MD-Gov: Don't be Jealous!

[TheLeftwardTide]

Donna Edwards could be a good LtG candidate. Or a good gubernatorial candidate, anyway.

If Cardin retires in 2018, I think she'll run for his Senate seat. I would probably support her, as I did in 2016. Pretty sure she's not going to run for governor, though.

[TheLeftwardTide]

Donna Edwards could be a good LtG candidate. Or a good gubernatorial candidate, anyway.

If Cardin retires in 2018, I think she'll run for his Senate seat. I would probably support her, as I did in 2016. Pretty sure she's not going to run for governor, though.

You think she will run even with her recent MS diagnosis?

I was not aware of this until now. Well, that sucks, as she was an excellent congresswoman, and I wish that she could go further with her political career. If she wasn't diagnosed with MS, then what I said still holds up.

[TheLeftwardTide]

Jealous will probably lose the primary but I'd be interested in hearing our resident MDers takes on his chances.

Maryland doesn't like candidates like Jealous. Just look at how Bernie Sanders got destroyed in the Maryland primary.

Jamie Raskin would like to have a word with you.

[TheLeftwardTide]

Jealous will probably lose the primary but I'd be interested in hearing our resident MDers takes on his chances.

Maryland doesn't like candidates like Jealous. Just look at how Bernie Sanders got destroyed in the Maryland primary.

Jamie Raskin would like to have a word with you.

1) Not a statewide race

2) Are you familiar with the term "proving the rule with the exception?"

First, let me give my take on Jealous. I will almost definitely support him in the gubernatorial primary, as he is probably the most progressive candidate in the race.

I don't think there's some sort of "inherent centrism" in Maryland, unless if you only look at Ben Cardin (and even he isn't as centrist as, say, the Clintons). Paul Sarbanes, our state's longest-serving Senator in history, was one of the leaders of the left wing of the Democratic Party, and I wouldn't exactly call Mikulski a Clintonite. Despite my support for Edwards in the primary, I would consider Van Hollen to be quite progressive, and I would say that at least a few of my fellow MD berniecrats agree.

The reason that I brought up Raskin was because I think that a Jealous primary win would look very similar to a Raskin primary win. There are two main reasons as to why he won:
1) By far the most grassroots support - who gets excited about Kathleen Matthews?
2) A divided opposition - he won with 33.6% of the vote. Though to his credit, he was severely outspent.

Now, look at the current field. There are several candidates present, but none of them are really well-known, household-name politicians. Furthermore, Jealous is the only one who is seriously courting progressive voters, and is likely to have the most grassroots support. These are the main two factors that got Raskin to win in 2016, in an arguably harder-to-win environment (MD-08 is wealthier and more suburban than Maryland as a whole).

There is definitely a winning coalition that he could form in order to win the primary, which has three main parts:
1) African-Americans. This is by far the most important element, as they make up ~40% of the electorate (IIRC). This is also where his political strength would be most apparent, with him being the former head of the NAACP and all. A big factor here is how influential Rushern Baker is in PG county.
2) Rural Democrats in Western Maryland and Cecil County, where Bernie won. His economic progressivism could play well there.
3) Whatever progressive Democrats he could pick off in Montgomery (such as myself), Howard, and Baltimore County, Raskin-style.

Do I think that he will win? No; he's still definitely favored to lose, as he will face the similar challenges that Sanders and Edwards did due to the largely suburban nature of the state. But is he DOA? Absolutely not, and I think everyone who think he is should seriously re-assess their analysis.

With a gun to my head, I would say that Jealous has a 30% chance of winning the primary, and a 55% chance of winning the general if he gets past the primary. These numbers are largely arbitrary.

[TheLeftwardTide]

The biggest obstacle that I think Jealous will face is that his support for single-payer could actually be a liability in MD. With the health care industry being such a large employer here, the transition could result in the industry going into disarray, with health care workers being laid off.

Democratic primary voters also seem to value elected experience, so that could also be a problem for him in the primary.

I don't know about that. Which workers in the health industry would oppose single-payer?

Is it those working for federal agencies, i.e. NIH, FDA, etc.? lol no.

Is it doctors? No. Even with Obamacare in place, there are still many uninsured patients that they have to see, and so many doctors have to deal with whether or not they should be treated, and in the case of life-threatening diseases such as cancer, this decision is often very difficult to make. In California, it was Nurses United out of all groups that was most vocal about the push for single-payer.

Is it pharmacists? Not necessarily, though this argument could go either way.

The only people I can see who would be opposed to it on circumstance, in the way that you are implying, are health executives and health insurance company employees (Geico being headquartered in Chevy Chase, etc.). But really, how much of the electorate does this group take up? The former would probably vote for Hogan anyway, being more wealthy and fiscally moderate.

Really, the only way to verify these arguments is with polling data of single-payer approval in Maryland, both of the Democratic primary and general election electorates.


I would say that your second point is more valid, but keep in mind that Larry Hogan had never held elected office prior to being elected governor.

[TheLeftwardTide]

Nurses are very different from doctors - doctors are normally a group impossible to please in health reforms (they were the biggest opponents of the NHS, for example; and simultaneously now the NHS is in place are the biggest opponents of Tory "free market reforms"). American doctors have large amounts of student debt and fear that single payer will lessen their incomes (disproportionately high compared with many countries) and mean they are less likely to pay back their debt. This may be an unfounded fear:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3110239/

but it is understandable, especially as most doctors in America associate government funded insurance with being paid less. As Bevan found, any move to single-payer would probably require a few mouths to be stuffed with gold.

I must admit, this is a very strong argument.

However, as of now, 56% of doctors support single-payer healthcare. It should be noted that in 2008, 58% of doctors opposed single-payer (it discusses why in the article).

Considering the fact that doctors are relatively split evenly between the two parties, it can be assumed that this support number would be substantially higher among Democratic doctors.

He's literally the first Governor of Maryland without elected experience since Augustus Bradford was elected in 1862. Besides, it seems like the Republican primary electorate prefers candidates without elected experience more than the Democratic electorate.

I don't deny that Maryland likes elected experience in it's politicians, but how many states do elect governors without experience? Or, rather, how has the performance of "green" (as in "with little experience) Democratic candidates in competitive gubernatorial races been? The bolded point really needs a constant to compare to in order to be effective.

I would consider the non-bolded point to be a reasonable assumption, however, Hogan won among the Maryland general election electorate, where Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-1.