A Chicagoan at heart, a series of events, including falling for a local boy, led me to spending time "Iowa-adjacent," in Moline, Illinois. Moline is on the Mississippi River and part of the Quad Cities region. When I first started coming here in 2015, and when asked, "What's it like?" by friends in Chicago, I highlighted three points that stood out the most.

First, five cities make up the Quad Cities, well at least five, some might even say eight or nine. Apparently, they started as the "Tri-Cities," changed to Quad as the region grew, but "quint" never stuck. Second, split by the Mississippi River, residents move between Illinois and Iowa  - sometimes many times a day - crossing the largest river in North America like it's no big deal. Being from Chicago, crossing the Mississippi meant a great adventure ahead, not, "We ran out of peanut better, so I am going to the Super Target." As a result, the little girl in me avoided Iowa to keep a sense of adventure alive. Finally, fall 2015 marked the beginning of primary season for the Iowa caucuses and although I was in Illinois, it's an Iowa media market. This proved to be incredibly painful because I don't travel with my Tivo and for the first time since 2004, I had to watch commercials - and political commercials at that! I started avoiding TV like I avoided Iowa.

Four years later, I still get a kick out of telling "newbies" here are eight towns in the Quad Cities, it's less of a rant than it used to be. I continue to avoid Iowa, but it is more about bridge construction, like the rest of the "locals." And I have convinced my boyfriend that Tivo is a great investment, so I won't be exposed to the commercials for the 23 Democrats traipsing all over Iowa again in the bid for 2020.

I vote in Illinois and I assume that by the time our primary rolls around, my choice for the Democratic candidate will not have much impact. Plus Illinois is an open-primary state, so as an "anybody-but-Trump"-er, I will be pulling a Republican ballot and voting for whoever else is on it. 

But this does not stop me from supporting a candidate by volunteering in Iowa. Although I have one or two "favorites," as an "anybody-but" voter, I am not yet convinced he or she is the best candidate to beat Trump in the generals. So, I am going to take advantage of being "Iowa-adjacent" and go to as many town halls, house parties, candidate coffees, etc. within a 2-hour drive and see if I can figure it out.

At the same time, I hope Iowans, with its "first-in-the-nation" pride will be open to a stranger in their midst. But I am looking forward to listening to opinions outside of a Democratically controlled area, like Chicago. Also, I have always been skeptical of our countries primary process, as, much like the electoral college, I think it gives some states undue influence over the process. As a result, I am looking forward to seeing the process up close. 

Plans for upcoming events:

• Monday, May 20, Beto O'Rourke, Davenport.
• Sunday, May 26, Sen. Cory Booker, Clinton.
• Monday, May 27, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Burlington.

I will be looking at specific policy issues (promoting responsible budgets; decreasing costs of health care, housing, child care, and education; and promoting campaign finance as a start) as well as "electability" whatever that means.... If you have a specific question you would like me to ask or something to look out for, post it in the comments below.

The "democratic socialist" label is like nails on a chalkboard to me, no matter if it's Bernie proclaiming it proudly or FOX news dropping it with disdain. Democratic Socialists support policy reform in areas I care deeply about, such as healthcare, affordable housing and childcare, and campaign finance. They believe that democracy should work equally, for everyone. So why do I have such a visceral reaction to the label?

I have spent more time than I care to admit trying to figure out why "democratic socialist" bothers me so much. I have questioned whether the time I spent post-communist Eastern Europe has made me overly sensitive. I looked up the word" socialist" because it has been a long time since college poly sci and wanted to confirm it still means the collective ownership of the means of production (it does). I tried to understand how Bernie and AOC describe democratic socialism but direct quotes, in context, are hard to find. The secondary sources I found, are a bit biased, both to the left and to the right. That said, I found one direct quote by AOC that stuck in my head.

She is contradicting the definition of socialism. Is it just AOC? I go to the Democratic Socialists of America site. The cacophonic phrase is there too.

Suddenly, I am transported to fifth grade English class and diagramming sentences. The dust from the chalkboard is tickling my nose and I can feel the scratchy polyester fabric of my brown-plaid Catholic school uniform. My head is filled with subjects and verbs and straight lines and squiggly lines and conjunctions and adjectives and get out a pen and paper.

I know I am a bit of a grammar geek and that most people don't harken back to grade-school grammar exercises, but by relegating "democratic" to the adjective, the democratic socialists make "democratic" the less important of the two words. This subordination is what causes me to cringe at the label. And whether democratic socialists like it or not, it's not just me.

The word socialism is still viewed negatively by independent voters, in more than one poll. Although this has begun to shift, DJT and his cohort have already started using this fact in his messaging for 2020. Multiple op-eds have been written about how the democratic socialists need to do more to explain how the policies of democratic socialism are misunderstood, but wouldn't it be easier to stop using the word? Or at a minimum, adopt "social democrats"?

I know hard-core socialists don't believe the two phrases are interchangeable, but what is more important? Using the word "socialist"? Gambling that a full explanation of the platform will erase the historical baggage that comes with the word "socialism" for voters over 30?

Or can we stop using "socialism" and focus on making healthcare, education, housing, and childcare more affordable? And reforming campaign finance laws? Because isn't that the point? Ensuring our democracy works for everyone, equally?