Wrong. We do not need to purge moderates from the party. That's just as fucking stupid

[cali]

as the wingnuts who want to purge what they consider to be RINOs from the pukester party. Sorry, but Nebraska ain't gonna be electing a Bernie Sanders anytime soon. Mississipi won't be electing Barny Frank either.

What we need is leadership in the House and Senate that keeps blue dogs in line, but insisting on party purity and unsullied liberalism in all parts of the country is a bullet train to a marginalized party.

[SIMPLYB1980]

1. K&R for the truth.

:thumbsup:

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. It's simple math.

Even if we were to get lock-solid liberals in every state that elected Obama (which is a long shot in and of itself), that'd only be 56 truly liberal Senators and we'd be in the exact same spot that we are right now. And like I said, there's no way you'd get lock-solid liberals in a fair number of those states, so that's a pipe dream.

[baldguy]

3. The moderates need to support the Democratic Party agenda rather than blocking it.

[el_bryanto]

4. That is true, and guys like Lieberman and the like need to be taken to the woodshed

That said, obviously moderates are going to try to shape the agenda into something more pleasing to their convictions.

Bryant

[HereSince1628]

5. I don't understand one thing about this...

Are you saying it's ok to have blue dogs, so long as they meow rather than wag their tails and bark?

Imagine a party where you accept green people, but only if green people vote for blue values. There would be no reason for green people to feel like they should belong and they probably wouldn't. Wouldn't the end result of the hypothetical be the same as if the green people were banned?

[Sebastian Doyle]

6. Actual leadership would be a good start.

Harry Reid didn't show any signs of a spine until his own re-election was clearly in jeopardy. And I'm still not convinced that he's serious about it. Having actual Democrats in all the leadership positions (both the House and the Senate) would be a big step in the proper direction. Primary out the DINOs when and where you can, but in the meantime, they should not be controlling the agenda.

[madrchsod]

7. what we need is a guy like lbj that knew how to wheel and deal

obama is`t ready and harry just can`t cut it...

pelosi is doing a pretty good job in the house but we need real leadership in the senate. kerry,durbin,or ?

[cali]

12. exactly. harry is useless.

[boston bean]

43. it would help to have a clear, concise, bold policy from the White House...

[jgraz]

8. Quit calling them "moderates". They're corporate right-wingers.

The two actions are not equivalent. The Pukes want to get rid of people who don't hate "the other" quite enough. We want to get rid of people who don't give a fuck about us and are just in it for the paycheck.

[Echo In Light]

9. +1

[OHdem10]

11. They are conservative Democrats who tend to vote more with

the Republicans than our Party.

I am not for purges. I am for ending the practice of telling
Blue Dog Candidates they can vote their constituency.

Let's be straight here. Their consituency is not the middle
class or the poor.

They deliberately choose to compete with Republicans for Business
Vote, the Rich and Upper Middle Class. Upper Middle Class and
Rich are mostly Republicans. This is why they fear GOP.

No Purge. Just get a handle on our candidates.

[jgraz]

17. No, they really aren't.

The Blue Dogs gave themselves away during the healthcare debate. If they were truly conservative, they'd have swung toward a public option as soon as the CBO showed that it brought down the deficit. Instead, they just kept doing whatever their corporate sponsors told them to.

[RaleighNCDUer]

23. Exactly. Not only are they not voting 'conservative' principles - supposedly

in accordance with the wishes of their constituency - but they are not supporting their constituency either. Neither conservative financials, as you point out, gets their vote, nor does the wishes of the populace which, even in red states, favors a public option. Clearly, they are listening to someone else.

[OHdem10]

25. GOP is the Conservative Business Party.

The GOP does not want HCR ---"it hurts business"

[onenote]

46. actually blue dogs are conservatives who vote with Democrats more than with Repubs

Check out their actual voting records. They abandon the party on some pretty important issues, which is very bad. But its simply wrong as a factual matter to say that they vote more with repubs than with Democrats. Take, for example, the Recovery Act. Not a single repub voted for it. Around three-quarters of the blue dogs supported it.

Do I wish that the blue dogs were more progressive? Of course. Would it be better if they were replaced by real repubs? Of course not.

[whatchamacallit]

10. Stay or go, I won't waste a vote on them anymore (nt)

[FarCenter]

13. In a democracy, you have to get to 50% (60 in the Senate)

So you have to build a coalition of people who don't agree on everything, maybe not even on a lot of things.

[Salviati]

14. Leadership would be good...

It should be clear that anyone who joins Lieberman in his tooth and nail fight against what the party and his constituants want will not provide him any "cover", but merely provide more people to be punished.

I've got nothing against conservative democrats who are accurately representing the will of thier constituants, but what I do have a problem with is those that don't understand that they are not the center of the democratc party, they are near the edge, and who prevent the rest of the party from getting work done.

If you're threatening to fillibuster the party, or you are going against the wishes of the party AND your constituants, and the party leadership cannot drag you back into line, then as far as I'm concerned, you should be primaried in the hopes of getting an actual democrat in your seat.

[Kingofalldems]

15. That goes both ways

[RoadRage]

16. Couldn't Agree More! NY23 is a great example..

Republicans / Conservatives are having a great time playing the "either your super duper hard lined right-winged conservative or leave" game. Guess who that benifits? US. Democrats.

I live in Nebraska. Hate Ben Nelson all you want.. but realize one thing, it's either HIM - or it's a Lee Terry Look-a-like in this state.. and a Blue Dog is far better then a far right-winged conservative. Ben at least votes on the "D" side 1/2 of the time.. that that is 1/2 more then any Nebraska Republican would ever do.

