Progressive Ann McLane Kuster Cruises to Victory in NH

 

Some liberals are celebrating the victory of Christine O’Donnell in Delaware’s GOP Senate primary, hoping that her candidacy will hand the seat to Democratic candidate Chris Coons. But elsewhere, progressives have a primary victory of their own to cheer. In the Democratic primary to replace Rep. Paul Hodes in New Hampshire’s second congressional district (Hodes is running for the Senate), liberal-backed Ann McLane Kuster clobbered more conservative Katrina Swett. (Swett committed the ultimate crime in progressive-land: she was the co-chair of Joe Lieberman’s presidential campaign.) Kuster was backed by major pro-choice groups, who worried that Swett could not be trusted on abortion rights issues. That mattered. But the race was also a chance for liberals to flex their political muscles. 

Kuster was supported by all the big progressive activist groups—especially Howard Dean’s Democracy for America (DFA) and the Progressive Change* Campaign Committee (PCCC). I recently spoke to PCCC’s Adam Green about the race. He said Kuster’s win showed “maturity” in the progressive movement’s ability to affect primaries. “A few years ago blogs would raise small amounts of money for candidates but not really have an ongoing relationship with their campaign,” Green said. “But now we’re at a point where we’re helping campaigns find staffing, run cutting edge online campaigns, and also raise a ton of money online from lots of people.” There’s no doubt PCCC had an impact on the race: it mobilized its 2,800 New Hampshire members to assist her campaign, it helped her find her communications director, and it raised around $100,000—real money in a primary contest—for Kuster. The candidate called the organization a “real partner.” 

Liberal groups haven’t won all their primaries this year. Their candidate in Arkansas, Lt. Gov. Bill Halter, lost to incumbent Sen. Blanche Lincoln in June. But they’ve notched some important victories. Joe Sestak beat party-switcher and White House-backed Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania Democratic Senate primary. Liberal- (and Daily Kos-)backed candidate Manan Trivedi (a doctor and Iraq war vet) won a tough House primary race against a more conservative, self-funding opponent in May and will face incumbent GOP Rep. Jim Gerlach in the fall. The night Trivedi won—May 18—Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway beat a more conservative opponent for the Democratic Senate nomination in that state. And on June 22, liberal favorite Elaine Marshall beat establishment-backed Cal Cunningham (the pick of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee) for the Dem Senate nomination in North Carolina. 

The real question, of course, is whether any of these progressive candidates can win in November. Swett attacked Kuster during a debate as unelectable and too progressive. She’ll certainly have a hard race against former Rep. Charlie Bass—if he can survive a tough primary race of his own. (Swett would have had trouble with Bass, too.) But Green, unsurprisingly, thinks his group picked the right horse. “A lot of people have been saying Democratic voters don’t vote for a progressive candidate because they can’t win,” he says. “We want to prove that wrong in 2010.” He sure picked some year to test that proposition.

UPDATE: Reshma Saujani, who ran a Wall Street-backed campaign challenging incumbent New York Rep. Carolyn Maloney from the right, lost badly on Tuesday night. That should probably count as another victory for liberals.

*This originally said Congressional. That was wrong. Sorry.

 

 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate