Since Nebraska has become the latest target of the guardians of Democratic orthodoxy at Open Left, I thought it only fair that a Nebraskan should respond.
It's helpful to actually learn the politics of a state before bashing its Democrats for not being sufficiently progressive. Or, in the height of ironies, bashing its Democrats for "bashing Democrats."
But regardless, a little context is necessary for those who seem hell bent on letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
These are the two current elected officials in the state of Nebraska who were elected with a "D" after their name. That's it. That's the list. Two.
The two largest cities in Nebraska, Omaha and Lincoln, both have Democratic mayors who were elected by comfortable margins. (Mike Fahey of Omaha was reelected in 2005, Chris Beutler of Lincoln was elected in 2007).
Our nominee for governor received an abysmal 24% of the vote against a milquetoast Republican who makes Mike Johanns look Kennedyesque by comparison.
Outside of Ben Nelson, our two biggest successes in the 2006 cycle were two previously unknown congressional candidates who, defying all expectations, came closer than anyone expected to defeating their Republican opponents. In both races, our candidates received 45% of the vote.
Our unicameral legislature is elected on a nonpartisan basis, but it is still a partisan battleground. And out of 49 seats, Democrats hold 15. The most liberal senator in the unicameral, an independent from Omaha named Ernie Chambers, just recently filed a lawsuit against God, and last year tried to segregate Omaha's Public Schools.
And in 2006, Nebraska Democrats were so desperate to field a candidate for state auditor, they turned to the incumbent, an anti-choice, extreme right-wing Republican for the nomination.
If that looks like a bleak picture for Nebraska Democrats, that's because it is. It's a far better picture than in 2002 and 2004, however, when Democrats failed to win a single statewide or federal race. In 2006, Nebraska Democrats made significant progress in getting our message out to voters, and they responded.
And that's why 2008 matters for Nebraska. We have a chance to prove to voters of this state that what is needed is leadership; what is needed is proven experience. What is needed is the thoughtful independence that a Senator like Bob Kerrey can provide.
Against the backdrop of the divisive mudslinging of Pete Ricketts, the singleminded arrogance of Hal Daub, the two-faced rhetoric of Jon Bruning, and the indecisive politicking of Mike Johanns, Bob Kerrey is a breath of fresh air: Both for the people of Nebraska, and the Nebraska Democratic Party.
Teaming up with Scott Kleeb in the third district, and Jim Esch in the second, Kerrey can be exactly the standard-bearer this party needs.
I'm going to ignore for a moment the national implications, as Singer at MyDD and Lowell at Raising Kaine have argued quite persuasively on that subject. This, for me, is about Nebraska. And if there's one thing Nebraskans don't like, it's outsiders, people who have no roots in Nebraska, telling us what's best for us.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 1 Comment :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.