Mediaboss Marketing

The Democratic presidential primary is over. Joe Biden is the presumptive nominee heading into the election. And this week, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren endorsed their former competitor.

On the left, the question is: What went wrong? How did Sanders lose to Biden? Why didnt Warren catch fire? But too few of these postmortems have had sufficient data to build out their theories. And too many of them explain away strategic and tactical failures as media or establishment conspiracies.

Sean McElwee has a different perspective. McElwee is the co-founder and executive director of Data for Progress, an organization that utilizes cutting-edge polling and data-analysis techniques to support progressive causes. His aim is to fashion an agenda that is both progressive and popular. But he also sits atop mountains of data that let him test hypotheses with a lot more rigor than most armchair pundits.

As a result, McElwee has a fascinating, heterodox view of the 2020 primary, the Sanders and Warren campaigns, and what it will take for progressives to build power. We discuss the critical mistakes both major progressive candidates made, which progressive ideas are most popular with the American people, how the lefts theory of class politics interferes with its most obvious path to electoral victory, why maximalist policy agendas fail even when they look like theyre succeeding, what good (and bad) Overton Window politics look like, how progressives can shape Bidens presidency, and much, much more.

You can listen to our full conversation by subscribing to The Ezra Klein Show, available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.

As a teaser to our discussion, here are some of McElwees findings:

Theres a lot more where that came from. You can listen to our full conversation by subscribing to The Ezra Klein Show, available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Support Voxs explanatory journalism

Every day at Vox, we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you, and our audience around the world, with information that has the power to save lives. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower you through understanding. Voxs work is reaching more people than ever, but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles, videos, and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires. Please consider making a contribution to Vox today.

Read more from the original source:
Why Bernie Sanders lost the presidential nomination and how progressives can still win - Vox.com

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis and more, subscribe to Mother Jones' newsletters.

Few things are clear about next years defense spending authorization billwhen Congress will be able to debate it, when it will be approved, when President Donald Trump might sign it. The only certainty, at a time when the coronavirus crisis has upended almost every known quantity in Washington, is that progressive Democrats are going to hate this legislation.

Every spring, Congress puts together a mammothbill that is supposed to authorize the Defense Departments spending for the next fiscal year, but usually contains dozens of unrelated amendments that help shape the federal governments national security policy. For decades, lawmakers passed the bill, known as the National Defense Authorization Actor NDAAwith strong bipartisan majorities and avoided prolonged debates over controversial policy matters.

That changed last year when the progressive flank of the House Democratic caucus pushed to include amendments limiting Trumps ability to spend Pentagon funds on his border wall, preventing him from starting a war with Iran without congressional approval, and ending American support for Saudi Arabias war in Yemen, among other things. None of those provisions made it into the compromise bill, which emerged after negotiations with the Republican-controlled Senate. In the end, progressives were left feeling discouraged.

This years debate originally presented an appealing opportunity for progressives in the House to extract concessions from Senate Republicans. Nearly every major Democratic presidential candidate has spent months calling for a rethinking of American national security strategy, which has been dominated by endless wars in the Middle East. Even Joe Bidenthe presumptive nominee, who is distrusted by many on the leftacknowledged to Military Timesthat the Pentagon can maintain a strong defense and protect our safety and security for less.Meanwhile, the Center for International Policys Sustainable Defense Task Forcecomposed of former government budget analysts, retired military leaders, and other expertsdetermined that the United States could save at least $1.25 trillion over the next decade by trimming the size of the military by 10 percent, eliminating waste and redundant positions, and halting the Trump administrations massive investment in nuclear weapons.

And now, the death toll and economic devastation caused by the coronavirus has reinforced the fact that there are urgent national priorities and security threats not named Russia, Iran, or ISIS that might require some of the resources normally reserved for the military. With the pandemic wreaking havoc on the US Navy, there would, perhaps, be no better time than this year to craft a compelling message against maintaining the Pentagons status quo.

But structural obstaclesincluding a lengthy,coronavirus-caused delay that is expected to push the passage of the bill into the next fiscal yearwill probably make any significant changes near impossible. There will probably be a prejudice within the leadership and the Congress to dispense with the NDAA as expeditiously as possible, Bill Hartung, director of the Center for International Policys Arms and Security Program, told me. Hartung is one of many advocates for a slimmer defense budget who views the pandemicas an appropriate moment to reset the eternal debate over how to spend the Pentagons money. But, because of the truncated schedule lawmakers now face, he doesnt expect reformers will have as many opportunities as last year to attempt to amend the NDAA.

