Progressives Storm the Gates
-Matt Brown is in the race under the Rhode Island Political Co-op banner, which gives this growing far-left slice of the Democratic party their candidate. It was always clear to me that this faction would never be satisfied with the assumed “big 4 candidates”of McKee, Elorza, Gorbea, and Magaziner. Obviously Elorza is out now, so you can fairly pencil in Brown as rounding out the Big 4, at least at this point. This group better represents the spectrum of Democratic officials and voters in the state, with Brown to the far left, McKee in the centrist lane, and Gorbea/Magaziner somewhere in between.
-So what are Brown’s chances realistically? It’s been pointed out that Democratic primary voters already rejected him once. In 2018, his primary challenge to Governor Raimondo was more of a referendum on Raimondo and less of a clear head-to-head contest between the centrist and progressive wings of the party. The lines between those factions are somewhat blurred, but I have a hard time seeing Brown’s ceiling as being much higher than the 33 percent he got last time around. The 2018 anti-Raimondo vote will have more options this time around, including both centrist and left-leaning candidates. At the same time, Brown’s 2018 campaign was also a challenge to an elected Governor, a more difficult feat that doesn’t apply this time around.
-Being in the “somewhere in between” world is why I’m more bearish on Gorbea and Magaziner after Brown’s announcement. It was always assumed that they would run well to the left of McKee, but now they have a more complicated calculation on their hands. They might be correct to assume that the bulk of the primary electorate is actually somewhere between McKee and Brown ideologically, but they risk splitting that middle ground. If the theory is that McKee is the favorite, it would make sense to play up their differences with him as much as possible. They could stick to their leftward tack and try to drown out Brown with their significant fundraising advantages and by touting their work as sitting general officers. But the other possibility is that the left gains steam, throwing the race into something like a tossup. Such a scenario would spook the business community (especially if there is no viable Republican) and the party establishment. In this case, Gorbea and Magaziner could move to the center, hitting McKee on things like shady state contracts and ethics investigations into top staffers, while echoing McKee’s tone on improving the business climate as the state recovers from the pandemic. Either way, without a clear lane and the benefit of being an incumbent Governor, it’s a tough needle to thread. As for McKee, he has both of those things. At the moment I see him as well-positioned, but he has shown a tendency to become his own worst enemy with poor handling of controversy and a muddled public decision-making process. I have to think he sees the entrance of Brown to be a benefit to his odds. I tend to agree, but just how much is unclear.
-Speaking of the Republican Party, it is time for them to get serious about drafting a viable candidate. Within hours of Brown’s announcement, Democrats began gouging eachothers eyes out. GOP chairwoman Sue Cienki played up the division in the Democratic ranks, but this is a point that a candidate should be making and getting play off of. Cienki teased nearly 2 months ago that a Republican candidate was ready to announce, and that said candidate is currently holding elected office. If this wasn’t just bluster, it’s now past time for the candidate to name themselves, both for fundraising purposes and to make hay with the Democratic infighting (which is surely just beginning). As I mentioned above, the threat of a Matt Brown administration and a more progressive General Assembly would be a five alarm fire for the state’s business community. If those business leaders lose faith in the Democratic primary electorate to rebuke Brown (as they have lost faith in Senate leadership in beating back progressives in their chamber), it will be up to a Republican to convince them that they are a viable entity. Whether that is indeed a current elected official or a Don Carcieri type that isn’t yet widely known, it’s time for the GOP to get off the sidelines.
-While rumors surrounding Brown had been swirling for weeks, the announcement of a “ticket” with Brown and State Sen. Cynthia Mendes (for Lieutenant Governor) was a surprise. My hunch was that Sabina Matos would clear out any challengers from the General Assembly and maybe draw a longshot opponent that ends up not being not much of a threat. Then came an op-ed from former LG Candidate and Rep. Aaron Regunburg (more on him later) that read to me like an all-but-official announcement of his intention to challenge Matos from the left. And now Senator Mendes, who is basically unproven but has clear ideological stances, is in the race. I am curious to see how Matos approaches a statewide campaign. Having never run statewide, I’m not sure anyone actually has a sense of where exactly Matos falls ideologically. McKee and Matos will also run as a quasi-ticket, and they will have a calculation on their hands too. Does Matos march in lockstep with McKee, or does she lean into progressivism in an effort to give both her and McKee broader appeal? If this thing gets really close, it’s possible to imagine the weird outcomes (McKee-Mendes, Brown-Matos) that leave Rhode Island once again with a Governor and LG who don’t speak, let alone have a working relationship.
-The RIPC also announced a few dozen legislative candidates at various levels Wednesday, including several for the General Assembly. A few are repeat candidates who lost in 2020 primaries, some narrowly. But new candidates raised some eyebrows, especially an announced primary challenge to Senator Dawn Euer of Newport. Regunberg was quick to denounce this effort as a waste of time and resources, pointing to the fact that Euer had successfully sponsored the Act on Climate, the most sweeping climate bill in the state’s history. RIPC acolytes fired back, arguing that Euer was insufficiently progressive for having supported Dominick Ruggerio as Senate President and declining to pursue even more ambitious climate plans and other progressive priorities. In my opinion, the entire dust-up gets at the heart of the ineffectiveness of the modern progressive approach to politics. To the RIPC, a challenge to Euer is justified because of her embrace of what they see as half-measures instead of the furthest-left legislation on any given issue. But the choice is a false one. On the environment, in the 2020 General Assembly, the realistic options were the Act on Climate, something less ambitious, or no environmental bill at all. The Green New Deal legislation that the RIPC members in the Senate favored would have been DOA in the House before it even made it to the Governor, who surely would have vetoed it had he had the chance. McKee barely swallowed the Act on Climate as it is, and nearly a dozen members in the leadership circle of the House voted against it. I know the RIPC’s ultimate aim is to change the balance of the General Assembly to make such radical legislation viable, partly by unseating current legislative leadership. But the real world and the ideal world are different places. In the real world, the General Assembly only just came around to passing any substantive climate bills at all (ironically, progressives have the voters of Cranston’s 15th district to thank for that). Actual legislating involves knowing where your colleagues (including those in the other chamber) are at on a particular issue, knowing how to push them to go further and accept more, building consensus, and recognizing the gains made in proper context. Think about it this way — would Senator Euer have been spared a primary challenge for pushing the RIPC-favored bill only to have it fail, either on the Senate floor, in the House, or on the Governor’s desk? And ended the 2020 session without a major climate bill at all? Based on the logic used by RIPC candidates and followers, the answer seems to be yes. And that, to me, shows what the RIPC and progressive activists are really all about — purity, not progress.
Anyway, I won’t waste too much ink on trying to handicap any of the potential races this early, before the matchups are even set in stone (the redistricting process is going to be something to watch, huh?). For a perspective on the RIPC’s overall strategy that I basically agree with, I recommend this post from Sam Howard.
