Contested Primaries - Real World Example

EXACTLY the right answer from a Dem. County Chair!

"...Anchondo, the Democratic chairman, can't take a side in the primary. He said the fight between O'Rourke and Reyes is good for his party.
"We're going to get people excited and get them out to vote," Anchondo said. "The more Democrats we get out to vote, the better."

Homework

I spent my morning in San Juan finishing a polish on my part of a committee chair handbook for the DCDP while it rained. It was very Robert's Rules heavy, so my mind is too numb to flesh out notes on what I wanted to write about today.

Disappointment Is Not The Only Option

Reading the following blog post - The Professional Left is Killing Us; Example #1 - made me reflect on two things:

1. I need to remove the content advisory on my blog because I've over-estimated my capacity to spew venom foully.
2. Left-leaning people (including myself) need to take breath before we blame so many current ills and frustrations on Obama.

I remember hitting many of the North Dallas Democratic clubs after the 2010 election. It troubled me then that somehow in a red state with many Democrat politicians very eager to run away from Obama, many Democratic activists here somehow made it Obama's fault that the Republicans knocked out almost all the Democrats that were newly-elected in Texas in the last decade, finally achieving a super majority in the the state legislature. I remember all the times I've voiced my frustrations that Obama is Bush-lite regarding national security and Fourth Amendment issues, and grumbling at every other compromise in passing legislation through our divided Congress. I remember how much time I've spent with people that identify as Democrats who spent more time complaining about Democrats than the Republicans they say they saw as the opposition.

I'm leaning more and more towards taking a breath before damning Democrats as time goes by. I don't spend much time around embittered, ranting "Democrats" who have more appreciation for Republican electeds that will never show them the same respect. I'm mostly over the habit of complaining about Democrat electeds that aren't firebrands for the causes I feel passionately about.

I've come to a more peaceful and hopeful place internally. No politician is perfect, so I will not expect perfection. I do a better job of respecting how hard it is an elected to fully advocate choices that promote equality, social justice, and living in harmony with nature when it's human's instinctual nature to consume, seek immediate gratification, and punish those who fall under the category of "them". Most importantly, I will not echo Republican talking points against Democrat electeds who I have lost faith in; I will promote primary challengers as better choices instead. Conservatives can afford to do their own dirty work.

There are truths as powerful now as they were just a few years ago in 2008: You ain't gonna woo new Democratic voters or better Democratic candidates through pissy whining - just make your case. As someone on the ground, you'll do better all around by living as confidently positive as one can, and inspiring people through tangible action.

I haven't been living by that as much as I'd like the past year, but I'm getting better about it.

Contested Primaries

Primary season is about to start up in Texas. There's plenty to write about regarding the all the wonky changes due to complying with new federal guidelines to mostly aid registered voters overseas, but I'm going to write about something more fundamental. A caveat up front: I can only speak credibly about what I saw in Dallas County, and not the rest of state or country.

Many people looked at the fierce competition for the 2008 Democratic Party Presidential nomination in horror. The seemingly unpredictable (debatable) and overwhelming (debatable, but less so) turnout and the tension between passionate, competitive supporters caused many people - even in red state Texas - to freak out. The impact of that contested primary continues to this day with every occasional "those Obama people" comment in Dallas Dem circles, whose intent varies from curiosity to skepticism.

(It's strange that I rarely hear "those Clinton people", but it could be the company I keep. Please share your experience in hearing "those Clinton people" in conversation.)

Many people saw chaos and discord. I completely agree. We had ample amounts of both in Dallas. Both candidates did a great job in getting new and casual voters excited and participating for once. Democrats had competing, compelling dreams embodied in two credible candidates: the first black U.S. President and the first female U.S. President. Unfortunately, the Texas Democratic Party (TDP) had just come out of a hard reboot in 2005 when enthusiasm and professionalism had hit a new low. Having all these "new" people involved and having expectations when they were just starting to manage the "old" people capably again led to very stressful moments and perhaps not the most thought-out decisions to cope. It was a crazy time, though, and I respect that everyone was trying to act responsibly.

The situation was exacerbated in my area by people in the Dallas County Democratic Party (DCDP) HQ betting early on Clinton, making party operations and the DCDP HQ seemingly a de facto extension of the Clinton campaign. I don't completely fault them for doing this. County Chairs all around the country were forgetting their obligation to take a neutral stance in primaries. Usually, the Democratic Presidential primary is done by the time it hits Texas (Thank you California!), so it became phenomenally exciting and awkward when the Presidential primary didn't get resolved in California in February. It wasn't obviously resolved until the time of the TDP state convention in June. That's an awfully long time to be squabbling over something when people aren't accustomed to it. It's entertaining in retrospect, but as a newlywed, I can attest that that sort of thing can leave a mark.

At this point, I could wade deeper into the weeds of the 2008 general election season. That's not the point of this. I hope you can forgive the warm-up. Years later, I can see that much of the primary-oriented discord in Democratic circles I saw in 2008, again in 2010, and likely will in 2012 comes not from Obama vs. Clinton tensions, though their names get brought up regularly. No, Obama and Clinton are convenient scapegoats for something more fundamental to squabble over.

After many years of having to beg people to run as Democrats in Texas, there lingers a profound unease and distrust of contested primaries in general. I see "Obama" and "Clinton" labels thrown on people in relation to that. I think it's a bit of a cop-out, but I think I get it. Obama was the brash upstart who didn't wait in line, and Hillary Clinton, a smart, capable person in her own right, was the establishment choice who got credit for the standing in line that her husband did. (Many people seem to have forgotten how controversial it was when she ran for U.S. Senate in New York.) The narrative around those two and the still-tender 2008 primary scars make for an easy shorthand.

