 Well, after weeks of uncertainty, we now know the outcome of the Democratic Party primary that took place in the 28th congressional district of Texas between progressive Jessica Cisneros and right-wing anti-choice Democrat Henry Cuellar. Unfortunately, he won, albeit by the skin of his teeth. As Zoe Richards of NBC News explains, progressive challenger Jessica Cisneros conceded to representative Henry Cuellar of Texas on Tuesday after a recount and a repeat of their 2020 matchup making Cuellar the Democratic nominee for November as he seeks a 10th congressional term. The race was decided by less than 300 votes. Cuellar issued a statement Tuesday declaring victory, quote, it is now time to come together and win the general election in November. I am an American Texan, then a Democrat in that order, and I will continue to fight for Texas values and not let coastal elites bring their failed agenda to our communities, Cuellar said. Very interesting that he denounces coastal elites when Nancy Pelosi, the quintessential coastal elite, helped him eke out a victory here and he wants to come together after he and his allies put up billboards smearing Jessica Cisneros as a homewrecker. Notice how he didn't want to actually debate on the substance because for all intents and purposes, this is a Republican. He's a right winger. He's socially conservative and economically conservative. So what incentive does Jessica Cisneros have to come together with you? If you lose, then the outcome will be the same for people in this district. That seat will be occupied by a conservative. So what difference does it make if there's someone there with a D or an R in front of their names? Now, sure, you can say that sometimes even corporate Democrats are different than these Republicans. But for all intents and purposes, Henry Cuellar is a fucking Republican. So he is ideologically indistinguishable from a Republican. So there is zero incentive for Jessica Cisneros to come together and back you. There's no point. In fact, if I were Jessica Cisneros, what I would do is refuse to endorse him and actively campaign against him, endorse any third party candidate who's running or, you know, if there's no sore loser laws in that particular district or state, then I would just run as a right and candidate against him, sink his campaign, go down in a blaze of glory because it really doesn't matter. Voters already lost. They're getting a conservative in that district. So why does it matter if she sinks this corrupt corporate Democrat? I mean, perhaps the Republican candidate is less corrupt than Henry Cuellar. His home was raided by the FBI for ties and or potential corruption with Azerbaijan. So him losing materially will make no difference for voters in that district. But the one caveat to this strategy, if you want to call it that, is that she probably wouldn't really be able to challenge him again in a primary. And she has every reason to challenge him. She lost very narrowly. So she has a great chance of beating him. But really what made the difference here was Democratic Party leadership. And she took to Twitter to explain how because of them, she lost and voters in this district in particular are going to lose out on a really great progressive candidate because Democratic Party leadership intervened here. She writes, we always knew this was an uphill battle. We were up against a corrupt political machine, Republican funded super PACs big oil, the chamber of commerce, dark money groups, big pharma and nearly the entire Democratic Party establishment. And we still refused to back down with this close of a margin. It's clear that without their aggressive interference in the lives of South Texas families, we would have one. The biggest thing holding us back from pursuing the change we deserve is their fear, fear of change, fear of the future. The only way you defeat fear is with courage and determination that in the richest nation in the world, we all deserve to thrive. Change is a process. And through this process, we're educating our community and we deserve better than the status quo. Now, she's correct that she probably would have one had Democratic Party leadership not intervened, but she's wrong that fear is what drove them to intervene. This isn't about fear. This is about corruption. Nancy Pelosi, James Clyburn and Steny Hoyer, Democratic Party leaders are corrupt. They are beholden to their donors. And because they were looking out for their donor's interest, they wanted to stop Jessica Cisneros, who is unbought. So since she's not corrupted, the policies that she would propose and fight for would be antithetical to what the Democratic Party's donors want. That's why they intervened. And it does her no good to pretend as if fear is the factor here. Fear was not an issue. It comes down to corruption, period. And really, we have to stress how awful it is that the Democratic Party leadership intervened here. I don't think that Normie Democrats and MSNBC Brain Liberals know how corrupt and ruthless the Democratic Party is. Only when it comes to the left, they literally endorsed someone who was rated by the FBI, who's corrupt, who is anti-choice. I mean, if you have a Democrat who is fiscally conservative, but socially liberal, at least you have something there to pitch to voters. But this is someone who is functionally a Republican. So the fact that they intervened to stop a progressive woman who likely would have won, had they not interfered, truly should be outrageous to every single Democratic Party voter. Even after he was rated by the FBI, they refused to withdraw their support for him because they would rather have a corrupt right-winger win than a progressive woman. And this is what the Democratic Party does. This isn't the only race where they intervened, right? So these leftist candidates who do not take corporate money, it's already very difficult at a