For so long, I've heard that people "aren't ready" for progressive politics, but time and time again, we're seeing that progressive politicians actually fair better with people who are sick of the current system, which is an increasingly large number of people. The democrats need to embrace this perspective, rather than trying to bury it.
Define recently, Terry Branstad was the first governor to support DonOld, that would have been 2025, and since Terry was almost Governor For Life, the MAGA strain has been alive and well for at least 20 years. I live here!
AI Overview The most prominent Democratic state official in Iowa is Rob Sand, who has served as the state's Auditor. He is the only Democrat currently holding a statewide executive office in Iowa, though he is the Democratic nominee in the race to become the state's next Governor.
I was a poll worker for the iowa primary yesterday. Voters have to claim a political party at which point they receive the ballot for that party. I strive mightily to frame my question so as to tell voters that they could choose either ballot, regardless of registration, but so many responded “well, I’m a____” And that was the ballot they chose.
Only in this case, the electorate did not choose the progressive candidate, Zach Wahls.
"Democrats now have a highly electable Democratic state representative, Josh Turek, who defeated by a healthy margin progressive Zach Wahls, with the help of a nearly $10 million VoteVets ad buy." - Jen Rubin
"Turek and Wahls are aligned on many Democratic positions, including a public health insurance option, higher minimum wage and more labor bargaining rights. They both talk about corruption in politics benefiting corporate interests and hurting working-class people.
But they campaigned on different visions for how to win statewide in November...
Wahls' opposition to U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer as party leader has been a defining tenet of his campaign. He has criticized a coastal playbook that doesn't work in Iowa.
A flood of outside support has boosted Turek in the final stretch. ... Political organizations affiliated with Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, who chairs the Democratic Senate campaign arm, have recently contributed to Turek's campaign committee." - PBS
So Turek was the more Democratic "Establishment" candidate. Voter interviews found that people believed him to be more electable statewide.
Turek is, in fact, not a Vet, but "VoteVets endorsed him because he was born with spina bifida, which he attributes to his father's exposure to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War."(NYT)
It’s not clear to me that Turk was the candidate with the “progressive” message. I think that’s the point of these wins in Texas and Iowa—that these Democratic candidates are finding a voice and message that resonates with a broader spectrum of voters. Is voting for “affordability” and for preserving livelihoods as farmers “progressive”? The progressive label can absolutely be toxic for Democrats.
From the NYT—Schumer picked the candidate that can win, not the one who is progressive:
“Josh Turek, a Paralympic gold medalist who was backed by $10 million from a group allied with Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, coasted to victory in Iowa’s Democratic primary for Senate. He defeated Zach Wahls, a progressive state senator who ran a campaign aimed at upending the party establishment.”
Voters are not potted plants. With the exception of brain-washed MAGA's. But they comprise "only" ~22% of the electorate. We can -- and will -- beat that number!!
In "red" states where people are in the habit of voting Republican, people need to feel the pain to start questioning their habits. I blame the voters, partisanship above all, vulnerability to propaganda and lies, for the predicament we are in. I hope we survive.
Apparently that slush fund was a bridge too far even for some Republicans. But the equally suspect "deal" to not investigate or even audit past tax returns for Trump, his family, and his countless corporations remains in place - until Congress changes hands, that is. Can't happen soon enough. Mr. Turek is a solid candidate with a real chance of making that happen.
As an Iowan, I will say that you have our situation well encapsulated. Josh Turek has wide appeal and well might finally give us a Democratic Senator. We have a great candidate for Governor, Rob Sand, and a similarly great candidate for Congress here in Iowa's 4th House District, Dave Dawson. It is notewhorthy that Governor candidate Randy Feenstra, Trump's and the apparent Iowa Republican Party's choice, not only lost statewide, but even here in his own district (he has been for several terms our 4th District Congressman). We are indeed burdened with too many MAGA loyalists here in Iowa, but we also have possibly more voters who simply always fill in the blank for any Republican, rather thoughtlessly in my estimation. If enough of those people are unhappy with our state's precipitous downward slide, we have reason to hope.
