Dennis Kucinich, the eight-term Congressman from Cleveland, lost his bid for re-election last night in a primary to fellow Rep. Marcy Kaptur. Ohio lost two seats after the 2010 reapportionment, and eliminated a seat in the Cleveland region, giving Kucinich few options. He decided to try to defeat Kaptur largely on her turf, and came up well short, 55-41. In places like Lucas County, home to Toledo, the base that Kaptur has represented for 15 terms, she trounced Kucinich 94-3, and he could not make up the ground elsewhere.
The district itself is a monument to gerrymandering, connecting a small piece of Cleveland and Toledo on a 120-mile stretch along Lake Erie.
Kucinich was an often lonely voice in Congress, particularly on matters of war. The criticism that he didn’t accomplish a great deal in his eight terms merely reflects the fact that his take on the issues placed him well to the left of the Democratic mainstream. Kaptur is a reliably liberal and even populist vote on economic issues. She’s also anti-choice and was a major thorn in the party’s side on the Stupak amendment, a real black mark in her record.
But this race came down to geographics, and it was foolish to hope that Kucinich could pull off the upset. There’s been persistent talk that Kucinich would move to Washington state to find a seat, and that could still happen – he has until May 18 to get on the primary ballot. He doesn’t have a whole lot of options in Washington, however, given their redistricting changes and his profile. He may have to face another incumbent or take part in an open-seat race in a less liberal district than what he represented in Ohio.
The Kaptur-Kucinich primary was the first of a handful of races across the country where incumbents will face one another due to redistricting. Kaptur goes on to face Joe the Pumber, who inexplicably ran for a seat designed to be Democratic vote sink, in the general election.
In other primary races in Ohio, Mean Jean Schmidt lost to a challenger who ran to her right, and former Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy lost a Columbus-area race. Those of us expecting that incumbents would face a poisonous electoral environment this year were not disappointed in Ohio, and with Congressional approval numbers under 10%, that looks like it will only continue.





64 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
I watched one of the debates and Kaptur would constantly say “I agree with President Obama”. I guess you have to obey the higher ups to get anywhere in congress nowadays. Kaptur also takes money from the Military Industrial Complex. Just go to opensecrets.org
Why doesnt Kucinich run as an Independent?
Once again Obamabots fuck over true liberals.
this result is disheartening to say the least. there is an open seat in my district in california also where gerrymandering originally brought david dreier in on reagan’s coattails and where righting that wrong of 32 years ago is now compelling him to quit. (thank gawd.) recently the seat has been tougher and tougher for dreier to win, (though i am sure conventional wisdom would suggest it remains to conservative for kucinich,) still i would love for him to move here and i would personally work my ass off for him.
The real work is being done outside the system. Dennis should join Occupy.
Go Occupy!
Because he’d lose. And probably cost Kaptur the seat as well.
Boxturtle (not that Kaptur is any great prize, but she’s better than the gOP alternative)
That’s actually not bad advice. Spend a couple years with Occupy, get himself some national recognition, make sure people know he is no longer the “boy mayor” and run again.
Boxturtle (I think running to another state would be a career killer)
A liberal, anti-choice Dem sounds like an oxymoron to me. How does she walk that tightrope?
YES! . . .And BT @ #5, I don’t think he’d lose.
Kaptur and those like her are largely popular with a certain part of the college educated professionals that suck up to TPTB. They do not want to lose their McMansions and BMWs and private schools. In some ways worse than repugs because they are a whole lot more weaselly. The Grimma Wormtungs of the liberal establishment as it were.
my problem with Kucinich is he NEVER introduced a bill when the dems had the majority in the house.
every progressive bill he introduced was when the republicans had control and nothing could come from it.
You’re missing the point. It’s not about getting “national recognition” because Occupy is a horizontal, democratic movement. It’s about getting things accomplished. Dennis will be able to get far more accomplished working within Occupy than he ever will within the “system.”
ps. obama never wanted a democratic house and having the republicans in control there satisfies his right wing agenda just fine.
Maybe at some point the “liberals” will get the point, and realize that the whole of the political class is against them. Their near-unanimous support of ten years of austerity planning last year should have been the wake-up call. Never mind Kucinich’s capitulation on the PPACA. Kucinich’s departure from Congress will remove someone from Congress we can pretend is “on our side.”
