General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEd Markey Has a Message for Democrats: 'The Age of Incrementalism Is Over
Now, says the senator who won an unprecedented primary victory, is our moment to think big and take bold and urgent action.By John Nichols
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/ed-markey-progressive-aoc/
Until September 1, 2020, when Representative Joe Kennedy III failed in his Democratic primary challenge to Senator Ed Markey by a 55-45 margin statewide. Markey won 60 percent of the vote in Boston and 80 percent in Cambridge and Somerville. Political narratives, at least as they have been written by pundits and political insiders, dont usually end that way. Kennedys arent supposed to lose in Massachusetts. And 39-year-old challengers with star power, 100 percent name recognition, and mounds of moneyand who start their campaigns with double-digit poll leadsarent supposed to get crushed by earnest 74-year-old veterans of the state legislature, the US House, and the US Senate who have spent decades focusing on the complexities of issues like nuclear disarmament and net neutrality.
What happened?
When the future of Democratic Party politics took shape in 2016 and 18, Markey understood that everything was changing. He had always been a liberal with an instinct for reform. But Markey saw a new politics emerging, and he was ready to embrace it.
When I first got to Congress, the reception I got was (very) chilly, AOC recalled Tuesday. But, she added, Ed Markey wasnt afraid. He offered his expertise and partnership. He wasnt scared of big policy and he didnt use kid gloves. The unlikely duo introduced a groundbreaking Green New Deal resolution in the House and Senate, and they found common ground on a host of issues concerning economic, social, and racial justice. A year ago, at a point when pundits were predicting that a challenge from Kennedy would force Markey out of politics, Ocasio-Cortez provided a critical endorsement for the senator:
Much more at the link. A very good read.
2naSalit
(86,071 posts)There's no time mess around anymore. Shit has to get done or we all die, period.
SMC22307
(8,088 posts)good DU times.
With Fat Nixon threatening Social Security and Medicare, Dems BETTER GO BIG.
Autumn
(44,765 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)SMC22307
(8,088 posts)Obama's a big boy... he can handle criticism of his policy, methods, etc., you know, like a mature adult.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)And I don't mean the Party going extinct, I mean life on Earth going extinct.
stillcool
(32,626 posts)Like himself? Who, what has he been since 1976?
Autumn
(44,765 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Autumn
(44,765 posts)maybe submit it to The Nation. I think it's an excellent article and his message is right on point. I was very impressed that he won over a Kennedy in Massachusetts. That to me was rather amazing.
George II
(67,782 posts)....objective publication. But I didn't say it was "filled with errors", did I?
To me it's an exaggeration, and mischaracterization, of what Markey actually said. Remember, Markey has been in Washington for almost 50 years. To those who have followed him over most of those years, his "message" hasn't changed much over those years.
That's my opinion. To quote, "If you don't like........."
Autumn
(44,765 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....and mischaracterization of what Markey actually said.
A difference of opinion isn't a complaint, it's merely a DIFFERENCE OF OPINION!!!!!
I guess in your eyes I'm not entitled to my opinion, eh?
I am from MA and have a slightly different take.
He is the Senator that I voted for, Joe was my Congressional rep that I voted for. He lost his own district to Markey. Huge loss in his own district. Voters felt betrayed that in these times he would primary a very popular progressive Senator. He ran not on his merits, his ad's were all about Bobby and John. They were all over TV here.
He made a huge mistake and now on top of his loss our district, very blue, is in jeopardy. The last I checked it is still to close to call. The lead candidate was a Dem. Changed to GOP in 2013 to help campaign for and vote for our GOP Governor. Gave max donations to an anti LGBT sheriff up for election. Then he flipped back. My district may be voting GOP either way from the looks of it. I voted for his opponent.
George II
(67,782 posts)Interesting dynamics in that primary. Originally nine candidates, two withdrew before the primary but still got votes.
What's curious is the endorsements:
Auchincloss was endorsed by the Boston Globe and NAGE
Leckey was endorsed by Omar and Brand New Congress
Mermell was endorsed by Pressley and Planned Parenthood Action Fund
Grossman was endorsed by Khanna
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....who switched to being a Democrat for this.
I wonder if someone might run as an independent?
sheshe2
(83,355 posts)Then switched to R in in 2013 so he could work on Gov. Bakers-R campaign and vote for him. Switched back in 2014. I am very disappointed for District 4.
Saw that on the news earlier. I read that Mermell has until today to call for a recount. Haven't been around to see if she had.
JI7
(89,182 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....as their vehicle to communicate their own message.
Ed Markey has been steady in his message for decades, and he's been the consummate Democrat throughout those decades. Sad that a publication with the status of The Nation has falsely attributed a "message" to Markey's remarks and some jump at it.
Cary
(11,746 posts)Whatever happened to "Our Revolution" anyway?
Weren't there all kinds of other takeovers of the Democratic Party? Or did Nina Turner and Cornell West start a new party?
Is it just me or does anyone else find it difficult to keep score?
I'm sure Autumn will be good enough to clear this up. What do you say, Autumn?
stopdiggin
(11,095 posts)and grafted it on to a politician -- (a good one) -- of long standing record.
Markey's "message" is one of experience and substance -- and doesn't really need viewing through the lens of AOC or the Nation.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)Thanks for posting it, Autumn!
Autumn
(44,765 posts)sheshe2
(83,355 posts)gulliver
(13,142 posts)Those who, on net, increase Dem votes and seats for our team get honor from the whole team and deserve to have their voices heard more. Those who, on net, decrease votes and seats for the team deserve to have their voices heard less. That's the rough math anyway. Obviously, it doesn't have to work out that way, and there are very obvious exceptions, but there is democratic justice in that rule.
To paraphrase JFK, "Ask not what the Dem Party can do for you, ask what you can do for the Dem Party." And really, the Dem Party is the country's only hope right now. That's just a fact. So doing something for the Dem Party is doing something for America.
George II
(67,782 posts)....I don't see how this primary was "unprecedented" for Markey.
Plus, Ed Markey received more than 500 endorsements from Organizations, Unions, and fellow members of Congress, including:
Senator Elizabeth Warren
Senator Cory Booker
Senator Chuck Schumer
Congressman Richard Neal
Congressman Jim McGovern
Congresswoman Lori Trahan
Congressman Stephen Lynch
Congressman Bill Keating
One would naturally say that THOSE endorsements are far more "critical" than the one mentioned in the article.
sheshe2
(83,355 posts)Warren has stood by his side since 2013. She stumped hard for him. Her voice carries a lot of weight.
George II
(67,782 posts)19 in House elections and 2 in Senate elections without that one "critical" endorsement!
sheshe2
(83,355 posts)I believe you also posted that Markey's rating in the Senate is:
4th most Progressive Senator. Interesting, hum.
George II
(67,782 posts)...."critical" endorsement?
sheshe2
(83,355 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)He has the advantage of a long incumbency, and didn't just phone it in during the campaign.
Wounded Bear
(58,440 posts)The first thing they do is vote on the rules.
Nuke the fillibuster on Day fucking One.
Especially if McConnell is still there. Make him squirm while his powers are destroyed.
Autumn
(44,765 posts)honest.abe
(8,556 posts)Democrats have had enough. The filibuster only seems to help the Republicans.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)I don't think Joe Kennedy has anything to worry about - he has a big career ahead but it's time to seize this day on issues like the Green New Deal.
AOC finds her allies and moves. Love it
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)There's nothing wrong with that. And it's a hell of a sight better than the misplaced pride some politicians feel when they boast to their constituents that they have NO loaf-of-bread (not even a thin slice) because they refused to negotiate. It happens every time. The politicians with an "all or nothing" philosophy will usually end up with a plate of NOTHING.
Fact of the matter is that we are better served by politicians and activists and voters who can understand and accept the REALITY in that we are NOT the only party, and we are NOT in control. Nor is it likely that we will EVER have a "super-majority" either. In the end: Slow-progress is better than NO-progress. (I think reasonable and thoughtful people can agree on that simple axiom, right?)