Progressive advocates who are in touch with the committee staff crafting the House version of the bill have also tempered their expectations. It is very, very likely were going to see an NDAA that reflects business as usual, a source affiliated with a group that works on military issues told me, adding that this years legislation is just not designed to encompass the vision progressives had for last years bill.

The primary architect of the the House bill will be Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), who chairs the Armed Services Committee. Last year was his first time shepherding the NDAA process, and he was evidently no fan of how the debate unfolded. Liberal lawmakers stacked the bill with contentious policy provisions, resulting in a rare party-line vote in committee, zero Republican support from the rest of the House, and a compromise negotiation with the Senate that left progressive leaders like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) blasting the legislations astonishing moral cowardice. An exasperated Smith told Politicoat the time that he would be a lot more critical in the future of lawmakers trying to insert amendments that were not within our jurisdiction.

Whilethe delay in moving forward with the NDAAcould open the door to pandemic-related provisions that shore up the Pentagons response to the virus, its not likely the bill will be as expansive as in previous years. I think there is a renewed resolve, certainly by both Adam and me, to confine our bill to our issues, and not allow it to be a vehicle for lots of other wish lists that are not able to make it through other committees, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas), the committees top Republican, told Defense News earlier this month. Having gone through last year, everybody has a better understanding of what is and is not doable with a Democratic House and a Republican Senate and a Republican president.

Thats not to say Democrats wont offer amendments that challenge Trumps war-making authority. Smith told reporters last week that he expects to revisit the provisions from last years bill aimed at limiting American support to Saudi Arabia.

In a statement, a spokesperson for Smith said the chairman understands and shares the concerns of House liberals, as well as those of other House members. But this time around, progressive lawmakers say they arent going to support a bill without assurances that their priorities will be included in the final product. The progressives are not going to pass a House NDAA to give them license to strip all the progressive priorities from the bill, as it was last time. The leadership is going to have to make a choice, Khanna, an Armed Services Committee member, told reporters on a conference call Tuesday. Theyll either pass a progressive NDAA or pass a bill with Republican votes.

Continued here:
Progressives Are Going to Hate This Year's Defense Spending Bill - Mother Jones

Upset Wisconsin Supreme Court winner Jill Karofsky. Photo: John Hart/AP

There may have never been in living memory a more blatant voter suppression scheme outside the former Confederacy than the one Wisconsin Republicans and their federal and state judicial allies attempted this month. With the connivance of the legislature and the Wisconsin Supreme Court they controlled, the Badger State GOP insisted on holding an in-person election at the height of the coronavirus pandemic that was sure to disenfranchise many Democratic-leaning minority voters in Milwaukee. Meanwhile, the conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court stopped a federal judge from extending time for voters forced to vote by mail to receive and return their absentee ballots.

The big prize for Republicans in this maneuvering was a ten-year term on the state Supreme Court that would have ensured its judicial agents a majority on that powerful tribune until well into the next decade, making a Republican gerrymander of the legislature and the congressional delegation much more likely, along with a voter purge. The intended beneficiary was incumbent judge Daniel Kelly. But in a big upset delayed by slow-arriving absentee ballots (SCOTUS would not allow an extension of the April 7 voting deadline but left in place a ban on the announcement of results until April 13), Kellys progressive rival Jill Karofsky won the nonpartisan election, as David Nir reported:

Dane County Circuit Court Judge Jill Karofsky has unseated Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Dan Kelly in a key race that will narrow the courts conservative majority in this crucial swing state. The victory also sets progressives up to take control of the court when its next member is up for election.

Karofsky piled up big majorities in Milwaukee and Dane Counties but also held Kelly to smaller margins in the suburban and rural areas that were the mainstay of Kellys political patron Scott Walker and the Republicans controlling the legislature. It was an astonishing win for Wisconsin Democrats and may even reflect a popular backlash against Republican tactics, which risked many lives by demanding that voters who didnt receive mail ballots in time vote in person even though thousands of poll workers considered polling places so unsafe they didnt show up.

In what had become an afterthought, Joe Biden easily dispatched Bernie Sanders who formally endorsed him today in the Democratic presidential primary by a better than two-to-one margin. But turnout partially driven by the all-but-abandoned primary may have helped Karofsky. Now we will see if Wisconsin Republicans find some way to challenge the Supreme Court results despite their determination to go ahead with a mid-pandemic election. And Wisconsin Democrats have reason to feel more optimistic about the odds of recapturing their state for Biden in November.

Daily news about the politics, business, and technology shaping our world.

