Donna Edwards Nabs Washington Post Endorsement

Well this is very good thing. The Washington Post is one of the local papers in the race, so the dynamic is more local than national in this case.  

REP. ALBERT R. WYNN has represented Maryland's 4th Congressional District since 1993, and in that time he has never faced a serious challenger. This year, in Donna Edwards , he does. Ms. Edwards, a lawyer and foundation executive with a distinguished record of civic activism, is Mr. Wynn's opponent in the Sept. 12 Democratic primary. Tough, articulate and knowledgeable, she is one of the smartest and most impressive newcomers in Maryland politics.

The 4th District, comprising parts of Prince George's and Montgomery counties, is heavily Democratic, a profile that meshes with Ms. Edwards's long involvement in liberal causes. She has championed a higher minimum wage, campaign finance reform and an array of environmental issues, and she fought for legislation to curtail domestic violence. Locally, she was an ardent opponent of National Harbor, the multibillion-dollar development underway in Prince George's, but she came around to supporting it when she was satisfied that it would include a balance of commercial, entertainment and residential components. Her assent removed one of the project's last major hurdles -- a fact that testifies both to her skill as an advocate and her openness to reasonable compromise.

Now it's up to Donna's last minute media blitz, the field campaign, and free media that's going to come out as the primary gets noticed.  Donna Edwards, Ned Lamont, and Jennifer Lawless are part of a need breed of aggressive and progressive East Coast politician, accomplished non-candidates who are turning to politics as a vehicle for successful change.

I've written about Donna here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.  So MyDD readers have had a bit of a jump on her primary story.  Not being in the district, it's hard to tell how this will play out.  Movement progressives have already played a big role in shaking up the status quo in Connecticut; this is just confirmation that the winds of progressive change are growing to gale force.

Update: Let me spell out what this endorsement means. The biggest hurdle for any candidate is to appear 'viable'. Viability is an ephemeral quality, prone to spin and bullshit, but it's basically the idea that a candidate has a shot at winning a race. Political people want to spend their time and money on races that can be won, so a key challenge in politics is convincing enough donors and political influentials that a race is real and can be won. Once a candidate has become 'viable', money and support is unlocked by establishment groups whose primary interest is in not being embarrassed. The Washington Post endorsement means that Donna Edwards is now a real and viable challenger to Al Wynn. That's huge.

Tags: Al Wynn, Donna Edwards, Machine, Maryland, net neutrality (all tags)



Light and Air

Wonderful news.  I had not been aware that Donna Edwards has once worked for Albert Wynn specifically when Wynn was in the State House.

This is a big news particularly as the Washington Post has leaned more conservative in recent years, but while maintaining its status as the repository of official Washington opinion and culture (read unchallenged permanent employment).  While the Post is a local paper for the 4th District i.e. essentially the whole district is a short distance call from DC, its surprising willingness to smack an incumbent and endorse a newcomer speaks to Edwards' merit, Wynn's failings and possibly a new era of light and air breaking into this troubled city.

Or dare I hope too much?

by Bruce Godfrey 2006-08-30 10:34AM | 0 recs
Any thoughts of making her a netroots candidate?

I think Wynn is much worse than Lieberman, in terms of representing what is a very blue district.  

by bosdcla14 2006-08-30 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Donna Edwards Nabs Washington Post Endorsement

Lawless debated Langevin tonight and came through with a definitive victory.  Lanvevin is now flip-flopping on the issues.  He claimed for the first time ever that he supports bringing the troops home now even though he has voted 11 times to stay the course.  Most memorably he voted on May 25, 2005 against calling for a timetable to bring the troops home.  The Congressman blatantly flip-flopped and I have a hunch that we'll be hearing about it tomorrow.

by mpalevsky 2006-08-30 07:30PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads