Democratic Party's New Motto: Ever Leftward

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) may find herself in the toughest re-election battle of her career.  She previously had a tough re-election bid in 1994, where she ran for her first full term in the Senate after winning a special election in 1992.  In the 1994 race, her Republican opponent accused her of being too liberal.  A quarter of a century later, she may lose her seat because she’s not liberal enough.

 

The octogenarian Former Mayor of San Francisco has attracted a challenger in State Senator Kevin de Leon, the State Senate President Tempore, who has engineered many of the state’s insane laws that have led to California’s reputation as the epicenter of the #Resistance.   

 

In an ordinary state, Feinstein could probably fend off a primary challenger quite easily.  California has a top-two primary, where all candidates run together on the same ballot in the primary election, regardless of party affiliation.  Since Republicans have virtually given up on winning a Senate seat in California after failing to advance to the general election in the 2016 Senate race, it seems likely that the top two finishers in the June 5 primary will be de Leon and Feinstein.  Feinstein would probably prefer to run against a Republican, as she would have no trouble defeating any candidate the GOP put forward.  She defeated her 2012 Republican opponent in the general election by 25 percentage points. 

 

Just to demonstrate how seriously Republicans are taking this Senate race, with less than two months until the primary, three of the relatively unknown Republican candidates have just over $10,000 of cash on hand, while the two major Democratic candidates who possess very high name ID have raised more than $10 million combined.

 

While questioning Amy Coney Barrett, a nominee to serve on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, Feinstein seemed to suggest that her Catholic disqualified her from serving on the bench:  “When we read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you.  And that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for – for years in this country.”  One of the “big issues” Feinstein has found herself defending is abortion, once remarking that “women all over America have come to depend on” Roe v. Wade.  In spite of all of these progressive credentials, Feinstein failed to secure the endorsement of the California Democratic Party, which instead endorsed de Leon.  Of California’s 39 Democratic Representatives in Congress, Feinstein has secured the endorsement of 25, while de Leon has received the endorsement of three others; all of them freshmen members of the lower chamber.      

 

On the opposite end of the country, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has found himself a progressive primary challenger in actress Cynthia Nixon, well-known for her role on the soft-core porn HBO series “Sex and the City.”  While Nixon more recently portrayed Nancy Reagan in Bill O’Reilly’s “Killing Reagan,” don’t expect a Nixon governorship to even remotely resemble the policies of the Reagans.  During a recent appearance on “The Wendy Williams Show”, Nixon said that she favored legalizing marijuana; providing quite a contrast to the “Just Say No” campaign that served as a major initiative during Nancy Reagan’s tenure as first lady.

 

Cuomo had previously attracted a primary challenger in his first bid for re-election in 2014; when he easily beat law professor Zephyr Teachout, who had the endorsement of the powerful education lobby.  Progressives just don’t think he’s progressive enough, even after he went on a rant against conservatives, officiated a gay wedding, and participated in a gun control walkout.  Cuomo also signed into law the SAFE Act, one of the most restrictive gun control laws in the country.  Not long after Nixon announced her gubernatorial bid, Cuomo showed off his progressive credentials by signing an executive order allowing 35,000 paroled convicted felons to vote and referring to President Trump as “un-American.”  

 

Cuomo, unlike the 84-year-old Feinstein, sees himself as a possible contender for the Democratic Presidential Nomination in 2020.  Believe it or not, he may find himself one of the most moderate members of the field; which will likely include Senators Kamala Harris and Cory Booker.  Both Harris and Booker have tried to raise their profiles by asking ridiculous and irrelevant questions during confirmation hearings for President Trump's cabinet nominees.

