July 15, 2018

On DiFi and Dems, Two Sentences Which Cannot Coexist at the Hill

Filed under: Activism,MSM Biz/Other Ignorance,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 6:54 pm

The Hill jumped to a hasty conclusion in the first bolded sentence below contradicted by the second bolded sentence. It’s based on California Democrats’ endorsement of incumbent Senator Dianne Feinstein’s opponent:

The California Democratic Party endorsed progressive candidate Kevin de León for Senate late Saturday in a stunning rebuke of 25-year incumbent and establishment favorite Dianne Feinstein.

De León, the state Senate president pro tempore, secured 65 percent of the party’s vote, while just 7 percent voted to endorse Feinstein.

A candidate needed 60 percent of the vote to win the endorsement. Twenty-eight percent of the body voted not to endorse any candidate.

“Today’s vote is a clear-eyed rejection of politics as usual in Washington, D.C.,” de León said in a statement. “Through years of hard-won progress, we have proven to the world that California can forge a path for the rest of the nation.”

“We have presented Californians with the first real alternative to the worn-out Washington playbook in a quarter-century,” he added.

The endorsement is a sign that the state’s politics are moving to the left as the country heads into a midterm showdown. De León has also secured endorsements from progressive environmental and labor groups.

Still, it is unlikely that he will beat Feinstein in the general election. In the state’s June primary, Feinstein won 44 percent of the vote, far ahead of de León’s 12 percent. The two candidates will face off in the November election because of the state’s top-two primary system.

The first bolded sentence assumes that “the state’s politics” is synonymous with the state’s Democrat and leftist politics.

The second bolded sentence shows, absent a very unexpected contrary result in the U.S. Senate general election, that the state’s politics are NOT synonymous with the state’s Dem-left politics. If they were, DeLeon would walk away with a November landslide. That seems unlikely.

A strong argument could be made the the 85 year-old Feinstein shouldn’t be running again anyway. I know other senators have remained into their 90s and that one made it past the century mark. That doesn’t make it right, and it’s virtually impossible to argue that the states represented by octogenarians didn’t (and in the case of California, don’t) have a single more qualified person available to serve.

Exit question: Should most Republican-dominated states go to a top-two primary system to shut the left out of politics? I believe the top-two approach exists in a different form in only a very few other states. Two which come to mind are Louisiana and Georgia. Georgia’s top-two approach may only apply to party primaries and not the general election.

Share

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.