UPDATE: There may be a runoff in TX-28. Either way the point of this diary remains: bloggers should support Pennacchio's Senate bid in Pennsylvania.
Original: Okay, the Ciro race is over. He lost. He lost and the world hasn't ended. Progressive A-List blogs are still flickering. Nobody is closing up shop in despair or from loss of credibility. As far as I know, readers aren't demanding their money back from bloggers who encouraged them to send it to a Democrat running against a Republican in an open primary in Texas. As the kids say, it's all good. As
Jane at Firedoglake said,
We had to draw a line in the sand and actively show them we're willing to challenge them on that front. We did that. It was important. We showed up for the fight.
There's another fight that bloggers, A-List on down, need to show up for. It's happening in Pennsylvania, a pro-choice state where Dems will be voting on May16 in a closed primary to send a Democrat to beat a reviled and powerful Republican in the fall. The Democrat they can choose is Chuck Pennacchio.
Currently blogtopia is suffering from a kind of groupthink about Chuck. The excuses I've heard from bloggers who ignore him and the PA Senate primary is that Chuck can't win. They don't have time to take up the cause of every candidate out there. Readers trust them to fund raise for canidates that have a chance.
I really don't know what to say about that first argument that doesn't sound snarky. But it's not as if blogtopia's track record for supporting winners is at issue here is it? Is that why we got in the game? Do we have some election street cred that I'm unaware of? In Pennsylvania we have the national party anointing the anti-choice, anti-stem cell, pro-war, PAC-powered, Me-Too Dem, Bob Casey and trying to crush the candidacies of all challengers in the process by bigfooting all over the rights of Pennsylvanians for a free and open (in a good way) primary. But hey, if you're worried about Chuck's electability, look at what he's done in the face of the party's opposition:
Pennacchio for Pennsylvania Files 4212 Petition Signatures
March 6, 2006
On the afternoon of March 6th in Harrisburg, Pennacchio for PA filed over 4200 petition signatures, more than double the number needed to qualify Chuck as a candidate for the May 16th Democratic Primary. The signatures came from 32 counties and were collected by 220 circulators, every one of them a volunteer. Unlike the other Democratic campaigns, the Pennacchio campaign did not pay circulators, nor did we receive help from the Democratic Party machine. The largest number of petition signatures collected by an individual was 280.
On Saturday, March 4th, the Bucks County Democratic Party voted on endorsements in the US Senate Race. In spite of the strong preference of John Cordisco and the Bucks party leadership for Bob Casey, Chuck received 47% of the vote.
This all volunteer, PAC-free Senate campaign continues to build grassroots support around Pennsylvania, most recently collecting endorsements from Democracy for Lancaster, Democracy for Pittsburgh, Democracy for Harrisburg, Upper Bucks for Democracy, and Bucks for Progress. We now have active organizations in 7 key counties, and forming in many others.
Chuck Pennacchio issued this statement: "I am grateful to all of our circulators for braving cold weather, cold shoulders, and tired feet, for circulating after long days at work and on weekends, when you could have been relaxing. I'm inspired by you all, and ready to do whatever it takes to win this race and change politics in our state and across the nation. This is what democracy looks like."
Why don't we want in on that action? Why are so many bloggers willing to give Casey a free pass on his way to ensuring six more years of Rick Santorum in office? Because if you want to talk electable, then let's talk electable: Casey ain't it.
Haven't we learned all we need to know about running people like Casey in 2000 and 2004 when the Dems took what should have been at least convincing wins and turned them into races so close that the GOP was able to steal them both? The state and national pols will tell you all about the famous Pennsylvania T, what James Carville rudely and incorrectly referred to as "two big cities with Alabama in between." Their strategy in PA is simple: carry Philly and Pittsburgh and lose the T by less than we've ever lost before. Inspiring, no? That's how they plan to get that 50% + 1 they need to send Santorum home. They've decided that the only way to do that is by running an anti-choice candidate who winks to the pro-choicers assuring them that he'll vote "with the party when it counts."
Now, is there an issue that swing voters care more about than character? Is there a position more absent of character than the one I just described? It manages to betray everyone involved and it's a guaranteed loser for the party. Add to that the legitimate conclusion most Republicans will draw: why vote for Santorum-lite when I can vote for the genuine article, who actually has quite a bit of clout in D.C.? and you can read the writing on the wall. There will be no balloons falling in a Casey ballroom in November.
Chuck can win. He's an unapologetic Democrat, which means that he offers a real alternative to Santorum - something PA voters haven't had in a very long time. As such, he won't be forced to waste all that time proving that he isn't a liberal because he's not making any false promises and winking to any constituencies: he is pro-choice, anti-war, anti-PAC, pro-stem cell Democrat. He is a man of character and conviction - just like Santorum is positioning himself to be. A Pennacchio/Santorum match-up will be an up and down vote on issues that matter to Pennsylvanians: Choice, Corporate influence in Washington, Corruption and the War in Iraq. That's it. It can be that simple. I'm not saying that Pennacchio can't lose, but I am saying that I'd rather fight with him leading the charge than Casey.
Which brings us to the other big part of the Casey strategy: neutralizing the base. The problem is that the base Casey is neutralizing is his own. The message could not be louder or more clear. The Casey campaign is perfectly happy to have progressives, traditional Dems and women sit this one out. In fact, in the case of pro-choicers, sitting election day out is probably the very best Casey can hope for. If Michelman gets in the race as a pro-choice Independent, which is what she said she is considering doing if Casey wins in May, Casey's people won't even have to bother ordering those balloons.
I'll ask again - why are progressive bloggers ignoring this race?
Honestly, the better question may be why do I care so much what bloggers do? We're not exactly king makers. Rodriquez lost by fewer votes in 2004 than he did yesterday. And Chuck is planning to win by doing what he did for the winning campaigns of Tom Harkin, Tim Wirth and Paul Simon before blogs existed.
The answer is that I'm working the bloggers partly because I am one. It's partly because I read so many and so I'm watching Lamont, who faces a bigger struggle than Chuck, get all the love and donation now that Ciro's out of it. It's because with a few thousand dollars, Chuck could get some kickass data management software that might make the difference between winning and losing in May.
It's because every day I see another post about South Dakota and how horrible thatsituation is and how we have to do something.
We can do something. We can stop the Dems from thinking that it's okay for them to send an anti-choice, anti-stem cell, PAC-driven Democrat up in a swing state like PA. We can let them know that they won't get away with another jump to the radical right without getting a fight from the netroots.
Can't we?
You can donate to Chuck's Campaign here.