This is happening, albeit on a different scale, here in TN.

Kurita is getting no support from the state party in her primary bid. None. Traditionally, they shouldn't be aligned with any particular candidate, but that's how it's gone down. TNDP executive director Jim Hester is Ford's campaign chair.

But, to be fair, they're falling in line with the DSCC on this one.

This is a transcript of a speech given by Chuck Schumer at a private party. (link)

"Let me tell you one other thing we did. We are no longer letting Democrats get in a circle and shoot each other. I was just in Tennessee with Harry and with (...) and we have a primary and I stood up there Harold Ford is running and he can become the first African-American elected in the south to the Senate since reconstruction which would be a great thing for America. There is this young woman whose... not so young... but a nice woman running against him but everyone says she is going to attack him."

"...(unintelligible) we are going to intervene if anyone one democrat attacks another, we're doing that in states where there are primaries. We can't afford to do it anymore. This always happens in the primaries, we would throw up the cards and see where they landed. No more, we are finding the best candidate in every one of the seats where a Republican is vulnerable."

So, here you have the reason why Ford is the presumptive nominee over Kurita: rather than letting voters decide, the DSCC thinks that they know best on how to choose a state's candidates.

This is the same DSCC who lost control of the Senate and whose strategic architects are the same folks who lost the last two presidential elections, by the way.

D'ya think that Chuck Schumer knows what's best for Tennessee? Well, he certainly thinks that he does. Here, eat your broccoli.

Whether you like HFJ or not isn't quite the issue here (I don't, but I've gone on at ridiculous length about that). The issue is that the vetting process of the primaries is intended to allow the voters to determine who they think would best represent them. And, fact of the matter is, I don't think the DC Democrats know shit about winning elections. At the very least, they've demonstrated zero competence at it lately. They can blame Nader* all they want for 2000, and they can go on an on about how the vote was rigged in 2004, and both points have merit -- but the solution, at least as I see it, is getting the grassroots engaged in the process and getting them excited about candidates, not this Stalinist "eat your broccoli" strategy.

* You reap what you sow. Purging progressives from the party forces them to go somewhere.

____________________________

If we heard mortar shells, we'd cuss more in our songs and cut down on guitar solos

Whether you like HFJ or not isn't quite the issue here (I don't, but I've gone on at ridiculous length about that). The issue is that the vetting process of the primaries is intended to allow the voters to determine who they think would best represent them.

  This is how I felt about the Hackett race.  The voters should have decided.  As for the Pennacchio race, I still think the voters should decide but I also think that Casey is an artificial choice made in D.C. by corporate Dems.