While I often disagree with Dennis, I like him personally very much and am sad to see him go.
You echo my feelings. I don’t live in Ohio, but… Kucinich has often *talked* a good game, but when it’s come down to *doing* something… well… I’d like to give K the benefit of the doubt bc I do suspect that there’s intense pressure (in various forms, including possibly being threatened of being hurled from an airplane) to “toe the line.”
Possibly this is a good thing for K. Maybe he can do more good by working outside the system. The “system,” as it were, is totally broken, and I truly don’t think it can be “fixed” by working “inside” it.
I love Marcy & Dennis! The video links below are some of the reasons why the obama administration worked with Ohio’s rep. boehner & gov. kasich to redistrict Kaptur’s & Kucinich’s districts together. It was a goldman sachs special
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1QLZtSRrOk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YimTs6Q_xD0
He called Obamacare “The health Insurance Companies Protection Act” and voted for it a week later.
He talked the talk, but when crunch time came, he faded.
Yeah, like most of the “Progressive Caucus” in the House, he was more mouth than action. A bit sad to see him go down to a more Blue Dog Democrat, but as that is how all Democrats are going these days, not too surprising.
Why, it’s almost as though you’d have to vote Green, or Socialist, or Justice to get anything done. But apparently that’s unpossible. Realignments only happen every 80 years or so. 1770s, 1850ss, 1930s, ____?
And so the slow march of the Democratic Party rightward continues. His voice will be missed.
Can we now please have articles about non Democratic candidates on the front page?
Like say, Rocky Anderson? Instead of “Obama’s latest betrayal” or the latest Republican Clown Car Circus debacle.
For the love of God folks. If you have not gotten it yet, here is the political reality.
The Democratic Party is where progressive politics and movements go to die. Oh and yes, Dennis Kucinich DID cave on the health care bill. That is not so much a condemnation of him as it is of his party and its leadership.
Voting lesser evil only strengthens the rightward ratchet of the Ds.
She counts on tribal loyalty/lesser evil.
Or Jill Stein (Green Party). Or Stewart Alexander (Socialist Party). Kucinich is middle-right of the road. We need to pull the discussion much, much leftward.
Or how about ALL of them?
The job of the media is to inform the public and let that informed public make a decision based upon the facts.
To only focus on the Republican Clown Car Circus or complaining about the latest Obama betrayal is not informing us. We have MSNBC, Current TV, Air America et al for that.
The article just below us (here on the front page of FDL) is that gas bag T Boggs. So can those of us who have been freaking right, so often and for so long get some front page action? Or shall we carry on, on the sidebar?
That entirely depends on what you consider the definition of “better” is.
If I’m going to have to deal with a conservative I’d rather deal with a real one than one masquerading in Dem clothing.
Michael.
Michael, Michael, Michael.
Now … you already know the answer to that question.
Let us hap-hazard a guess, shall we?
In about three to four “election cycles” the American electorate IS going to get “it”.
In the meantime, and it will BE a VERY mean, and nasty, time, indeed and in fact … FDL will be pressured, very, very HARD to get “IN” … initially, ON the Obama bandwagon, and then on the gebandwagon of whomever is anointed “top” Dem, it might be some “rising star”, like Elizabeth Warren or an old stalwart such as Nancy (on or off … the table, depending …) Pelosi.
That is the prevailing bad news.
Now, the good news is that Occupy … has cut that “learning curve” the length of time required for the teach-to-the-test “edumacation” of “the people” in, approximately, half … so, instead of being twenty to thirty years, it will only take about ten to fifteen years …
I realize that is a very depressing perspective, however, it is not as depressing as it could be.
Just to hearten everyone who is now even more despondent. Let us look on the bright side. Certain “events” or “trends”, should they come to pass, will speed the “proce$$” along … even if it might seem, at first blush, that these “eventualities” or “happenstances” would strengthen the death-grip of the 1% …
Take, for example, a war with Iran. The conventional wisdom will hold, no doubt, that such an adventure will be a cakewalk or a slam-dunk … it just might not turn out that way …
Or, ponder a continuing rise in the price of gasoline. Think of the “collateral damage”; nobody would go anywhere and nobody would buy anything, except food and clothing … and pay, somehow, for shelter.
As one may see, this would bring things right down to the “basics”, in a VERY understandable way. Only those who were, really, “somebody” would be able to “do” anything frivolous, and even they would not find much of anything to celebrate at whatever “destrucination” they were contemplating attending. Perhaps, these somebody folks could go out to a bar, but there would be NO live music. Perhaps, these somebody folks might go to a movie, but no one would sell them popcorn, because there would not be any popcorn, nor any nobody people to sell it to the somebody people … as there are simply not enough somebody people to create (although they COULD “pay” for) an actual economy that relies on numbers of all kinds of people doing all kinds of “things”.
Of course, the somebody people could twiddle their money and hang out with their somebody friends but, eventually, there would not be any wine, nor caviar, nor cocaine … nor anything, because every nobody person would be too concerned about basic survival and would not be much inclined to kowtow to somebody people who have everything when nobody people have nothing.
Unfortunately, it will, likely, have to be that stark and THAT obvious before enough nobody people all, together, say “Enough!!!!”
We now return you to your two-party, and ONLY two-party, programming …
DW
It saddened me to learn of Kucinich’s loss last night. His consistent highly moral, and reasoned, stance against war and the rise of militarism in this country will not soon be replaced in Congress. The word “inspire” often comes to mind when I think of Kucinich. Thank you, Mr. Kucinich, for speaking out when so few of your colleagues were afraid to do so.
Oh, I hope you’re right – I hope it’s only 10-15 years. But I fear even that long and we’ll be looking at severe violence.
I apologize that I still don’t understand why the front page seldom has articles on parties other than R or D (I should say RD, since it is truly one party, not two).
I understand sometimes there are necessary tradeoffs, and a gray area now and then.
Yet if there ever were an unequivocal disqualifier, I can think of nothing firmer than for a Dem to have an antichoice stance. It’s simply a be-no.
The unique problem with this one, especially nowadays, is that it’s not just “choice” that’s under attack. It’s the sly, corrosive method of cutting off funding from many gov’t sources which will ultimately make choice difficult or moot it out, Row v Wade notwithstanding. I think that leaves little room for an anti choice Dem in the mix. Maybe I’m too much an alarmist in that regard?
Perhaps it wouldn’t be as big a deal for Kaptur’s necessities if one were absolutely sure the Dems will comfortably take back the House anyway, keep the Senate and WH to boot. I’m afraid that’s too risky an assumption, hope as one may.
Kaptur bady needs to rework this. Or Kucinich needs to run if he thinks there’s a way to win.
Correct. That is why he won’t help downticket Dems in races in the House and Senate. He wants what Clinton enjoyed: a Republican Congress so he can complete his corporate takeover and have smooth sailing on cutting Social Security, etc. His second term is going to be a doozy as far as catering to the elites at the expense of the people. A Republican congress means he can tell Pelosi to get bent. He’ll keep her in the green room while he cuts his deals with who ever takes over for Boehner as Republican Speaker and McConnell in Harry Reid’s slot.
Face it, most here are like Kucinich: wildly progressive when it doesn’t matter much.
Diaries about third parties/challenges to Obama don’t get a lot of attention. Diaries about some progressive betrayal do, but when it moves into the “Let’s DO something about this!” stage, not so much – unless it is some “work within the system” crap.
For instance, I promised that we would never get single payer unless we surrounded congress with a million or so bodies in a peaceful vigil, reading names of victims of Health care companies and so on. I also promised that if we did that, we would get single payer.
How could I promise that? I know history – and I know that that many citizens in close proximity scare the shit out of sellout congresscritters, no matter how peaceful they are. That’s the secret.
I was ignored and SURPRISE! No single payer, no public option. Thank the stars for OWS, they’re our only hope. At least they get it.
As long as progressives visibly have no place to go but the Democrats, the Democrats will treat them like cur dogs willing to eat the occasional scrap. They can whine, bark and moan, but nobody will listen. Let a few million people vote even for Mickey Mouse, much less Socialists or Greens, and suddenly they will become relevant.
I’m sure Oilybumbler is happy about getting rid of Kucinich. You know the Wizard of O held him in contempt, just like he holds in contempt anyone on the Left who has the balls to question Dear Leader’s decisions.
Oilybumbler wants compliant servants in Congress, Blue Dog lackeys who’ll kiss his neoliberal ring.
Kucinich caved because there was a provision for states to develop their own health care systems, thus opening a crack in the wall for single payer to be established on a state by stae basis. Vermont is in the lead on that. He knew it was the only way to get it done given the Obama/Baucas tag team.
