Our view: Democrats plot pointless self-sabotage
With each passing day, it is easier to see the unease of Republicans and the growing confidence of Democrats who expect big gains in coming elections.
And why would this not be the case? President Donald Trump is taking the GOP down one dark alley after another and producing a string of cringe-worthy moments.
But if Republicans have reason for cheer, it is in the Democrats’ long history of undermining their own cause. This history includes the failure to develop a clear message, an inability to get their base out to the polls in nonpresidential years, and a growing affinity for far-left candidates such as Bernie Sanders and Alexandria OcasioCortez, a 28-year-old New Yorker who defeated the fourth-ranking House Democrat on an extreme platform that includes guaranteed government jobs.
The Democrats’ latest potential misstep is a jaw-dropping moment out of California. For reasons that make no sense, the party there has formally endorsed Kevin de Leon for the U.S. Senate, despite the fact that the incumbent Democrat, Dianne Feinstein, shredded him in the primary.
In California’s “jungle primary,” all candidates run together, with the top two vote getters, regardless of party, advancing to the general election.
In the case of California’s race for the U.S. Senate, Feinstein finished first with 44 percent of the vote; de Leon was a distant second with 12 percent.
The logical action would have been to endorse no one. A second option would have been to side with the candidate who won the primary by a ratio of more than three-and-a-half to one.
Alas, the state party decided that California is not liberal enough.
This act follows a national trend of liberals exercising power in ways that make little sense and violate basic democratic principles.
For example, the liberal wing of the party has pressured the Democratic National Committee to scale back on “superdelegates,” senior party officials who cast votes at the convention and could theoretically tip a close race for the nomination. At the same time, they expect the party to retain the most undemocratic element of its nomination process: party caucuses.
These confabs, an alternative to primary elections, drive down participation because they require voters to spend 90 minutes or more. But caucuses are adored by liberals whose voters are more committed.
In 2016, Sanders cleaned up in caucuses, winning 10 of 13, often by large margins that gave him significant delegate hauls not reflective of the overall view of the state. Something similar happened in 2008, though in that case, Barack Obama also won an impressive number of primaries.
The actions of liberals in California and nationally could anger more centrist Democratic voters and feed the argument that the two parties are equally controlled by their hardcore fringes.
If Democrats wanted to help Trump win re-election, they’d continue making decisions like these.