WHAT IS CHUCK SCHUMER REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT -- ELECTABILITY OR BLOCKING PROGRESSIVISM?

Even before I knew any of the specifics, I assumed that the Democratic senators involved in this dispute with Chuck Schumer were right:

A group of influential liberal senators is directly challenging Senator Chuck Schumer’s approach to the midterm elections and President Trump....

The coalition of at least half a dozen senators, who call themselves the “Fight Club,” is unhappy with how Mr. Schumer and his fellow senator from New York, Kirsten Gillibrand, the head of Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, have chosen, recruited and, they argue, favored candidates aligned with the establishment.

The mutinous mood of the senators — who include Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, Tina Smith of Minnesota, Christopher S. Murphy of Connecticut, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts — reflects the widespread doubts among the Democratic base that party leaders in Congress have a strong vision and a winning strategy for returning to power.

... Other senators who have participated in the group’s actions have included Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico.

They are focused on contested primaries for open seats in Minnesota, Michigan and Maine.

Schumer's candidates, you won't be surprised to learn, lean moderate. He insists that his concern is electability.

The “Fight Club” senators ... worry that leadership is using a dated playbook and risks dampening the party’s energy and desire for new kinds of candidates.

Alex Nguyen, a spokesman for Mr. Schumer, disputed that notion. “Our North Star is winning the Senate majority in 2026 and any decision is made to achieve that goal,” he said in a statement.

But is that true? Is Schumer trying to ensure victories -- or is he trying to keep the Democratic caucus as middle-of-the-road and corporate-friendly as possible?

Let's look at Minnesota. Members of the Fight Club have released a video endorsement of Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan for the Senate seat being vacated by Tina Smith.

“All the way, she’s taken on powerful corporate interests,” Mr. Van Hollen says in the video.

Mr. Markey echoes, “Powerful corporate interests in every battle.”

It seems clear that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee prefers Representative Angie Craig. Craig won her House race last year in part by swinging right:

“I really believe that voters want someone who has a moderate, centrist voting record,” Crag said.

She distanced herself from Biden on immigration issues, traveling to the U.S.-Mexico border with 17 GOP lawmakers and appearing on Fox News to discuss the need to address what she called a “national security issue.” She also ran ads condemning the influx of fentanyl into the United States, which the GOP has blamed on lax border security.

Another point of contention was Biden’s effort to forgive college loan debt, which she said rankled those without a college degree.

And Craig supported a GOP attempt to overturn the Biden administration’s protections for thousands of small streams, wetlands and other waterways that the GOP called an environmental overreach....

Steven Schier, professor emeritus of political science at Carleton College, said ... [the] messaging Craig adopted to appeal to conservative voters had a definite Republican cast.... “At times I watched her ads and asked, ‘Wait a minute, is she a MAGA candidate?’” Schier joked.

Craig might appeal to Trump voters, but Flanagan inspires - I know this is crazy talk - voters in her own party.

Annie Wells, whose crop art recreation of Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan’s Senate campaign poster hung in the State Fair Agriculture Horticulture building, doesn’t want a candidate who tries to meet Republicans in the middle.

“She’s one of the Democrats that’s actually trying to stand up and do things,” Wells said. “I’m frustrated with a lot of the Democrats that are not being bold enough in response to what’s happening at the federal level.”

... listen to how Flanagan recently framed her campaign against Craig —in classic Midwestern style, without naming or directly attacking Craig — in front of more than 1,000 supporters at at a brewery in northeast Minneapolis: “Will we send Washington the same old people and the same old solutions — or will we be bolder and fight harder and get more done for people?”

Flanagan is of Native American descent and grew up on public assistance. She was the executive director of the Children’s Defense Fund of Minnesota, where she helped lead a successful battle to raise the state's minimum wage. She's proudly anti-Trump and anti-plutocrat.

Trump and Republicans have “ransacked our government” and are “spitting in the faces of millions of people” who stand to lose health care or food assistance, Flanagan said at [a] rally....

Flanagan also lobbed attacks at corporations and big-money politics.

Voters need to elect people who “have the guts to fight against these powerful corporate interests who are pulling the strings these days,” Flanagan said.

In a poll of the potential matchup conducted early this year, Flanagan beat Craig 52% to 22%. She's clearly the candidate Democratic voters would prefer.

But is Craig a better general election candidate? Not really.

GQR poll (Released September 20)

Minnesota Senate (initial vote)
🟦Peggy Flanagan 46%
🟥Republican candidate 44%
—
Minnesota Senate (initial vote)
🟦Angie Craig 47%
🟥Republican candidate 43% https://t.co/y283I76hI1 pic.twitter.com/LQY6we2Xwo

— Politics & Poll Tracker 📡 (@PollTracker2024) October 10, 2025

Minnesota might be nearly a purple state in a good year for the GOP, but 2026 is likely to be a bad year for the GOP. So why not favor the candidate preferred by the party's own voters?

Also, there's a good chance that whoever wins the Democratic nomination will be running against Royce White, a former pro basketball player who lost to Amy Klobuchar in the race for Minnesota's other Senate seat by nearly 16 points last year. White, who's raised the most money of any GOP candidate, has an been seen with "ALEX JONES WAS RIGHT" tattoo written on his head and has some thoughts about various issues:

“Women have become too mouthy,” White said on [Steve] Bannon’s “War Room” podcast. “As the Black man in the room, I’ll say that.” Elsewhere, White denounced the “Jewish lobby” and the “Jewish elite” and called Israel “the linchpin of the new world order.” He described the L.G.B.T.Q. movement as “Luciferian” and wrote that it’s “the brainchild of radical feminists and their cucked men.”

At the State Fair this summer, his behavior was Trumpian:

Craig made the rounds to the more conservative-leaning Farm Bureau booth and went in for a handshake with Republican Senate candidate Royce White at his fair booth last week.

White declined the handshake, saying he thought Democrats were “communists.”

That's his response to the moderate Democrat.

I realize that the GOP might find a more electable candidate than White. I realize that Trump might not be as unpopular next November as he is now. But the odds are that this will be a good year for Democrats in Minnesota no matter who runs. So why would Schumer put his thumb on the scale for Craig, unless he'd actually prefer a centrist to a progressive?

Is he still afraid of the wrath of the Baileys? Or does he fear the possibility of progressive change?