We need attractive candidates with an attractive and inclusive message. I am particularly impressed with James Talerico in Texas and Jon Ossoff in Georgia. They seem to get it. Would that so many other Democrats would wake up. If we can win in November, we have a 2-year holding action to mount and manage to the Nation's advantage. We won't actually be able to do much but very publicly explicate tRump's and the Oligarchs' depredations in anticipation of another big win in 2028. He will still continue his unbelievable illegalities and without a massive conversion moment for the rethuglicans, he will just double down for the next 2 1/2 years. We have to turn that into political hay.
Agreed. We can seize the narrative if we have Congress. We can win hearts and minds for our side versus their side. And we can make manifest what the people have been saying since Trump took office - "NO KINGS!". Because that is the constitutional role of Congress - to rein in a monarch in the executive branch.
I grew up in Iowa, and I'm old enough to remember when Democrats and Republicans there were on more or less equal footing. That might give one hope that MAGA's grip on the state can be loosened. Still, I have serious doubts. The entrenched support for anyone claiming to be a Republican is very strong - even when the Republican Party is nothing like its past incarnation. I am reminded of the words of Democratic Governor Herschel C. Loveless in his parting address (ca. 1961): " I am disturbed and a little bit frightened over attempts being made in Iowa to divide the rural and urban population...Any group which attempts to create in people's minds fears of each other ought to be condemned." Iowans in rural areas had then (and probably still bear) mistrust, and in some cases outright disrespect for progressives. Current Republicans have magnified and used that to their advantage. Governor Herschel would be saddened to learn that his words were ignored.
Well, of course Democrats can win with a people-oriented politics in the middle of the country. People always respond to this message. Trump won these voters because he feigned being a man of the people. Trump made all kinds of populist-coded assertions and promises. Now, as noted, the people expect him to execute on these promises. Unfortunately, Trump only said what he needed to say to get their votes. Now that Trump has what he wants, he can't be bothered to even pretend to address their expectations.
It becomes apparent to me that neither party has been connected to or addressing the actual, common sense beliefs and needs of the average person. Both parties have treated voters in the middle of the country as immutable categories rather than humans with agency. There is a distinct tone of contempt in both approaches. Republicans, aping Trump, assume mid-country voters are idiots who can be mollified with culture wars and shallow identity signaling. Democrats also assume they are idiots, but sneer at them and write them off as not worthy of persuasion. Same result for the people - nada.
I would like to see new blood, new ideas and a return to retail politics. I would like to see competitive elections with competitive primaries. For example, I am a Texas Democrat. I would not like to see any more out of state and out of touch smart-aleck Democratic consultants lecturing us local political party volunteers about what Texas is rather than what will win a Texas election. These yahoos have told us over and over that Texans love MAGA and can never, ever, ever be changed. Well, that's not political persuasion. That's party insiders lording it over us for their own power plays. And the irony is the facts on the ground have never backed their obvious class bias.
Texas Democrats have risen up and gone our own way. We are on the move and we see Republicans moving our way. No, they may not stay with us forever. In fact, they probably intend to rebuild their party. BUT - they indicate a willingness to vote for Talarico. It's our job to get them to vote for Hinojosa and Clayton Tucker and on down the ballot in THIS election. And that is both doable and good enough for now.
I wholeheartedly agree with you, success has come in special elections when the candidates speak to the people directly. I have lived in Texas, I hope for improvement there and in Iowa.
We can only have hope that these guys will win in Iowa and Texas, but that will be an experiment. TX like Alabama has serious voting apathy. Only 23% of Alabama voters went to the polls on May 19th, but a much larger number of Democratic ballots were cast. That leaves me a bit of hope for this fall.
It's not a cakewalk here in Texas by any means. Furthermore, we already have massive amounts of dark Republican money pouring in behind the MAGA Republicans. I hope we can replicate what happened in Hungary. That is, the propaganda machine in Austin and all that money is mooted by grassroots, analog and face to face campaigning.
I read this morning Paxton met in the oval office last night with Trump. Trump didn't announce that, but Paxton put pictures on his social media. The topic of the meeting was not announced either. But, I guarantee it was about Trump's money being invested in Paxton. Look for direct message coordination between Trump and Paxton. This may be a very losing bet if Texans aren't magically transported into voting Republican merely because Trump is invoked. And that is our mission-moot the propaganda and online MAGA provocations.
