Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey and Joe Nation in CA-06
Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey is a House Member with an impressive voting record. That analysis (from Joshua Grossman's website Progressive Punch) lists Woolsey as one of the most progressive members of Congress.
Term-limited CA State Assemblyman Joe Nation is running against Congresswoman Woolsey in the Democratic primary in CA-06. The local press doesn't give him much of a chance. I honestly don't know. I'm sure, however, that this race will get some attention this year. Conventional wisdom puts this as a "more centrist" challenge (Nation) of a "progressive Dem" (Woolsey).
Here's what Assemblyman Nation lists as his reasons for making this challenge. The phrase "a rubberstamp Democratic vote" notwithstanding (what does that mean to imply?), clearly, someone who's willing to challenge a popular incumbent is nothing if not amibitious.
I'm curious what the community here makes of this. Democratic primaries are a two-edged sword. At their best, progressives and reformers can have an impact on the party. At their worst, they are divisive, and if not that, then at the very least they are distracting. As a matter of principle, however, no elected official is guaranteed their seat without debate and challenge; if that applies to Joe Lieberman then it has gotta apply to Lynn Woolsey too.
Truth is, if the two candidates are both worthy Democrats on some level, I think it's important to acknowledge that. If there are real ideological or character differences...well, then that should be made clear and put to the voters in a constructive manner.
I guess the question for Assemblyman Nation is, "Why should the voters in CA-06 send you to Washington in preference to Congresswoman Woolsey?"
And my question to readers here is: "What do you make of this? What should term-limited Dems do when they are in Assemblyman Nation's position?"
Your thoughts?
Term-limited CA State Assemblyman Joe Nation is running against Congresswoman Woolsey in the Democratic primary in CA-06. The local press doesn't give him much of a chance. I honestly don't know. I'm sure, however, that this race will get some attention this year. Conventional wisdom puts this as a "more centrist" challenge (Nation) of a "progressive Dem" (Woolsey).
Here's what Assemblyman Nation lists as his reasons for making this challenge. The phrase "a rubberstamp Democratic vote" notwithstanding (what does that mean to imply?), clearly, someone who's willing to challenge a popular incumbent is nothing if not amibitious.
I'm curious what the community here makes of this. Democratic primaries are a two-edged sword. At their best, progressives and reformers can have an impact on the party. At their worst, they are divisive, and if not that, then at the very least they are distracting. As a matter of principle, however, no elected official is guaranteed their seat without debate and challenge; if that applies to Joe Lieberman then it has gotta apply to Lynn Woolsey too.
Truth is, if the two candidates are both worthy Democrats on some level, I think it's important to acknowledge that. If there are real ideological or character differences...well, then that should be made clear and put to the voters in a constructive manner.
I guess the question for Assemblyman Nation is, "Why should the voters in CA-06 send you to Washington in preference to Congresswoman Woolsey?"
And my question to readers here is: "What do you make of this? What should term-limited Dems do when they are in Assemblyman Nation's position?"
Your thoughts?
Comments
In my home state of New York I'm excited at the prospect of an effectiv reformer in Thomas Suozzi challenging the esteemed Eliot Spiter in the New York primary for governor. I know primaries can be nasty but politics isn't suppossed to be a social club.
Though I believe that concerns that a tough primary can weaken the party in the general are very valid.