U.S. Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts has secured the Democratic nomination in his bid for a third term in office. Markey fought off a challenge from U.S. Rep.

U.S. Sen. Ed Markey secured the Democratic nomination in Massachusetts’ Senate primary Tuesday, once again fending off a push for generational change as he seeks a third term.

Markey, 80, defeated U.S. Rep. Seth Moulton, 47, who had attempted to argue that it was time to do away with the “status quo” in his pursuit to oust the octogenarian.

Yet Markey successfully pointed to Moulton’s more moderate positions to argue that it was Moulton — not the older incumbent — who was out of touch with the state’s voters. Perhaps no other issue defined the race more than transgender rights, and Markey repeatedly hit Moulton for previously saying he would not want his daughters to play against transgender athletes.

  • JasonDJ@lemmy.zipEnglish
    24·
    6 days ago

    You know nothing.

    Markey is a way more progressive…socially and economically, than that fucking DINO shitstain Moulton.

    The really embarrassing thing is that Auchincloss held his ground against his challenger, by like 50 points. Both young guys but Auchincloss is clearly bought-and-paid-for.

    It would’ve been nice to have a younger progressive to challenge Markey, or for Markey to retire, sure…but also keep in mind the dynamics of elections:

    • with a third, younger progressive, the progressive vote is now split between Markey (who has incumbent bias)…good chance that a “moderate” (dino) secures more votes, despite progressive policies being more popular and having more total support (imagine an 33/33/34 split with Moulton (dino) winning)

    • If Markey retired, the stage will be packed with candidates. Same thing, the vote gets split too many ways with too many similar messages…makes it easier for a dino to take “the majority” with a small overall percentage of support. I still contend this is how Trump secured the 2016 GOP nomination. He was loud and had staying power, and that’s all that mattered when there were a dozen candidates on the stage.

      • JasonDJ@lemmy.zipEnglish
        5·
        5 days ago

        Absolutely. But that’s not the world we are living in today.

        Until it is, we have to vote according to the confines of reality.

        If I said they didn’t have to select three they could just pick two or one, would they be even more afraid? Would they run off screaming?

      • Rhaedas@fedia.io
        3·
        5 days ago

        Ranked choice type voting needs to be pushed more at the state levels. Some have changed. It’s the only way to ever change the higher voting system. The ones in power certainly aren’t going to open the door for losing their job.

          • JasonDJ@lemmy.zipEnglish
            1·
            5 days ago

            Because it was too complicated.

            God damnit. How is ranking things you like complicated? If I asked these people what are their top three ice cream flavors, would they just look at me with vacant eyes, like I just asked them to solve quantum physics?