Read the rest here:
Progressive Upsets Conservative Judge After Suppressed Vote in Wisconsin - New York Magazine

Progressive Insurance has donated $2 million to establish the Trusted Choice COVID-19 Relief Fund in response to the economic and operational challenges the coronavirus crisis has presented to independent agencies.

The grant will be dispersed directly to independent agencies via an application processes via the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America (the Big I). Independent agencies can apply for assistance online.

The Big I is so grateful for Progressives generosity in leading the charge to support the independent agency community during these unprecedented times, said Bob Rusbuldt, Big I president & CEO, who created a video message to address the donation and new fund. Big I agents and agencies are facing unforeseen obstacles even as they seek to help their clients and communities in their time of need.

Rusbuldt said that with the impending loss of premium from retail and service businesses, independent agencies are now beginning to experience what many of their business clients are experiencing.

He said some agencies are also facing equipment shortages, staffing challenges and other challenges during the coronavirus pandemic.

Tricia Griffith, Progressive president and CEO, said that partnering with the Big I gives the insurer the ability to provide grant assistance quickly and broadly to agents across the country who are affected by this pandemic. By sticking together, well come through this stronger, she said.

Rusbuldt invited other insurance carriers and industry partners to also support this new 501(c)(3) charitable fund.

Progressive said it is also sending checks worth more than $2 million to its approved auto repair and auto body shops across the country. The insurer said it recognizes that many of these shops face uncertainty due to fewer claims that come from less frequent driving. The shops can use the money for any purpose.

The donations are part of Progressives broader relief program that will also return approximately $1 billion in premiums to customers.

Other Assistance

There have been a few other reported efforts to aid insurance agents during this crisis.

In another move to help agencies, earlier this month The Travelers Companies announced that it will accelerate commission payments to eligible agents and brokers to help them ease liquidity concerns due to the COVID-19 crisis. In total, Travelers said it is accelerating more than $100 million, which it called a significant boost of cash flow to its distribution partners when they need it most.

Also, Brightway Insurance has altered its franchise contract to make it easier to attain franchise ownership during the current coronavirus pandemic. The company is offering a stay-at-home option for franchisees to launch their businesses while deferring costs incurred until they are able to open their insurance store.

Get the latest insurance newssent straight to your inbox.

See the original post here:
Progressive Gives $2M to Big I Fund to Aid Agencies Affected by Coronavirus Crisis - Insurance Journal

When it became clear last month that former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. would almost certainly win the Democratic nomination, many of the progressive Democrats who supported other presidential candidates were disappointed but not deterred. They quickly shifted their electoral focus to candidates lower on the ballot.

The plan was straightforward: They would donate to a slew of insurgent congressional candidates, and a stable of grass-roots groups would be ready and waiting to organize for the general election and beyond.

But that was in a pre-pandemic America, before the spread of the coronavirus caused thousands of deaths, about 10 million new unemployment claims in two weeks, and the halting of public events in the presidential race. Now many progressive candidates and the organizations that support them are struggling to adapt to a bleak reality dried up fund-raising, unclear election dates, and a moratorium on tried-and-true political tactics like in-person phone banks and door-to-door canvassing.

Its an immediate effect on how we can plan, how we can grow, and even our month-to-month cash flow, said Amanda Litman, the executive director of Run for Something, one of the many Democratic organizations founded after President Trumps 2016 victory. Its really scary, because the candidates need more support than ever. And political fund-raising right now is plummeting, as is the rest of the economy.

Ms. Litman said her group had already been forced to cancel fund-raising that was expected to bring in nearly $500,000. The coronavirus, she said, has made basic operational questions including Run for Somethings survival through the November general election a more open question.

There are also political challenges, said Waleed Shahid, a spokesman for Justice Democrats. Insurgent candidates are more likely to rely on door-to-door canvassing and rallies to show enthusiasm, activities that are functionally discontinued until further notice. Progressive candidates also tend to rely exclusively on small-dollar donations, which have experienced a downturn as people tighten their budgets.

Incumbents have certain advantages in a crisis, namely access to the media as a voice of authority, Mr. Shahid said.

The grim picture may have a profound political impact for the general election and beyond. Democrats were poised to have an organizing juggernaut ready for the 2020 election, with the goal of both reaching new voters and helping reverse the state and local losses they experienced during President Barack Obamas years in power. Even more, liberal groups hoped this election cycle would formalize their political infrastructure, so the activism that erupted in response to Mr. Trumps election could be harnessed going forward.

