We’ll have to hold our noses and move forward with Bob Brooks
Well, he wasn’t even my second choice. He was my last choice, easily, but Bob Brooks—with staggering material and organizational support from an out-of-town Dem establishment—has won Pennsylvania’s Seventh Congressional District Democratic primary that covers Saucon Valley.
I myself haven’t witnessed an election where so many Democrats wanted a different Democrat but are stuck now with someone they didn’t want.
But, alas, as always, life in my private Hellertown goes on.
Democratic primary votes for Ryan Crosswell (20%), Lamont McClure (21%) and Carol Obando-Derstine (17%) comprised 58% of votes.
That obviously means that of every five Dems who voted yesterday, roughly three of them wanted someone other than Brooks. Something to think about. Brooks can’t win the general without their help, but I think they’ll hold their noses and support him.
58% — combined support for Crosswell, McClure and Carol Obando-Derstine ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████
42% - support for Brooks ██████████████████████████████████████
I do not think that Dems who supported other candidates — I myself donated to McClure and Crosswell — will fade quietly into the night with our sense of annoyance.
Unlike many others, I never predicted an outcome. I had no idea how the race would turn out. I feel disappointed and miffed.
But I would not go so far as to call this annoyance a deep-seated resentment. Nor will I fail to support Brooks this fall (and more importantly, this summer) — not that he needs my help.
I railed against the endorsements of Brooks by Gov. Shapiro, Bernie Sanders and, locally, Lehigh Valley for All, and that sense of unnecessary meddling in a primary will linger. I feel let down by them all.
For my part, I would not recommend sending a dime to national Democratic structures again. The party is completely rudderless. They are out of touch in a big way. I will stick to donating directly to candidacies I like.
Make no mistake: Brooks will need support from all Democrats—and then some.
Another positive spin on all this is that we saw in this primary a party with several different powerful strands that represent what being a Democrat means in 2026. We all like our strand best, to be sure. But combine them together, and you get something stronger that’s actually more important than what the party leaders, or we ourselves, tell us what we’re supposed to be.
Still, Republicans who project their own sheep-like hierarchical mindsets — Trumpism is a personality cult, after all — onto Democrats’ really miss the point. We can fully support Brooks this fall without losing our heads.
Democrats will in-fight. Democrats will complain. Democrats will kvetch. Democrats will speak up and grouse. But if you know the Democratic grassroots in Pennsylvania at least, you know we never line up dutifully to support anyone. We’re more like outdoor community stray cats who eventually adopt a human family and come in from the bad weather.
Democrats are also fully capable of discerning between a primary election disappointment and the ongoing threat to our democracy that Trumpism represents.
I heard yesterday secondhand that a well-known Republican party leader based in Hellertown called Brooks a “hoodlum.” There’s plain evidence that Republicans preferred to face Brooks as an opponent, including thousands of dollars spent by Republican-backed dark money groups propping up Brooks’ campaign.
But let’s just think about what our local little Republican said. If Brooks is a “hoodlum”— and that’s ridiculous — what is the most corrupt president in American history?
He’s not a hoodlum; he’s an idea about where the party hopes to return.