As he once said, “The Democratic Party sucks”.
PS: Take another liberal icon, Barney Frank.
The guy got real power: Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. While there, he far outpaced even the pro-banker Republicans in campaign contributions from the banks and Wall Street. So what did he do? He produced Dodd Frank, the biggest sellout since the Medicare drug benefit. It didn’t restore any of the protections ended under Clinton and Bush against rapine by the bankers – he made sure of that. Too big to fail is still with us, just for starters, and I could go on and on. Now he is retiring to get his payoff, and it will be huge. But he is still an honored guest on Maddow and other “progressive” shows, because he can be counted on to be witty, clever and acerbic about some social issue he never had the power to significantly affect.
9 out of 10 here – at least – would still call him a great liberal. Maddow does They are suckers and he is laughing all the way to the bank.
Barney Frank is a lying slob. He’s an arrogant tool who thinks he knows everything. He never got nailed for his bankster protection racket, but he’s just as corrupt as any garden variety Repug. He may be a little liberal on social issues, but like most Dims he sucks up to the corporatist teat.
i love fdl, (and i had this argument once with jane directly,) but the only thing i don’t like about it is how unrealistic and uncompromising the coomunity can be. some here do not want to work inside the system?! wtf? you want armed uprising? how effective do you think that will be? the only way to make change in america is to work with the great framework the founding fathers gave us and change it from within. (now let’s get the money out.) speaking of which did anyone see dennis kucinich’s speech at the dnc when obama was nominated? class warfare is over america, you lost! all the crying about oh, dennis caved on healthcare. can you imagine that? he compromised. what a creep.
we’re right fire dog pups. that said we do not have to be so rigid that we cut off our noses to spite our face.
magilla, you are absolutely correct.
Guess people are just sick and tired of getting screwed.
i agree totally. the same lack of action when otherwise able goes for:
Pelosi
Hoyer
Reed
Oblabla
the entire leadership is worthless
the system has become corrupted primarily by money. we need to restore the tone of service to public office instead of the idea that it equates to power which in turn produces wealth. i respect obama and some of the others who work within the system. if it was up to this community i sometimes wonder if we would just stop participating and watch the religious right take over and run the country into the ground. imagine of pelosi, hoyer, reed and oblabla abstained and we had four republicans in their places. welcome to north korea.
Since we are talking of liberal icons and their betrayals.
My favorite. Congressman John Conyers. He was the very first candidate in the country who called for Impeachment of Bush. For the record, I believe that I was the second.
John Conyers was placed at the head of the Judiciary Committee. The very Committee that spear heads an Impeachment Investigation. John Conyers became the biggest obstacle to Impeachment of Bush and/or Cheney. I even strongly suspect that I know why that is. Hint- hiding certain Democratic Party leadership direct complicity in the crimes of the Bush Administration.
I will disagree though about the time line. I really do believe that the time for the over throw of the entire corporate corrupted system will come sooner than we think.
Yes, those of us who have been right all along get smeared and attacked. Which does nothing but expose those who attack us. Even here at FDL. Yes we do not get coverage in the corporate media or the 501c3 Industrial Complex “progressive” blog o sphere.
Despite all of this, I do firmly hold that the time is coming and it is coming soon.
The truth of the level of the corruption is getting out there.
Michael, hope you’re right. But I’ve talked to many liberals and they are all Obamabots. Even after O-blah blahs crappy presidenting, they still stand firm for their man.
I truly thought this would be the election that people would wake up, but alas, it has been a wash, per usual.
My barometer is Cspan morning callers. The tales of woe I hear there are heartbreaking. This is modern America: getting along on slave wages and no healthcare. Sad.
There needs to be a concerted two prong approach and both sides need to show respect to the other side(progressives that decide to work within the party need to respect and not demean those that are working on a secondary structure).
The reason the right is successful is because they do not disparage their pioneers and voices that push forward ideas that start off outside the norm of mainstream.
That doesn’t happen on our side. As a result we start off from the center and state of compromise.
Take the Health care debate. There was a concerted effort to shut out single payer activists. Something like that would never have happene had they been on the right side of the aisle. As a result they are much better at ratcheting and leveraging the conversation toward the right.
Barney Frank is a liberal icon???? Is this snark?
Do you honestly believe this corrupt gov’t can be saved? In my 40 or so years, each year brings more heartache.