That may still happen, but it will require creative financial and digital solutions, according to interviews with several leaders of progressive political organizations and left-wing candidates running for office in states like New York and Ohio. Optimists have called it a time for political innovation, while others worry the structural barriers could stymie the progressive movement at a critical crossroads.

The outcome is of particular importance because the two most liberal presidential candidates, Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, were surpassed in the primary race by the more moderate Mr. Biden. Ms. Warren ended her presidential bid last month, and Mr. Sanders still says his campaign has a narrow path but is facing increased calls from allies to cede the nomination to Mr. Biden.

The left-wing Working Families Party had to recall waves of canvassers who were collecting signatures for congressional, state and local candidates endorsed by the group. It has also scrapped multiple in-person initiatives: a volunteer training program that was to begin imminently and a two-day organization-wide convention in Milwaukee that was scheduled for May.

On the campaign side, Ohio canceled its primary just one day before voters in the states Third Congressional District were set to vote in a Democratic primary between Morgan Harper, a community activist who had previous jobs at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and as a corporate lawyer, and Representative Joyce Beatty, an incumbent with a long history in state politics. The state has rescheduled its primary to April 28, but has also mandated that nearly all voters submit ballots by mail, a move Ms. Harper said might depress turnout and give an advantage to candidates with higher name recognition.

People are very stressed about contracting an infectious disease that has the potential to kill you while also dealing with the disruption to financial life right now, Ms. Harper said. And in the midst of that, while experiencing extreme financial stress, were going to ask them to have the wherewithal to go to a website, request an application, print it out and mail it back in just to get a ballot.

Suraj Patel, one of several challengers running in New Yorks 12th Congressional District against the incumbent Democrat, Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, contracted the coronavirus in March, forcing him into quarantine.

The situation disrupted his campaign schedule, though he has been trying to work from home. Mr. Patel said his small dollar fund-raising had dropped off by 80 percent by the end of March.

No doubt fund-raising is way, way, way down, Mr. Patel said. And its difficult to even ask people to give when most of them are either furloughed or at home or uncertain of whats going to happen.

There have been some silver linings for progressive candidates. Ms. Harper and Mr. Patel have ramped up digital contact with voters and repurposed campaign tools to provide information about coronavirus safety.

Jamaal Bowman, a progressive who is mounting a campaign against the stalwart incumbent Representative Eliot L. Engel in New Yorks 16th Congressional District, pivoted to an online-only operation in a matter of days, said his campaign manager, Luke Hayes.

One of the things about having such a broad base of small donors is that while asking them for that recurring donation of 10 dollars a month, you cultivate a relationship with them, Mr. Hayes said. I think some incumbents, you know, they just expect kind of checks brought in just based on their stature.

Just as in the business world, where new digital tools have exploded in use, fresh political technology is also helping to fill gaps. Outvote, a political start-up in Boston that allows users to send voting and other political information to people in their social networks, has seen a rise in interest from progressive campaigns and causes as the pandemic spreads. Some have begun using Outvote to disseminate information about how to guard against the virus, said Naseem Makiya, the companys founder.

On Thursday, the Progressive Turnout Project, a political action committee that supports liberal candidates, announced a nearly $3 million investment in phone banking that aims to leverage up to 12 million calls from volunteers to lower-propensity Democratic voters before Election Day in November.

The more impersonal the mode, the less effective youre going to get, said Alex Morgan, the groups executive director. So while it is great that a bunch of groups are hopping onto text messages and digital, thats more distant than you and I having a conversation right now.

But progressives are also hoping that their message of big ideas has a new resonance in this moment of crisis. In interviews, group leaders said they were confident the pandemic had strengthened their calls for systemic change by exposing cracks in the countrys economy and health care system.

Ms. Litman said Run for Something, even with looming financial questions, had seen interest from prospective local candidates hold steady throughout March. Rahna Epting, the executive director of the progressive group MoveOn, said its membership had grown by more than one million in March.

What were seeing is that the energy that normally we would funnel into physical protests and physical action, the energy is there and its growing exponentially, she said.

On Sunday, the Working Families Party held its first digital rally, with appearances from the Rev. William J. Barber II and Stacey Abrams, who ran unsuccessfully for governor of Georgia in 2018 and now leads the voting rights group Fair Fight Action. Working Families plans to hold its May convention remotely.

You know, it took me some time to get my parents FaceTiming with me in a way that made sense, said Maurice Mitchell, the national director of Working Families. And I think thats happening on a broader level where people have different fluency with different types of technology. Were all kind of learning together.

Original post:
Progressives Built an Organizing Juggernaut for 2020. Then the Virus Hit. - The New York Times