2018 Congressional Recruitment/Fundraising/Ratings Megathread

[Holmes]

Scott Taylor is "considering" a run for Senate. Whether or not he runs is a different question though, but his seat would be vulnerable.

[Doimper]

Scott Taylor is "considering" a run for Senate. Whether or not he runs is a different question though, but his seat would be vulnerable.

He would be literally the perfect candidate if Clinton had won and there was a special election for Kaine's seat, but I can't believe that he would throw away his seat in a hopeless Trump midterm.

[publicunofficial]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate. The Angie Craig campaign in MN-02 comes off as looking especially bad.

[LimoLiberal]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate. The Angie Craig campaign in MN-02 comes off as looking especially bad.

Paul Hodes lost by 20 to Bass in NH-2 in 2004.

2006?

Wins by 7.

[Landslide Lyndon]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate.

Yeah, it's a pity that DCCC won't support stellar candidates like Tim Canova, Zephyr Teachout and Vincent Fort.

[kph14]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate. The Angie Craig campaign in MN-02 comes off as looking especially bad.

Your statement concerning PA-16 is a plain falsehood. Hartman lost by 11 points in 2016 while in 2014 Tom Houghton(D) lost by 15 points.

[junior chįmp]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate.

Yeah, it's a pity that DCCC won't support stellar candidates like Tim Canova, Zephyr Teachout and Vincent Fort.

Spending a billion dollars so Hillary could lose to a clown in orange face was money well spent

[publicunofficial]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate.

Yeah, it's a pity that DCCC won't support stellar candidates like Tim Canova, Zephyr Teachout and Vincent Fort.

No instead they support Goldman Sachs CEOS, political insiders, and no one else.

There's a middleground somewhere surely.

[junior chįmp]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Landslide Lyndon]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate.

Yeah, it's a pity that DCCC won't support stellar candidates like Tim Canova, Zephyr Teachout and Vincent Fort.

Spending a billion dollars so Hillary could lose to a clown in orange face was money well spent

Must be news to every political reporter that DCCC spent money to elect Hillary Clinton.

[BundouYMB]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate. The Angie Craig campaign in MN-02 comes off as looking especially bad.

Raising money doesn't prove someone is a good candidate. Candidates who raise more money lose all the time.

The DCCC is obviously backing the candidates they think have the best shot of winning, and whether they're right in every instance or not anyone who thinks they're conspiring to choose bad candidates on purpose to slight the party's left or whatever is living in lala land.

The DCCC is ran by members of congress, and every member of congress becomes massively more powerful if their party is in the majority. Do you really think Ben Ray Luján or whoever is saying "well, on the one hand I could be in the majority and wield massive amounts of power and influence every major bill as a top House Democrat, but on the other hand I really don't like those Bernie Bros." Oh please.

I'm about sick of hearing this nonsense from Our Revolution and co. It demonstrates an incredibly childish attitude toward politics in general to think that the only reason voters aren't picking your candidates is because of some shadowy establishment conspiracy. More likely the voters just don't like your candidates.

Also, spoiler alert, if you change nothing and just blame other people it doesn't make it terribly likely the voters will be picking your candidates next time around either.

[publicunofficial]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate. The Angie Craig campaign in MN-02 comes off as looking especially bad.

Raising money doesn't prove someone is a good candidate. Candidates who raise more money lose all the time.

The DCCC is obviously backing the candidates they think have the best shot of winning, and whether they're right in every instance or not anyone who thinks they're conspiring to choose bad candidates on purpose to slight the party's left or whatever is living in lala land.

The DCCC is ran by members of congress, and every member of congress becomes massively more powerful if their party is in the majority. Do you really think Ben Ray Luján or whoever is saying "well, on the one hand I could be in the majority and wield massive amounts of power and influence every major bill as a top House Democrat, but on the other hand I really don't like those Bernie Bros." Oh please.

I'm about sick of hearing this nonsense from Our Revolution and co. It demonstrates an incredibly childish attitude toward politics in general to think that the only reason voters aren't picking your candidates is because of some shadowy establishment conspiracy. More likely the voters just don't like your candidates.

Also, spoiler alert, if you change nothing and just blame other people it doesn't make it terribly likely the voters will be picking your candidates next time around either.