I think we are done here. Time to start from scratch.
Guess what – we tried change from within in (trust me, this was the argument – do we go the way of SDS and violence or do we remain peaceful and change from within)the 60′s and 70′s and most the hippies grew up to be bought-out Republicans. That from within stuff just doesn’t work.
Conyers has NEVER walked the walk.
I do not believe in the system as it stands. It does not work for the average citizen. That being said I do think that no matter how you approach this you are going to need to work both within infrastructure you already have and have a plan b. As it stands right now the Democrats are able to leverage the idea that they aren’t as bad as the alternative(like in the case of anti choice Marcy Kaptur) and escape punishment.
I also think activists on the left need to put away the idea that their is a shortcut to achieving their goals and the idea that they can get the media on their side. The media is not our friend.
Bravo Michael. The result of endless posts on either Obama or “pick any Republican” is to continue the belief in a two party system in which we must pick the “lesser of two evils”. Where are all the posts on the beliefs and ideas from those candidates outside of the corporate parties?
No shortcut. For twenty years, more in fact, people have been saying to support the Dims no matter what. Work within the system! And how has that worked out? The Dimocratic fat cat establishment has NO use for average people, much like the Repugnant Party. How do you unseat hundreds of corporate whores in the Dimocratic party?
Answer: you don’t. You can’t. They don’t want us around. They don’t give a shit about our concerns.
I once thought a third party would be the answer, but that’s a dead end, too.
Judging from the elite attacks on OWS, I think this is what they fear the most, hence the new legislation against protesting on gov’t property.
Perhaps OWS is the answer, I don’t know. But for the love of god, reforming the Dims is a loser strategy.
To be fair to Jane and FDL they actually have stated on numerous occasions that the site is dedicated to issues as opposed to wanting to focus on candidates per se.
I get the impressions that the horse race posts are secondary. I also give Jane credit because many of the Democratic leaning sites treat those that want to create an outside party as lepers. I haven’t seen that here. While there is no front pager that advocates for third parties there definitely seems to be a receptiveness to working with people who might be inclined towards third parties.
I know most FDL posters see no difference between the parties and resent the lack of options. But reality is what it is. And with stats saying that in 94% of the cases the best funded candidate wins, it is a commentary on the electorate more than the political parties.
The reason Dennis Kucinich is out is because a Republican governor and majorities in Ohio’s House and Senate were able to get into office and redistrict him away. Had that not happened, both he and Kaptor wouldn’t have been competing. It’s happening all over. You may not like the Democrats, but I suspect in most cases that if Democrats had been in power the last two years at the state level, you wouldn’t see the same amount of new voting rules, vaginal probe laws, drug testing for unemployment bills, etc. as you are now. But if you really think there’s no difference, keep letting the the GOP take over.
And for those who apparently advocate for more of the SDS violent approach, I question the logic. I’ve heard people criticize glitter bombing much less more serious destruction. Most have an aversion to that type of tactic, so those who perpetrate it just get labeled as extremists. It won’t bring about change. Just public condemnation and jail.
You acknowledge that the system is corrupted by money then say you respect Obama for working within that system???? If a system no longer functions and is completely corrupted, why should we work to continue it? Shouldn’t we look for a new system outside of the corrupted system that might actually work for the majority of citizens?
As for liberals, the problem in large part is that we aren’t actually talking about people with “liberal” beliefs, we are talking about the “liberal class”. As Chris Hedges stated, the liberal class “prefers comfort and privilege to justice, truth and confrontation. Its guiding ideological stance is determined by what is most expedient to the careers of its members. It refuses to challenge, in a meaningful way, the decaying structures of democracy or the ascendancy of the corporate state. It glosses over the relentless assault on working men and women and the imperial wars that are bankrupting the nation. It proclaims its adherence to traditional liberal values while defending and promoting systems of power that mock these values.The pillars of the liberal establishment—the press, the church, culture, the university, labor and the Democratic Party—all honor an unwritten quid pro quo with corporations and the power elite, as well as our masters of war, on whom they depend for money, access and positions of influence. Those who expose this moral cowardice and collaboration with corporate power are always ruthlessly thrust aside.” iconoclasm12 just provided an example of this.
I think you could reform the Dems but you are working up against a very comfortable with status quo leadership.