SCOTUS ruled in favor last night to allow the state of Alabama to use racist maps drawn in 2023 in the Allen vs Milligan case instead of the fair one that was used in 2024 that got us a second Democratic seat.
How on earth could they do that? Those maps from 2023 were ruled unfair and racist by the same SCOTUS. They are really showing their true colors. Pun intended.
I'll describe my reaction to this column the same way I did a piece about Texas. If Iowans haven't realized they've suffered enough under a Republican majorities in state, local and national elected offices, I have grave concerns for them. I live in Tennessee, and our Republican supermajority in the statehouse has taken our state—I'm using a state appropriate word here—to the shithouse. We're near the bottom of all states in several metrics. I don't think people in our state have suffered enough. But Texas and Iowa, they are at a tipping point. What a glorious November it would be if Democrats flipped Senate seats in Alaska, Iowa, Texas, Ohio, Maine and North Carolina. It's possible if we all help get out the vote.
Yep. Talaricio is important for the nation as an addition to a Democratic majority. However, as a Texan, I am most interested in Democrats winning the state and local races. We have excellent candidates challenging Abbott, the Lt. Gov. (the true political power in Texas), Attorney General, and other extremely important commissions. The Ag Commissioner candidate, Clayton Tucker is out campaigning in rural areas and getting a lot of traction. Why? Because as the former very MAGA Republican Ag Commissioner has stated Clayton knows more about agriculture than the Republican candidate. Common sense does prevail in America if and when the facts penetrate people's lived experiences.
Critically important - "That might remind you of Texas Democratic Senate nominee James Talarico’s populist message:..."
This might be simplistic, but there are basically two kinds of populism. On one hand is the kind of jingoistic, ignorance-driven, bigoted, and narrow-minded right wing "populism" of Trump (useful to fascist billionaires who don't believe any of it), and on the other hand the real and healthy "populism" of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. A Democratic Party which very explicitly and very competently embraced the healthy kind of populism could regain my support.
The top 0.1% are right to fear the power of the bottom 50% if they have an effective voice. That is one reason they want a system that concentrates more political power with the wealthy. Citizens United wasn't an accident. It was part of the plan ever since Nixon. The beginnings of that plan were codified by the Powell Memo right before Nixon nominated him to the Supreme Court.
Native Iowan here. I have watched my home state go from a decent place to live with reasonable governance, even going back to Robert D. Ray, to a MAGA cesspool. I honestly think that our current governor looks at all issues, asks herself what DJT would do, and then does it. Just like DonOld looks at anything done by Obama and Biden, even Clinton, and tears it down in a flash. Right now we have a window of opportunity with the retirement of Gov. Reynolds and Joni "make 'em squeal" Ernst. We also have younger, bright candidates as of yesterday, no wild eyed leftie in sight, and this makes me feel like we ought to have a chance to chip away at the total dominance of rural, Evangelical, small town, Western Iowa MAGAts. It is nice to see the Hawkeye State get some coverage from great writers like Jen Rubin!
Well said, Jennifer. I made a tiny donation to Josh Turek’s campaign last night after I looked up his position on Israel-Palestine. He supports conditioning U.S. military aid to Israel around Israel complying with international human rights law and, hence, meets my basic standard on the issue.
And, being that he is a great guy, I am giving him the benefit of the doubt on supporting Ukraine for now, even though I have absolutely no idea what his position on Ukraine is.
Turek has the potential to be a giant of the Senate, much like his mentor and inspiration Tom Harkin. He cares deeply about Iowans and Americans who work the land and have served our land.
Borne out by Jennifer Rubin's reporting, people in Iowa and Texas (and hopefully elsewhere) are reacting to a form of oppression and exclusion. They have seen promises broken and policies instituted by the people who they thought were going to help them. They voted for them then, and were cheated; now they are looking elsewhere, which is appropriate.
For so long, I've heard that people "aren't ready" for progressive politics, but time and time again, we're seeing that progressive politicians actually fair better with people who are sick of the current system, which is an increasingly large number of people. The democrats need to embrace this perspective, rather than trying to bury it.
All politics is and are local.
Iowa was a purple state until recently.
Define recently, Terry Branstad was the first governor to support DonOld, that would have been 2025, and since Terry was almost Governor For Life, the MAGA strain has been alive and well for at least 20 years. I live here!