All I'm saying is that in the end, "incremental" progress is STILL PROGRESS. It may not be exactly what we want, and it may not be as quickly as we want it... but anything that moves us closer to our goals it's a good thing. Patience is a virtue. Impatience, bullying, disrespect, and pie-in-the-sky demands always end up with a stalemate.
Basically, having a perpetual stalemate is the same as maintaining the "status-quo," and that's also an anathema to the far-left activists. So, a difficult decision must be made. The choices are simple: 1) Stalemate/status-quo/NO-loaf (but boasting about one's purity and unwillingness to negotiate with the "enemy'') ... or 2)Compromise/Mutual Benefit/slow-progress/a few slices now, a few slices later... always making PROGRESS.
The choices cannot be any clearer. I prefer progress, no matter if it's small. A slice is better than crumbs. I'm not too proud or to vain to accept that.
That "writer" John Nichols is an idiot. Promoting this type of "Democrats Divided" narrative serves no good purpose. It creates distrust and resentment, and that only serves to create an atmosphere of negativity: Negativity generates apathy. Apathy discourages voter turnout. Low voter turnout gives Republicans a chance to steal the elections.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)BannonsLiver
(16,162 posts)He seems to he even forgotten how things work.
stopdiggin
(11,095 posts)premise of the article was -- misguided at best.
And a lot of people are unhappy with the characterization of "a Kennedy loss" -- as some sort of sea-change transformative moment. Markey was well regarded -- ran a good campaign -- and Kennedy probably shouldn't have challenged him. This was not something completely outside the norm or unexpected. The days of fiefdom and fealty ...
betsuni
(25,138 posts)They freak out over change. When Massachusetts successfully launched a version of the ACA. it promoted progress. When the ACA didn't result in death panels, progress. Now people like it. When Seattle increased its minimum wage to fifteen dollars and the economy didn't collapse, progress. When states legalized marijuana and society didn't collapse, progress. Same sex marriage and everybody heterosexual didn't become gay, progress.
Everything is incremental.
George II
(67,782 posts)...over the years, he's the same Ed Markey that has been serving his constituents for decades.
Interesting how The Nation takes one sentence from his post-primary victory euphoria and makes it look like he had an epiphany this summer.
Also interesting is how an article presumably about Ed Markey changes direction (and focus) just a few sentences into it.
I dare say Markey's victory had a lot to do with the way he's been legislating all these years and some of the prominent endorsements among the 500 he received, including fellow Senator Warren and Senate Minority Leader Schumer.
But that's just me.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Autumn
(44,765 posts)to do anything.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)That's just reality. Anyone who tells you a quick fix to something very complicated is easy is selling something, or running for office. Like those who are saying that a vaccine for covid could be ready by the end of the year....
Those who have experience and are not running for office or selling something are a more reliable source.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/23/president-obama-speaks-his-mind
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/11/upshot/how-single-payer-health-care-could-trip-up-democrats.html
Markey didn't get elected decade after decade because he was a self-proclaimed disruptor who couldn't work well with others or get things done within the system of the Senate. Massachusetts has a large and diverse enough population to demand their Senator produce results, not just rant and rail at how everyone else in the Democratic party is wrong and he's right.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Too bad people weren't willing to compromise and find common ground and mutual benefit LONG AGO. Just think how much further along we'd be if more people had been willing to see incremental progress as ACTUAL PROGRESS! And small progress on top of previous small progress and so on, and so on... eventually we really have something meaningful and something to be proud of.
It's a far cry from the "pride" our hard-headed politicians and activists have when they boast about NEVER compromising... and being (apparently) pleased with themselves for "standing their ground" (yet coming away with absolutely NOTHING to show for it.) Ultimately, their own stubborn behavior ends up enshrining the status-quo and NOTHING gets done. What good purpose does that serve?
Incremental progress is still progress. Don't fight it.