yachts. It swamps the row boats.

People know that.

What has Lewis done for the district: Running on Jason Lewis' record could note his committee assignment Congressional page:

The Congressman is honored to be the senior freshman Member on the House Budget Committee. This allows Congressman Lewis to play a role in returning fiscal responsibility to the government and tackling the $20 trillion national debt. The Budget Committee has been a standing committee in the House since 1974 and leads the process for Budget Reconciliation. This process enables the House and Senate to fast-track key reforms, for example in health care and our tax code.

[...] The Committee on Education & the Workforce was previously chaired by Second District Representative John Kline, and Congressman Lewis is looking forward to continuing that service and working to return education decisions to parents and teachers.

[...] The Transportation & Infrastructure Committee has jurisdiction over all areas of transportation, on ground, air and sea, and major infrastructure such as pipelines and water systems. The Congressman understands the importance of efficient transportation and robust infrastructure in keeping American competitive on a global scale. Congressman Lewis is committed to practical solutions like widening highways to ease the traffic burden, making gas prices more affordable with crucial pipelines, and letting farmers manage their own land without being burdened by big-government rules.

Did he even attend meetings, or voice a single thing to help the district? What? DeVos vouchers? Rural broadband? MIA on that. Countering the squeeze of concentrated agricultural power in the hands of seed and equipment vendors on the one end, and concentrated buyers on the other, with district farmers in between? MIA again. The latest tax plus Republican proposed budget action will widen the deficit. The Republican fiasco on healthcare and then the tax perks for the wealthy, where's any help there for the actual voting people of the district? Infrastructure - road expansion - without adequate amounts of spending and policy aimed at affordable housing for road users is putting the cart before the horse. Renewable energy is infrastructure. Lewis' contribution there, a bravo for pipelines.

So will Erdmann or Craig better bring the story to voters? Craig if endorsed would have learned from 2016, but, should the Erdmann team be given the opportunity?

However the question gets resolved, it is the CD2 DFL caucus process that should decide, with no DCCC thumb on the scale; particularly if it's a beltway dumb thumb aiming to produce ineffective soundbite ads, but ads yielding substantial advertising revenue for beltway consultants.

End of story.