Remember Tom Vilsack and render him holy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Vilsack
AI Overview The most prominent Democratic state official in Iowa is Rob Sand, who has served as the state's Auditor. He is the only Democrat currently holding a statewide executive office in Iowa, though he is the Democratic nominee in the race to become the state's next Governor.
It’s the proposals to address problems that matters, not a label.
It takes a lot of work for some people to break out of the practice of voting for a label. Some never do.
I was a poll worker for the iowa primary yesterday. Voters have to claim a political party at which point they receive the ballot for that party. I strive mightily to frame my question so as to tell voters that they could choose either ballot, regardless of registration, but so many responded “well, I’m a____” And that was the ballot they chose.
Just as I said. Critical thinking and common sense are often missing and uncommon, all at the same time.
Only in this case, the electorate did not choose the progressive candidate, Zach Wahls.
"Democrats now have a highly electable Democratic state representative, Josh Turek, who defeated by a healthy margin progressive Zach Wahls, with the help of a nearly $10 million VoteVets ad buy." - Jen Rubin
"Turek and Wahls are aligned on many Democratic positions, including a public health insurance option, higher minimum wage and more labor bargaining rights. They both talk about corruption in politics benefiting corporate interests and hurting working-class people.
But they campaigned on different visions for how to win statewide in November...
Wahls' opposition to U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer as party leader has been a defining tenet of his campaign. He has criticized a coastal playbook that doesn't work in Iowa.
A flood of outside support has boosted Turek in the final stretch. ... Political organizations affiliated with Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, who chairs the Democratic Senate campaign arm, have recently contributed to Turek's campaign committee." - PBS
So Turek was the more Democratic "Establishment" candidate. Voter interviews found that people believed him to be more electable statewide.
Turek is, in fact, not a Vet, but "VoteVets endorsed him because he was born with spina bifida, which he attributes to his father's exposure to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War."(NYT)
It’s not clear to me that Turk was the candidate with the “progressive” message. I think that’s the point of these wins in Texas and Iowa—that these Democratic candidates are finding a voice and message that resonates with a broader spectrum of voters. Is voting for “affordability” and for preserving livelihoods as farmers “progressive”? The progressive label can absolutely be toxic for Democrats.
From the NYT—Schumer picked the candidate that can win, not the one who is progressive:
“Josh Turek, a Paralympic gold medalist who was backed by $10 million from a group allied with Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, coasted to victory in Iowa’s Democratic primary for Senate. He defeated Zach Wahls, a progressive state senator who ran a campaign aimed at upending the party establishment.”
That is extremely hopeful. We need gerrymandering to backfire as well
Voters are not potted plants. With the exception of brain-washed MAGA's. But they comprise "only" ~22% of the electorate. We can -- and will -- beat that number!!
GO BLUE ON NOV. 3 🩵
In "red" states where people are in the habit of voting Republican, people need to feel the pain to start questioning their habits. I blame the voters, partisanship above all, vulnerability to propaganda and lies, for the predicament we are in. I hope we survive.
I bet Iowans just love the $1.776B Trump fund, don’t they?
Apparently that slush fund was a bridge too far even for some Republicans. But the equally suspect "deal" to not investigate or even audit past tax returns for Trump, his family, and his countless corporations remains in place - until Congress changes hands, that is. Can't happen soon enough. Mr. Turek is a solid candidate with a real chance of making that happen.
If Big Ag stays home, Dems can win in farm states.
They hate it.
Acting attorney general Blanche says the slush fund is now dead. Courts may challenge the president's tax audit immunity as unconstitutional.
As an Iowan, I will say that you have our situation well encapsulated. Josh Turek has wide appeal and well might finally give us a Democratic Senator. We have a great candidate for Governor, Rob Sand, and a similarly great candidate for Congress here in Iowa's 4th House District, Dave Dawson. It is notewhorthy that Governor candidate Randy Feenstra, Trump's and the apparent Iowa Republican Party's choice, not only lost statewide, but even here in his own district (he has been for several terms our 4th District Congressman). We are indeed burdened with too many MAGA loyalists here in Iowa, but we also have possibly more voters who simply always fill in the blank for any Republican, rather thoughtlessly in my estimation. If enough of those people are unhappy with our state's precipitous downward slide, we have reason to hope.
