You denied the favoritism from the Democratic establishment in 2016 when they were tipping the scales for Clinton against Sanders during the Democratic primary. Up until it was undeniable. After proof was provided, you switched gears saying they had the right to choose whoever they wanted to as an independent political organization, obstructing democracy.
Curious why you would deny party elite collusion took place at first, then after it was proven, you accepted it as if it's just normal, the way it goes.. You switched positions because you knew you could no longer legitimately deny it.
Why deny it took place at first if you don't actually believe it to be wrong?
Now you're all good with party elites picking and choosing who to run in the general subverting actual democracy and letting voters choose. To be sure, the party elites like Hoyer aren't choosing which candidates they believe are the strongest to defeat Republicans, if that were the case, they would have backed Sanders in the 2016 general election instead of Clinton as he consistently polled +10pts above Trump leading up to November. The Democratic establishment is backing establishment candidates over actual progressives because if an actual progressive wins, it limits their ability to control the legislation that keeps them in power. They would rather lose districts to Republicans than have an actual progressive win.
When it comes to people like you, who claim to be progressive and support things like universal healthcare, it's suspect that you would support this strategy when it's already been proven to fail. You say your goal is to keep Democrats in control, yet the political strategy you ascribe to has been a proven failure for the past 8 years and has ensured more Republicans get elected to office over Democrats. Hoyer isn't pressuring Tilleman to vacate the race because he believes Crow is the better candidate, he's pressuring him to vacate the race because he knows if his views are actually implemented, the establishment would lose control of their hold on our government. He knows his views are popular, especially in a place like Colorado. Universal healthcare is even supported by a plurality of Republicans, not to mention 85% of Democrats. Yet establishment Dems like Hoyer, Pelosi, and Feinstein oppose it. 63% of Americans support legalizing marijuana, Feinstein finally came out this week in support of CA policy after being pushed to the left by Alison Hartson and Kevin de León. Corporate Dems like Booker and Gillibrand have signed onto universal healthcare after being pushed to the left by Bernie Sanders, and have even publicly stated they're going to stop accepting corporate PAC money. All of these people know they can't win the progressive vote in 2018 or 2020 if they don't support these positions. Including the OP of this thread, these are signs the message of "TRUMP BAD!" isn't working. You can't just be against Trump, you have to offer something alternative that voters support. Turns out, voters support things that benefit them, like universal healthcare, ending the wars, investing in science, education, and protecting the environment. They respect things like the institution of the rule of law and checks and balances.
So if the blue wave happens in 2018 and Democrats win back control of congress, what happens next will depend on the way they choose to govern. Worst case scenario for you is if they win big, super majorities. If that happens, the establishment Democrats will be exposed when they vote against progressive legislation. If they choose to do nothing with it, Republicans will inevitably win back control the next cycle and the political pendulum will continue to swing. Democrats keep control of congress like they did for the better part of half a century during the 1900s by supporting working class economic interests.