 

Nixon could end up dogging Cuomo well into the general election.  While he probably will defeat her in the primary, New York State has a very weird electoral system.  New York State has a bunch of minor political parties that usually end up endorsing the nominees of one of the two major political parties.  For instance, in the 2014 gubernatorial election, George Soros-backed Working Families Party and the Women’s Equality Party chose Democrat Andrew Cuomo as their candidate while the Conservative Party and the Stop Common Core Party supported Rob Astorino.  Basically, the same candidate can appear on multiple lines on the same ballot.  Rumor has it that Nixon will seek the endorsement of the Working Families Party in the general election if she does not manage to pull off a victory in the Democratic Primary.  Should that happen, that could potentially split up the liberal vote, allowing the Republican nominee to win with a mere plurality.     

 

In Illinois, pro-life Democrat Dan Lipinski has already had to deal with a primary challenger.  Lipinski, who spoke at the March for Life this year, nearly lost his seat in Illinois’s 3^rd Congressional District to Marie Newman, a pro-choicer who had the endorsement of septuagenarian socialist Bernie Sanders,  likely 2020 Presidential contender Kirsten Gillibrand and feminist icon Gloria Steinem as well as two of Lipinski’s Democratic colleagues in the Illinois Congressional Delegation.  On primary day, Lipinski ended up beating Newman by less than 3,000 votes.  Ordinarily such a poor performance in a primary would indicate vulnerability in a general election but Republicans ended up shooting themselves in the foot by failing to run a candidate against the former Chairman of the American Nazi Party, who ran unopposed in the Republican primary.

 

While one can understand why liberals would see Lipinski as conservative, the fact that Cuomo and Feinstein are now considered “moderates” should prove beyond a reasonable doubt how far left the Democratic Party has moved.  Just six years ago, President Obama, along with many other elected officials in the Democratic Party, affirmed the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman.  Then again, his “switcharoo” should not have come as that much of a surprise since he promised to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act should he win the Presidency, a bill that all but 14 Senate Democrats voted in favor of, in Court the year earlier.  President Obama’s confidante David Axelrod later admitted that President Obama supported same-sex marriage all along, he just thought that admitting that in public would hurt his electoral chances, especially among African-American voters, who overwhelmingly voted to oppose the redefinition of marriage in statewide referendums despite the fact that they bloc-vote for the socially liberal Democrats by massive margins.   

 

Another example of the Democratic Party’s left-turn 180 can be found in their handling of the issue of illegal immigration. During his 1995 State of the Union address, President Bill Clinton talked tough on illegal immigration; yet no one in his party called him racist or xenophobic.  When the Democrats used to care about the working class (or at least pretended to), they would admit that the presence of a large number of low-skilled immigrants did not exactly help the United States economy.  In his 1995 State of the Union, President Clinton asserted “The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants.  The public services they use impose burdens on our taxpayers.”  If President Trump dared to make the same point, “Fake Tears” Chuck Schumer would call him “mean-spirited” and “un-American.”    

 

More than two decades later, the Democrats have not surprisingly become increasingly dependent on the votes of immigrants and their children for their electoral victories as more and more of the native-born population rejects liberal insanity.  As Laura Ingraham has pointed out, “The left has gone so far left that they left America.”  As the rest of the country worries about their economic well-being, the Democrats obsess over giving drivers licenses to illegal immigrants, using taxpayer money to fund abortions for illegal immigrants, and in some cases, giving illegal immigrants the right to vote.  The Democrats have decided to do everything in their power to appease their new electorate. 

 

Perhaps no issue better illustrates the leftward trajectory of the Democratic Party than the issue of free speech.  Half a century ago, liberals descended upon the campus of UC Berkeley demanding the right to speak out in favor of civil rights and against the Vietnam War.  Let’s fast forward to 2017.  Today’s liberals can’t even bear to hear an opposing opinion as evidenced by their riots at the Berkeley campus ahead of a Milo Yiannopolous speech.  Their meltdowns in the face of opposing views had led to the nicknaming of this group of millennials as “snowflakes.”

 

 

To all those on the right who don’t feel motivated to vote in this year’s midterm elections, keep in mind that not voting would risk handing over the keys to an increasingly radical Democratic Party that will not hesitate to impose its left-wing agenda on the American people by any means necessary.  The future of the country hangs in the balance; now is not the time for complacency.