The Reasons Jamal Bowman Lost His Seat In Congress - And What Lesson We Can - And Should Take Away From IT: Introduction

 

As my readers are aware I’ve been a New York resident for more than thirty years. I’ve written quite a few articles about various aspects of elected officials in New York, both historical and contemporary. As anyone who knows the path forward for the majority in the House in 2024, it will almost certainly run for my home state. Many of the most critical members of the House, both in leadership and its more progressive members, represent New York. These include Hakeem Jeffries. Current House minority leader who will become Speaker if the Democrats win control, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, the founding member of ‘The Squad’ and Jamaal Bowman, currently representative of the sixteenth district.

I say currently because as of this writing Bowman has been projected by CNN  to lose his primary. There have been countless polls showing him trailing his challenger by double digits but the reason I’m almost certain Bowman is going to lose is because an article published – hours before the votes were cast -  in Daily Kos is acknowledging as much.

Now if you know anything about progressives, you know how good they are at spinning a narrative. So in the article they are labeling it ‘Bowman’s base eats itself’. The closest they come to acknowledge that Bowman has been a deeply flawed candidate and representative is by saying that he is in a ‘competitive primary, which requires a deft hand and sharp political instincts – both things Bowman seems to lack.’ In progressive speak, this is as close to saying this man is incompetent as they ever say.

They defend his decision to vote against the Build Back Better Act as the right move because ‘Biden and the Democratic leadership caved and compromised with Joe Manchin.” They acknowledge the vote failed to pass, but rather than argue it as a defeat for Biden, they decide to argue the much reduced version of it did pass and Bowman voted for it.

They try to blame Bowman’s failing on the political system where people think screaming and threatening is an effective way to influence politics. This is entirely the progressive way of course, but they don’t mention that. They say Bowman has courted the far-left which has little interest in engaging electorally. (As opposed to the Daily Kos which is a far-left that has a slight interest in engaging electorally – as long as the right result is guaranteed. )

They try to deflect Bowman’s position on Palestine as not being the reason for his loss (in a district that is significantly Jewish, something they fail to mention) and instead try to blame it on AIPAC, which they don’t even pretend to hide as being Right wing. They admit fully that Bowman’s rhetoric against Israel is combustible and they acknowledge  that Pro-Palestinian protestors are saying the same thing. But rather than acknowledge the two might be a turn-off to voters in his district, they say that it’s the protestors fault for protesting the event rather than being quiet and raising money for Bowman. To be clear, they’re less upset about the violence of the rhetoric of these protestors then the fact that they’re not raising money for Bowman instead. The next line in the article is: “Can people possibly be more absurd?” And it shows something about the left’s lack of total self-awareness that the author could write this with a straight face.

They also acknowledge this would happily enable Trump’s reelection in November and while they acknowledge this would be ‘catastrophic for Gaza’, they immediately remind their loyal readers that Netanyahu is rooting for Trump’s victory. But don’t worry, they’re Anti-Zionist, not Anti-Semitic.

Now they acknowledge that Bowman is cut from the same cloth as them, acknowledge that his rhetoric is inflammatory and that the best thing to do this is to gain public support and advocate to build public support. They acknowledge that pro-Palestinian activists don’t have public support, so the votes won’t be there but then they turn around and say the thing they should have done is do advocacy work to influence public opinion. If you know the leftist, you know that public support has always been incidental to the righteousness of their position and their unwillingness to compromise that position. I’ve seen so many examples of this in Daily Kos on everything else; this very entry even argues that Biden’s decision to compromise was a justification for Bowman’s decision to vote against the Build Back Better Bill.

Naturally they then do what they do best and turn it around on the right, acknowledging that they are as guilty of performative politics as the left. They try to avoid the ‘both sides’ argument – admitting that they don’t have the power of their counterparts on the right – but even this is written with a clear tinge of envy. So much of the left’s activity is performance rather then grass roots political action, and I know this article would bless it if it was actually working for Bowman. It is only because he seems doomed to electoral defeat that they are admonishing it – and in the most limp-wristed way possible because they are terrified of isolating their readers who believe that’s all politics should be.

Now they acknowledge that the 16^th District ‘seems set to remind Democrats that they value pragmatic results over performative rhetoric’. This is true, and it is immediately undermined by the very next sentence: “Too bad that lesson will be lost thanks to AIPAC’s flood of cash.”  In a sense these references really do render the valid points of the article moot, they are essentially saying to their most loyal advocates “we know who’s really to blame for this, nod, nod, wink, wink.”

I’ve read enough articles at this site and far too many others to know that in the history of politics, no leftist candidate has ever lost a free and fair election. How could they? Their positions are popular and they are by far the correct ones. No, we are not at fault.

So the left has its laundry list of suspects, all of which you’ve heard countless times: gerrymandering, corporate interests, the system, racism, white supremacy, red state ideology, Fox News and that all time classic: there’s no difference between the two parties, really. They have yet to outright blame the average voter as being a complete and utter idiot, sheep and unworthy of suffrage, but honestly with most progressives, I think that’s understood. To paraphrase, of all people Ann Coulter, the left truly believes that if everyone – not just Republicans or Democrats but every single person who isn’t them – they would naturally be progressive.

This has been the history of the left since practically the beginning of the American system. We see it with abolitionists, the Radical Republicans, progressives like Bob LaFollette, much of the suffragist movement,  all the way down to the Black Power movement and so many of the antiwar protestors in Vietnam. Their views are historically correct but they have never been proportionately popular with the American public. So much of the history of the progressive movements in our society make it all too clear that by far their greatest enemy has been themselves. The things that are essential in a democratic society – patience, compromise and willing to win over the general public – are all ideals that the left rejects in favor of their own moral certainty. It is why so many brilliantly radical politicians, from Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens to LaFollette and George McGovern, could either never advance to higher office while our greatest Presidents – Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and FDR – managed to achieve those ideals by being willing to do the dirty work – i.e., compromise -  necessary to get their landmark legislation passed.

Jamaal Bowman was, like so many of the leftists he was aligned with, an active successor in that style of politician,  far more about performance rather than actual legislation, rejecting pragmatism in the name of ideals that the majority of Americans – including members of his own party – were never onboard with. His primary defeat is going to send shockwaves throughout the 2024 election season. But when it happens, it is important that the media, the Democratic Party – and indeed so many of us who care about democracy – do not take the wrong lessons from it. The article in Daily Kos might say one thing in their eulogy of Bowman, but what they say in literally every other article they write about politics this cycle will belie the true lessons of it.

So in this series,  I intend to dive into the story of Jamaal Bowman, the circumstances that led to his election in 2020, the real reasons behind his defeat and what the victory of the man who defeated him can show a lesson for the rest of the country to follow going forward. I don’t expect this to be a popular series – I expect to get my share of screeds from certain people on the left – but as someone who truly believes in the American system, I truly feel it is in the best interest to write it, especially now.