Since her shock primary win in August, Nixon has complained about Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee recalcitrance to anyone who will listen. In September, she told MS NOW hosts Symone Sanders Townsend and Eugene Daniels that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer was less than thrilled about her race.

“When I did speak with Sen. Schumer on the phone, it was basically a ‘we will see,’” she said. “He’s going to look into it. That’s what was said, that he’s going to look into it.”

Nixon went on to say that Democrats were wary of throwing in behind a Black woman in the South following Kamala Harris’ 2024 loss: “Folks are a little gun-shy because, unfortunately, Vice President Harris lost as a Black woman, and so people are being very hesitant in terms of funding Black women, especially in the South.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 9 hours ago* (2 children)

The polling in Florida was not 13 points. And there was significant evidence that a cash infusion from Bernie had helped to close the gap even further.

This isn't a "in hindsight" kind of thing. The Democratic party had plenty of opportunities and evidence to show that funding was leading to a winnable race. Even more so than places that they DID fund and ended up losing/winning as well.

I'm sorry. But you were not paying attention to Florida and Nixon if you think there wasn't a deliberate bias against a black woman and DSA member. They abandoned her because they did not want her to win. They did not want an example of a leftist winning in the South. They want to continue to run establishment figures that are against Medicare for all; like Jon Ossof. Don't fall for their lies.

They lose either way though. Because she nearly won and didn't get their support. Now we're gonna run her again in two years and by then we hopefully won't need any of their funds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 hours ago (1 child)

    I'm sorry. But you were not paying attention to Florida and Nixon if you think there wasn't a deliberate bias against a black woman and DSA member. They abandoned her because they did not want her to win. They did not want an example of a leftist winning in the South.

    FTFY. The bias is entirely against leftists, not black women. The Democratic Party is perfectly happy to support a black woman, iff she's a centrist/liberal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

    You're engaging in class reductionism. The main reason is of course her socialist identity. But, to ignore that she is a black woman from the south would be like ignoring the attacks on Abdul for being Muslim (from both parties).

    A black socialist woman is significantly more dangerous to the Democratic party as their core voting base in the south is comprised of lifelong democratic black voters that they are trying to distance from DSA. "DSA is all privileged white people" you hear both parties regurgitate. They clearly see her as threat that will push a large part of their base further left.

    It's ok to analyze incentives through intersectionality. The Democratic party establishment is. They are just using it to keep power. Don't ignore it because the main reason they are against her is because of her socialist policies. That doesn't mean there isn't multi things that are a threat from her, because of her identity, that introduce contradictions to their existing narratives.

    Edit: This is not to say that black voters aren't extremely more left than the average American on average, they are. But, a large portion of the base of the democratic party, those that vote in primaries, are more likely to vote for the parties pick than an insurgent DSA candidate. A black woman from DSA contradictions their entire narrative. Ignoring that is ignoring how they are attempting to use identity politics to attack socialism.

  • source
  • parent