Big Vichy Dem-Ellen Tauscher..campaign manager doesn't like democracy

[LiviaOlivia]

CA-10: Tauscher's campaign manager whines about potential challenge
by kos
Tue Dec 12, 2006

Nice whine.

Only a month has passed since the Dems took back the House and Senate, and the divisive efforts of the netroots to rid the party of elected officials they don’t agree with has geared up in full force. Instead of doing what most good Democrats should be doing right now, which is working on getting our Freshman members of Congress re-elected in 2008, increasing our majorities in the House and Senate, and electing a Democratic President, the netroots are targeting sitting Democrats for defeat. That’s right. Instead of focusing on beating Republicans, these vocal Democratic activists are focusing on beating Democrats.

Last year, their misguided efforts were primarily concentrated on now re-elected Sen. Joe Lieberman, although they also targeted various "moderate" (bad word for the netroots) members of Congress in their primaries, such as Congresswoman Jane Harman and Congressman Adam Schiff. Their newest target: Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, D-Alamo.

It's not surprising that this writer, Ellen Tauscher campaign manager Katie Merrill, would try to head off what will be a vicious fight for this seat in a primary. Unlike her apparent hero Joe Lieberman, Tauscher won't get a "do-over" if she loses. And it's no surprise, if you read her full whine, that she mischaracterizes the nature and source of the local opposition to Tauscher. Again, she's taking a book from her hero Joe Lieberman.

There's a comprehensive response to this post over at Calitics, which will undoubtedly be a huge resource as we gear up to take out a right-wing Democrat in a 59-percent Kerry district.

But here's the bottom line -- people like the local net- and grassroots and me argue that Tauscher is increasingly out of touch with Democrats in her district. She'll argue that she's not. Ultimately the Democratic voters of the district will decide who is right.

That's "democracy". And I'm not sure why so many people are afraid of letting people decide. In my perfect world, every incumbent -- especially those in safe seats -- would receive a stiff primary challenge. Otherwise, they become lazy and unresponsive.

So in CA-10, we will have a candidate, and there will be a primary. We'll all make our best cases, and to the victor will go the seat. As it should.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/12/12/152644/12