This is exactly what I am seeing here in Texas as well.
We need attractive candidates with an attractive and inclusive message. I am particularly impressed with James Talerico in Texas and Jon Ossoff in Georgia. They seem to get it. Would that so many other Democrats would wake up. If we can win in November, we have a 2-year holding action to mount and manage to the Nation's advantage. We won't actually be able to do much but very publicly explicate tRump's and the Oligarchs' depredations in anticipation of another big win in 2028. He will still continue his unbelievable illegalities and without a massive conversion moment for the rethuglicans, he will just double down for the next 2 1/2 years. We have to turn that into political hay.
Agreed. We can seize the narrative if we have Congress. We can win hearts and minds for our side versus their side. And we can make manifest what the people have been saying since Trump took office - "NO KINGS!". Because that is the constitutional role of Congress - to rein in a monarch in the executive branch.
I grew up in Iowa, and I'm old enough to remember when Democrats and Republicans there were on more or less equal footing. That might give one hope that MAGA's grip on the state can be loosened. Still, I have serious doubts. The entrenched support for anyone claiming to be a Republican is very strong - even when the Republican Party is nothing like its past incarnation. I am reminded of the words of Democratic Governor Herschel C. Loveless in his parting address (ca. 1961): " I am disturbed and a little bit frightened over attempts being made in Iowa to divide the rural and urban population...Any group which attempts to create in people's minds fears of each other ought to be condemned." Iowans in rural areas had then (and probably still bear) mistrust, and in some cases outright disrespect for progressives. Current Republicans have magnified and used that to their advantage. Governor Herschel would be saddened to learn that his words were ignored.
Remember Tom Harkin and render him Holy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Harkin
Great hope for the heartland—thank you, Jen!
Well, of course Democrats can win with a people-oriented politics in the middle of the country. People always respond to this message. Trump won these voters because he feigned being a man of the people. Trump made all kinds of populist-coded assertions and promises. Now, as noted, the people expect him to execute on these promises. Unfortunately, Trump only said what he needed to say to get their votes. Now that Trump has what he wants, he can't be bothered to even pretend to address their expectations.
It becomes apparent to me that neither party has been connected to or addressing the actual, common sense beliefs and needs of the average person. Both parties have treated voters in the middle of the country as immutable categories rather than humans with agency. There is a distinct tone of contempt in both approaches. Republicans, aping Trump, assume mid-country voters are idiots who can be mollified with culture wars and shallow identity signaling. Democrats also assume they are idiots, but sneer at them and write them off as not worthy of persuasion. Same result for the people - nada.
I would like to see new blood, new ideas and a return to retail politics. I would like to see competitive elections with competitive primaries. For example, I am a Texas Democrat. I would not like to see any more out of state and out of touch smart-aleck Democratic consultants lecturing us local political party volunteers about what Texas is rather than what will win a Texas election. These yahoos have told us over and over that Texans love MAGA and can never, ever, ever be changed. Well, that's not political persuasion. That's party insiders lording it over us for their own power plays. And the irony is the facts on the ground have never backed their obvious class bias.
Texas Democrats have risen up and gone our own way. We are on the move and we see Republicans moving our way. No, they may not stay with us forever. In fact, they probably intend to rebuild their party. BUT - they indicate a willingness to vote for Talarico. It's our job to get them to vote for Hinojosa and Clayton Tucker and on down the ballot in THIS election. And that is both doable and good enough for now.
I wholeheartedly agree with you, success has come in special elections when the candidates speak to the people directly. I have lived in Texas, I hope for improvement there and in Iowa.
We can only have hope that these guys will win in Iowa and Texas, but that will be an experiment. TX like Alabama has serious voting apathy. Only 23% of Alabama voters went to the polls on May 19th, but a much larger number of Democratic ballots were cast. That leaves me a bit of hope for this fall.
It's not a cakewalk here in Texas by any means. Furthermore, we already have massive amounts of dark Republican money pouring in behind the MAGA Republicans. I hope we can replicate what happened in Hungary. That is, the propaganda machine in Austin and all that money is mooted by grassroots, analog and face to face campaigning.