I don't think they are purposely picking bad candidates, I think they are putting their thumbs on the scale for candidates that are friendly to the business interestests that supply the livelihood for Democratic consultants and advisors, and those candidates tend to be out of touch centrists who lose races.

Have you ever once thought that maybe Pelosi and co. are lying to you when they say they want universal healthcare, an end to money in politics, and fairer income inequality as much as they claim to?

[Jeppe]

The author of that article really doesn’t like women, that’s for sure. Most of the candidates he’s griping about are women, even though a pretty large majority of establishment candidates are male. For every Angie Craig, there are 4 more Harley Rouda’s running for Congress, men who are actual CEO’s and millionaires.

[BundouYMB]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate. The Angie Craig campaign in MN-02 comes off as looking especially bad.

Raising money doesn't prove someone is a good candidate. Candidates who raise more money lose all the time.

The DCCC is obviously backing the candidates they think have the best shot of winning, and whether they're right in every instance or not anyone who thinks they're conspiring to choose bad candidates on purpose to slight the party's left or whatever is living in lala land.

The DCCC is ran by members of congress, and every member of congress becomes massively more powerful if their party is in the majority. Do you really think Ben Ray Luján or whoever is saying "well, on the one hand I could be in the majority and wield massive amounts of power and influence every major bill as a top House Democrat, but on the other hand I really don't like those Bernie Bros." Oh please.

I'm about sick of hearing this nonsense from Our Revolution and co. It demonstrates an incredibly childish attitude toward politics in general to think that the only reason voters aren't picking your candidates is because of some shadowy establishment conspiracy. More likely the voters just don't like your candidates.

Also, spoiler alert, if you change nothing and just blame other people it doesn't make it terribly likely the voters will be picking your candidates next time around either.

I don't think they are purposely picking bad candidates, I think they are putting their thumbs on the scale for candidates that are friendly to the business interestests that supply the livelihood for Democratic consultants and advisors, and those candidates tend to be out of touch centrists who lose races.

Have you ever once thought that maybe Pelosi and co. are lying to you when they say they want universal healthcare, an end to money in politics, and fairer income inequality as much as they claim to?

Yes, because I don't know any politicians personally, I don't particularly trust any of them.

However, I don't think someone is less trustworthy just because they've been endorsed by the DCCC. The DCCC for the most part isn't funded by 'business interests' -- or at least, not business interests I find particularly objectionable. According to Open Secrets in 2016 the largest donors to the DCCC, by far, were House Democrats and 'retired' after which there's a huge drop off followed by lawyers and people employed in 'education.'

The DCCC took a million dollars from people working in the pharmaceuticals industry, yes, but that's less than half of one percent of the money they raised in 2016. That doesn't make me think "wow, every DCCC backed candidate who says they support single payer must be lying through their teeth."

[Cactus Jack]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate.

Yeah, it's a pity that DCCC won't support stellar candidates like Tim Canova, Zephyr Teachout and Vincent Fort.

I know you sort of live in a bizarre, inexplicable left-loathing bubble, but I can personally vouch that Mary Matiella is certainly the best candidate running in AZ-02. A damn sight better than Carpetbagger Kirkpatrick, in particular.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate.

Yeah, it's a pity that DCCC won't support stellar candidates like Tim Canova, Zephyr Teachout and Vincent Fort.

I know you sort of live in a bizarre, inexplicable left-loathing bubble, but I can personally vouch that Mary Matiella is certainly the best candidate running in AZ-02. A damn sight better than Carpetbagger Kirkpatrick, in particular.

Her fundraising sucks and Kirkpatrick is a pretty solid candidate, so I highly doubt that.

[Cactus Jack]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate.

Yeah, it's a pity that DCCC won't support stellar candidates like Tim Canova, Zephyr Teachout and Vincent Fort.

I know you sort of live in a bizarre, inexplicable left-loathing bubble, but I can personally vouch that Mary Matiella is certainly the best candidate running in AZ-02. A damn sight better than Carpetbagger Kirkpatrick, in particular.

Her fundraising sucks and Kirkpatrick is a pretty solid candidate, so I highly doubt that.

People seriously underestimate how much of an issue Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging really is. She has no appeal at all in Tucson and surrounding AZ-02, which is a wildly different district from AZ-01. Matiella is a local and she's a veteran, two things that the district should just love, on top of having a proven record of government service.

[Landslide Lyndon]

People seriously underestimate how much of an issue Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging really is. She has no appeal at all in Tucson and surrounding AZ-02, which is a wildly different district from AZ-01. Matiella is a local and she's a veteran, two things that the district should just love, on top of having a proven record of government service.

Sorry but I can't trust you. You are the same guys who sat out and grumbled about how Northam will lose because he was too conservative and not exciting enough for the base.
For all I know Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging is a thing only among Sandernistas and Justice Democrats.

[YE]

People seriously underestimate how much of an issue Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging really is. She has no appeal at all in Tucson and surrounding AZ-02, which is a wildly different district from AZ-01. Matiella is a local and she's a veteran, two things that the district should just love, on top of having a proven record of government service.

Sorry but I can't trust you. You are the same guys who sat out and grumbled about how Northam will lose because he was too conservative and not exciting enough for the base.
For all I know Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging is a thing only among Sandernistas and Justice Democrats.

Didn't he predict Northam to actually win comfortably?

[Cactus Jack]

People seriously underestimate how much of an issue Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging really is. She has no appeal at all in Tucson and surrounding AZ-02, which is a wildly different district from AZ-01. Matiella is a local and she's a veteran, two things that the district should just love, on top of having a proven record of government service.

Sorry but I can't trust you. You are the same guys who sat out and grumbled about how Northam will lose because he was too conservative and not exciting enough for the base.
For all I know Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging is a thing only among Sandernistas and Justice Democrats.

Hey, pal, here's a thought: do me a favor and don't lump me in with "them". I predicted Northam+9 and wanted him to win even though he was too conservative for my tastes, because the fact is that any Democrat is better than any Republican.

[LimoLiberal]

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23/dccc-democratic-primaries-congress-progressives/

Big piece in The Intercept hightling how the DCCC and Dem establishment groups are once again choosing terrible centrist candidates over good ones because they can fundraise better. Essentially the same stuff they did in 2006 that gave them an unworkable majority filled with business-friendly moderates that got decimated in 2010.

PA-16, MN-02, AZ-02, NV-03, TX-07, TX-21, and VA-02 are amomg those mentioned in the story. The PA-16 example is particularly egregious because 1] The left-leaning candidate is outraising the DCCC's choice, 2]The DCCC's choice spent record breaking amounts of money in 2016 to end up not ony underperforming Clinton but the 2014 D candidate.

Yeah, it's a pity that DCCC won't support stellar candidates like Tim Canova, Zephyr Teachout and Vincent Fort.

I know you sort of live in a bizarre, inexplicable left-loathing bubble, but I can personally vouch that Mary Matiella is certainly the best candidate running in AZ-02. A damn sight better than Carpetbagger Kirkpatrick, in particular.

Her fundraising sucks and Kirkpatrick is a pretty solid candidate, so I highly doubt that.

People seriously underestimate how much of an issue Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging really is. She has no appeal at all in Tucson and surrounding AZ-02, which is a wildly different district from AZ-01. Matiella is a local and she's a veteran, two things that the district should just love, on top of having a proven record of government service.

She moved here to live with her children and grandchildren... I think that's an effective deflection of any carpetbagging talk.

[publicunofficial]

People seriously underestimate how much of an issue Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging really is. She has no appeal at all in Tucson and surrounding AZ-02, which is a wildly different district from AZ-01. Matiella is a local and she's a veteran, two things that the district should just love, on top of having a proven record of government service.

Sorry but I can't trust you. You are the same guys who sat out and grumbled about how Northam will lose because he was too conservative and not exciting enough for the base.
For all I know Kirkpatrick's carpetbagging is a thing only among Sandernistas and Justice Democrats.

Hey, pal, here's a thought: do me a favor and don't lump me in with "them". I predicted Northam+9 and wanted him to win even though he was too conservative for my tastes, because the fact is that any Democrat is better than any Republican.

Nope, for expressing an opinion against Dem leadership you are now a socialist bernie bro according to Landslide Loser. Welcome to the fold.

[OneJ]

I don't see what's wrong with Matiella. She's just simply better.

[Blackacre]

I don't see what's wrong with Matiella. She's just simply better.

[Jeppe]

As long as Matt Heinz isn’t the nominee again, either Kirkie or Markell’s sounds fine.