I also think that people that think the Green or Justice party are the solution need to recognize that there is a very real possibility that IF their particular solution were to gain power that they would be subject to the same type of problems that infect the Democratic party( monied influences would utilize money to co opt the party).
The first thing people need to recognize is that democracy is hard work and apathy and stagnation are enemies to it.
As for liberals, the problem in large part is that we aren’t actually talking about people with “liberal” beliefs, we are talking about the “liberal class”. As Chris Hedges stated, the liberal class “prefers comfort and privilege to justice, truth and confrontation.
That’s a pretty broad statement. I know quite a few people, myself included, that jettisoned Obama because they ultimately felt that there were principles that just would not compromise and because they did not like that when they questioned things that they were mocked and derided for doing so. So I would say that there is a pretty decent portion of the liberal class that is comfortable with confrontation, justice and truth. The problem is they do not control the levers of power. The ones in power are perfectly comfortable with compromising on behalf of the 99% because ultimately those compromises will not affect them in a meaningful way.
I agree with you that the focus at FDL has been on issues and usually reflects the beliefs of those who are the humanitarians in our society. Bravo for that. But, if we want to be part of a political solution on issues, then how about at the very least, instead of the endless “Obama said” or “Romney stated”, that we see more interviews with other politicians. Many people don’t vote for candidates outside of the two parties simply because they don’t know where those candidates even stand on the issues. If we disagree with those candidates outside of the two parties, we can state as such. But, at least we would get different perspectives.
How do you define “liberal”?
My definition is a very loose definition but generally I see liberals as open minded and tolerant. They support women and choice, they support the LBTG community, they prefer diplomacy to war in almost every aspect(including drug war), they support immigrants and immigration reform, they support social programs and social safety nets…..There are probably other issues but this generally is how I define liberal.
Most of us aren’t afraid of a fight, if we were we’d define ourselves as progressive(because the mean ol’ conservatives took the word and denigrated it.)
There are some very big differences within the left in how we deal with conflict. The party “realists” and “idealists” need to work together though and they need to do so without disparaging the others’ point of view.
Marcy Kaptur – anti-choice, Democratic party.
President Obama – does not believe in marriage equality, Democratic party.
Passage of H.R. 347 which makes protests at a National event of consequence a felony – unanimous vote FOR the bill by Democratic party. Also, see Patriot Act and NDAA.
Unprecedented number of deportations under the Obama administration – Democratic party
Establishment and pushing of a “debt commission” which attacks social safety nets by President Obama – Democratic party
The list unfortunately is long. So, do you continue to support the Democratic party even though the actual policies are far from “liberal”? As for those of us who are and have been “open-minded” and “tolerant”, those very ideas have been used against us. We are told that it is “radical” to believe in social justice, civil rights, and humanity. We must, must, must compromise our beliefs and because we are “open-minded” we also will understand why we compromised. But, at what point do we lose our basic humanity by agreeing to have a party represent us that does not remotely represent our beliefs?
I think that would be especially ironic considering Kucinich voted yes on HR 347.
The real problem with violence is that it begets violence – and worse, marshall law. However, only the sheer number of us scares TPTB and I saw, in the 60′s, what the assumed threat of potential violence (not the act itself) could accomplish. It wasn’t the protestor’s threat, it was the fear of those being protested against and that fear came from the number of protestors.
I didn’t vote for Obama in 2008 because I thought his natural inclination was more conservative then I felt comfortable with. If I was going to get stuck with a conservative then I felt that the conservatives should get the blame for their policy position.
I’m not a Kaptur fan. I would definitely have preferred Kuchinich.
That isn’t saying that I haven’t gone out of my way to try and find common ground with those that did vote for him and push back.
He also was one of the few people that took the time to write a bill for a single payer system.
Considering you weren’t there to hear closed door conversations I think you are being awful tough on him.
Writing a bill for a single payer system would be impressive even if it had no chance of passing — if it weren’t for the fact that he voted for a privatized mandate that gives the health industry millions of subsidized dollars to buy even more lobbyists to fight real reform like single payer, as well as for legal fees to fight single payer on the state level.
As for not being there for closed door conversations, that’s just an overused tired excuse mainly utilized by democratic loyalists who are at peace with the idea of insiders running wild and screwing over the 99%. So nobody can understand except for the insider politicians. Thank goodness they’re around so they can make the decisions contrary to what the majority of Americans want, right?