disadvantage because they don't have super PACs running ads that cost millions of dollars in their favor. So whenever there is this progressive that has momentum, what happens? The Democratic Party establishment intervenes. Back in 2021, let me remind you, before Nina Turner lost, early polling showed that she had a 35-point lead against Chantel Brown, who also coincidentally enough was facing an ethics probe in Ohio because of corruption. It seems like Democrats love their corrupt Democrats, but they couldn't allow Nina Turner and the left to win. So they had to intervene, bring out the full force of the establishment, even trotted out Hillary Clinton's dusty ass to endure Chantel Brown. And once again, they won. Now, they don't always prevail. For example, they did this with Elliot Engel to try to save him from Jamal Bowman, but Jamal Bowman still won. But this is what happens every single time. Whenever there's momentum for a leftist candidate who excites people, they intervene and they crush that individual. And it's truly disgusting. And people have to know about this because a lot of individuals do not know how corrupt and ruthless the Democratic Party's leadership is. Now, thankfully, Bernie Sanders, having been the victim of the Democratic Party, crushing him himself multiple times, decided to call out Democratic Party leadership, saying billionaire funded super PACs and the Democratic leadership are celebrating the defeat of Jessica Cisneros, a strong young progressive and the reelection of a reactionary Democrat. Now you know why there is no grassroots energy in the party and Democrats are in trouble for November. And he is absolutely correct here. But he needs to name names, but he's right overall. I mean, as the planet dies and becomes uninhabitable, literally. And as our country descends into fascism and an authoritarian state, do you honestly feel like the Democratic Party is fighting Republicans more than the left? No, currently, even though we have a Democratic president, it feels as if Republicans are in control, largely that's due to the Supreme Court. But it feels like even with regard to rhetoric and setting the agenda, it's not Democrats. It's not the president who's setting the agenda. It's the right in this country. So where's the fight there? Where's the pushback against all of these lies about LGBTQ plus people being groomers? Is there any fight from Democrats when it comes to Republicans? No, the only time they show a sign of life, a willingness to fight, is when they have to intervene and sabotage the campaign of an insurgent progressive like Jessica Cisneros or Nina Turner. And after they do this, after they kill momentum, kill grassroots activism, they then turn around and blame voters for either not giving them a large enough majority to get anything passed, or, you know, they blame the left for losing elections. I mean, you have no fucking message. And the wing of your party who is energized, you crush them at every opportunity that you get. So I mean, is it really a surprise that you're incredibly unpopular with young people and you continue to lose elections even in the face of fascism? I mean, it should be a no-brainer. Everyone should come out and be motivated to come out to support Democrats given the alternative. But they're so bad, so undesirable that they end up making their fucking base hate them. And that's really, that says something, given the climate in this country, right? Now one more tweet from Bernie Sanders here. He says, think about this. Are we truly a democracy when you've got a handful of billionaires able to contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to elect candidates who represent the interests of the wealthy? Is that really the kind of democracy we want? I don't think so. And the answer at least for Democratic Party leaders is yes, that's what we want. We don't want these progressives elected because we don't want them to piss off the party's donors. So we'd rather tank them, piss off the base, and remain in good standing with our donors. Like they were given the opportunity, like years ago, to choose, are we going to represent our donors or our base? Because what the donors and the base wants conflicts with each other. They're antithetical, right? So you have to choose one or the other. And Democrats unquestionably chose their donors over their base. And now we're seeing how that's paying off for them. It's leading to Republicans crushing them. I mean, this November is going to be a complete fucking bloodbath. And I want to say that they deserve it because of how bad they're doing. But voters don't deserve this. Voters don't deserve to be forced to choose between a far-right fascist political party at a conservative Democratic Party full of geriatric elites who don't give a fuck about their base. So I mean, this is incredibly frustrating, but it's good to see some members of the Democratic Party call this out. But you've got to name names. Don't be afraid to say Nancy Pelosi. James Clyburn did this. It's not going to make you less popular. If anything, it'll make you more popular because if the Democratic Party's base understands what's happening and you educate them, that will help you make the case in future elections when they do inevitably intervene. So I'll leave that there just because Cisneros lost. So she should either have another rematch in 2024 or she should just run as a third party candidate or write in a candidate. It doesn't matter at this point. Henry Cuellar is a Republican. So voters in the 28th congressional district have the choice between a Republican or a Republican. Well, if it doesn't matter ideologically at this point and materially won't change anything, fuck up that race. They sabotaged you, Jessica. So I don't think that anyone would hold it against you, who are voters, your supporters. If you chose to do the same to Henry Cuellar, fuck unity.