I read this morning Paxton met in the oval office last night with Trump. Trump didn't announce that, but Paxton put pictures on his social media. The topic of the meeting was not announced either. But, I guarantee it was about Trump's money being invested in Paxton. Look for direct message coordination between Trump and Paxton. This may be a very losing bet if Texans aren't magically transported into voting Republican merely because Trump is invoked. And that is our mission-moot the propaganda and online MAGA provocations.
SCOTUS ruled in favor last night to allow the state of Alabama to use racist maps drawn in 2023 in the Allen vs Milligan case instead of the fair one that was used in 2024 that got us a second Democratic seat.
How on earth could they do that? Those maps from 2023 were ruled unfair and racist by the same SCOTUS. They are really showing their true colors. Pun intended.
I'll describe my reaction to this column the same way I did a piece about Texas. If Iowans haven't realized they've suffered enough under a Republican majorities in state, local and national elected offices, I have grave concerns for them. I live in Tennessee, and our Republican supermajority in the statehouse has taken our state—I'm using a state appropriate word here—to the shithouse. We're near the bottom of all states in several metrics. I don't think people in our state have suffered enough. But Texas and Iowa, they are at a tipping point. What a glorious November it would be if Democrats flipped Senate seats in Alaska, Iowa, Texas, Ohio, Maine and North Carolina. It's possible if we all help get out the vote.
Yep. Talaricio is important for the nation as an addition to a Democratic majority. However, as a Texan, I am most interested in Democrats winning the state and local races. We have excellent candidates challenging Abbott, the Lt. Gov. (the true political power in Texas), Attorney General, and other extremely important commissions. The Ag Commissioner candidate, Clayton Tucker is out campaigning in rural areas and getting a lot of traction. Why? Because as the former very MAGA Republican Ag Commissioner has stated Clayton knows more about agriculture than the Republican candidate. Common sense does prevail in America if and when the facts penetrate people's lived experiences.
Critically important - "That might remind you of Texas Democratic Senate nominee James Talarico’s populist message:..."
This might be simplistic, but there are basically two kinds of populism. On one hand is the kind of jingoistic, ignorance-driven, bigoted, and narrow-minded right wing "populism" of Trump (useful to fascist billionaires who don't believe any of it), and on the other hand the real and healthy "populism" of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. A Democratic Party which very explicitly and very competently embraced the healthy kind of populism could regain my support.
The top 0.1% are right to fear the power of the bottom 50% if they have an effective voice. That is one reason they want a system that concentrates more political power with the wealthy. Citizens United wasn't an accident. It was part of the plan ever since Nixon. The beginnings of that plan were codified by the Powell Memo right before Nixon nominated him to the Supreme Court.
https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/powellmemo/
Native Iowan here. I have watched my home state go from a decent place to live with reasonable governance, even going back to Robert D. Ray, to a MAGA cesspool. I honestly think that our current governor looks at all issues, asks herself what DJT would do, and then does it. Just like DonOld looks at anything done by Obama and Biden, even Clinton, and tears it down in a flash. Right now we have a window of opportunity with the retirement of Gov. Reynolds and Joni "make 'em squeal" Ernst. We also have younger, bright candidates as of yesterday, no wild eyed leftie in sight, and this makes me feel like we ought to have a chance to chip away at the total dominance of rural, Evangelical, small town, Western Iowa MAGAts. It is nice to see the Hawkeye State get some coverage from great writers like Jen Rubin!
Well said, Jennifer. I made a tiny donation to Josh Turek’s campaign last night after I looked up his position on Israel-Palestine. He supports conditioning U.S. military aid to Israel around Israel complying with international human rights law and, hence, meets my basic standard on the issue.
And, being that he is a great guy, I am giving him the benefit of the doubt on supporting Ukraine for now, even though I have absolutely no idea what his position on Ukraine is.
Turek has the potential to be a giant of the Senate, much like his mentor and inspiration Tom Harkin. He cares deeply about Iowans and Americans who work the land and have served our land.
Borne out by Jennifer Rubin's reporting, people in Iowa and Texas (and hopefully elsewhere) are reacting to a form of oppression and exclusion. They have seen promises broken and policies instituted by the people who they thought were going to help them. They voted for them then, and were cheated; now they are looking elsewhere, which is appropriate.