Okay. That said, we've got these primaries coming up and I can already see the beginnings of particularly discordant battle lines being drawn. These lines aren't so much always on policy disagreements, but centered on words like "loyalty", "not his/her time", "frivolous", and even the hoary chestnut, "real Democrat". (I love that one. Usually, no matter the skin color, a Texas Democrat is more akin to a Republican in New York than a Democrat.)

I'm going to tell you something that my wife resents me saying. I love contested primaries. I've worked for incumbents and challengers in primaries and loved both experiences. The arguments against contested primaries can start high-minded (they usually don't), but so frequently it devolves into the emotional language of "loyalty", "not his/her time", "frivolous", and "real Democrat". I hear a lot of defense of those terms, so I'd like to offer a contrasting take: Perceived merit can trump all of that, and being nasty about it doesn't help you make your case.

I'm not that different than the people with which I debate this. I feel that tug on my heart and get a little wistful when a long-time, reliable Dem gets into a contested primary with someone who isn't an obvious fixture in what might be called "the never-ending battle". Part of me wants them to be the best choice and be able to just focus on the real opponent from the competing party. However, something wonderful is happening - even in red-state Texas. You have newer or less prominent Dem activists taking it to the next level and running for office. Some of them are dogcatchers, overreaching and a little naive, probably doomed to fail. Some of them, though, are smart, professional, energetic, and not just a credible candidate for the office they're running for, but a better asset to the broader ballot. I hear complaints about contested primaries making a run for office too expensive and undermining a favored candidate's general election chances. Quite frankly, I've also seen some of our revered Dem incumbents get taken down or come close to being taken down in the general election, and I think they would've been better served by having a primary opponent to get them better focused. The best defense against a contested primary for an incumbent is to do your job well and be prepared to talk about it with voters early and often. (Isn't that responsive government?)

Beyond that, though, here's the fundamental fact that should destroy the hand-wringing about contested primaries. Contested primaries are not an ugly mutation of our democratic process. Contested primaries are inherent to our democratic process and are part of the checks and balances that makes it work. When someone argues that contested primaries are a flaw in the system that damages good electeds or candidates, I see someone who either supports a weak candidate or doesn't believe in the democratic system.

Do I like it when a opportunistic dogcatcher enters a race and makes it more problematic and expensive for my favored candidate? Sure! I also don't like it when the Westboro Baptist people use their First Amendment rights to protest military funerals with "God Hates Fags!" signs. In both cases, I feel like someone is exploiting a virtue of the system in a way that makes me feel uncomfortable and that doesn't improve our society. I don't see how we can have the good stuff, though, without the less-good stuff. The less-good stuff should inspire us to do better. It should remind us of where we as a society have come from. Elections are a time when we must evaluate our choices. I'm not sure how that's supposed to work optimally if there is fewer of them at any stage of the process.

Shilling for Hubbard

 www.HubbardForSenate.com

I'm putting it out there that currently I'm part of the "kitchen cabinet" for the Sean Hubbard U.S. Senate campaign here in Texas. That means I contribute time and effort to his campaign and get to weigh in on decisions, but I don't come close to calling the shots and I don't get paid. Like many of my friends and acquaintances who are elected or are candidates, I get abouthalf of my calls/texts/emails to them answered, but few Christmas cards.

Anyway, Sean Hubbard is running as a Democrat for the open U.S. Senate seat in Texas, and I invite you to check out his website and Facebook page. For Democrats, he's a refreshing alternative to the latest DSCC recruit who I think is the product of a cynical, misguided calculation that military background + latino + conservative + no real DSCC support is a great choice for Democrats and other Texans. We're filthy in Texas with consultants and candidates with a dream who think they can trick red state voters into voting for Republican-lite Democrats who will run against the Democratic Party. Good Luck with that. We have dozens of Republican-lite Dems in Texas who got shown the door by voters in 2010 because soft R's and Indies have gotten savvier, spotting the "trick", and the Dem base in Texas is fed up with Dem candidates that show contempt for their values and the President they recently helped elect.

While Sean Hubbard is no tree-hugging hippy, he is a proud Texas Democrat who believes that women, particularly those who are the head of household, are the bedrock of our state and don't deserve the insulting treatment they sometimes receive in Texas, whether it be pay discrimination or access to resources to better themselves and those they take care of. Hubbard considers the LGBT community as equal partners in our society, even if some of our society is uncomfortable with other people's personal business. Hubbard isn't frightened by people eager to join this mutt of a nation founded by immigrants known as the United States of America. Hubbard believes there's a better balance to be struck between personal responsibility and community needs than what's being offered in Texas right now. Hubbard believes that evolution is a reality and that talk of secession is an offensive waste of time.

He's pretty much just as underfunded and overworked as his primary challenger. The difference is, he's part of what will make you proud to be a Democrat and a Texan. I highly recommend Texans contact the campaign to have him join an event in your area. His team is working to create new materials and media to spread his message and mission digitally. Until then, he's still happy to hop in a car or plane and talk to voters whenever he can. You can help out by clicking here.

Oh, I know he looks he can't legally buy a beer, but that's just blessed genetics and sunscreen at work. If elected to Senate, he'll be older than Joe Biden when he was first sworn into the Senate. Now, if I can get him to cut his hair more often...

Hello

I'm finding it harder to get out-and-about as a newlywed and new puppy owner. It's a tradeoff once I exited a footloose and fancy-free singleton. Plus, I'm having some of the same discussions over and over again. I'm going to use this space to expand on and work through conversations I'm having in the North Texas political wilderness.

So there.