Although it's tough for costal democrats to understand - the midwest & south are slower, and have a different set of values. I'm not FROM that set (i'd be much happier living in Seattle myself)... but it is what it is. If we push to get rid of the Blue Dogs, then guess what... these people stay home, or vote "R".

I'd rather have a big tent that covers more land and is a bit slower to move, then a small tent that is 100% pure, and not large enough to get anything actually accomplished.

[T Wolf]

29. We will not get a big tent that moves slowlt. We get a tent that is so big that true,

Democratic ideals and values are washed away in the pursuit of those reich-wingers who would never support anything progressive.

A Senate of 100 sell-outs like Baucus, et al would really do us good, wouldn't it?

[BlueDemKev]

18. Absolutely True

You are right on. We must be an inclusive party if we are to stay in the majority and have the ability to do ANYTHING good.

[joeycola]

19. I agree, Why is it ok for Dems to purge but not Repugs to purge. ??

[Sebastian Doyle]

38. The Repukes are purging

Look at the NY congressional race, for example. They shit all over the legitmate Republican in that contest, forced her out of the race, and supported the neocon teabagger nutcase.

[LynneSin]

20. It's the ugly but realistic truth

I know PA-10 very well. If it wasn't for a moderate like Chris Carney that seat would be republican. Carney only won that seat because the incumbant was caught beating his mistress. And he's safe in that seat as long as he stays moderate else the seat would go back to republicans.

Must we give-in totally to the Chris Carney's of the world? Hell no - but we need to learn how to work with them

[Roland99]

21. "blue dogs" aren't moderates. They're GOP-lite!

Since when has a moderate liberal been pro-corporation over pro-individual????

[sufrommich]

22. It amazes me that the people calling to purge the moderates

in the Democratic party cannot grasp the irony of their argument.

[Mudoria]

24. They like purity even it means being a powerless minority...

[Romulox]

28. That's because it's propaganda, and not reality...

First of all, who are the "moderates", and, for that matter, who are the "they" who are calling for "their" purge?

A lot of indefinite pronouns in this little conspiracy theory... :shrug:

[Romulox]

26. Pandering to rightwingers does not advance our agenda, and it sanctifies theirs

Thus, "free trade" is the strict orthodoxy amongst both parties, and anyone who opposes it are treated like loons.

[Echo In Light]

31. “Politics is the shadow cast on society by big business.”—John Dewey

[cascadiance]

27. What we need to do is champion TRUE moderates, NOT corporatists MASQUERADING as moderates!

The DLC faction of this party has been at this for years, making sure that the so-called "moderate" wing of our party had purity in the sense that it was always corporatist at its core. We saw this when the likes of Schumer managed to push a TRUE moderate like Paul Hackett out of working his way up the Democratic Party ranks. Hackett would have been a good model for a REAL moderate that could champion things like gun ownership rights and other issues that would appeal to the center where he was, but still not be a slave to the corporate lobbyists that enslave so many other so-called "moderates".

I think ultimately the more we can expose the real corporatists for what they are, and support the other REAL moderate candidates in the primaries that will still look to serve the local constituencies of PEOPLE they represent, and not which corporate constituency lines their pockets the best, we'll win these battles.

I think crazy as many of the right wingers are in this election, I think many of them are also seeing the light here in rejecting some of the corporatist elements of their party in many places too. It kind of started with Huckabee, and has manifested itself in other places.

We need to appeal to some of the less extreme elements that are more independent leaning, etc. that also have big concerns over corporate ownership of our government. That's where we win. Unfortunately, it might require some HEAVY chemo put on our party to get rid of the cancer that it is in it now, that is at near fatal stages in the GOP...

[mike_c]

30. no, the left needs to take its votes elsewhere and let the RW dems...

...fester in their own bile until they go the way of the dinosaurs.

Would that suit your purposes better? The problem is that there is no real representation for liberals in this country any longer. Both major parties espouse different flavors of conservatism as they whore for corporate sponsorship and the increasingly vocal outrage of the right wing fringe.

I agree with you insofar as the democratic party should not BAN right wingers-- piss on the term "moderate," thank you very much, they're right wing obstructionists plain and simple-- but it should tell them to put up or shut up and get behind liberal legislation, just like liberals have held their noses and voted for democrats for decades as the party marched steadily rightward. These days, Richard Nixon would be too liberal for the likes of Rahm Emmanual and Harry Reid, democratic party leaders who court votes from Joe Lieberman and Olympia Snowe and screw the left rather than do what's right for the people, all the while counting their purses of silver from corporate lobbyists and rich donors.

I'm a liberal. I'd like some real political representation. I'd like it to come from the Democratic Party, but the tent is just not big enough to hold folks like us and the blue dog coalition at the same time, not for long, at least. Liberals have been propping up the democratic party for decades because we don't feel like we have anywhere else to turn. That won't continue indefinitely. It's time to move the party leftward, or find another party to vote for-- one that recognizes the futility of pandering to the likes of DLCers and blue dogs.

They can have the democratic party if they want it badly enough to make it just another version of conservative fear-of-meaningful-change. It just isn't my party any longer.

[whatchamacallit]

32. Pretty much how I feel too

:thumbsup:

[Romulox]

33. Better yet, why not come up with a NEW name for what is now the OLD party of George HW Bush

Even George Bush 41 didn't swallow this "trickle down" crap as hard as many so-called "moderate" Dems.

[mmonk]

34. I take offense of your comparing us to the wingnuts.

Wingnuts support ideas that run counter to equal protection under the law, the rule of law, and support illegal atrocities such as torture. Your way never gets anything progressive or liberal passed that isn't watered down to ineffective blends that contain conservative ideology. They have gotten what they want all the time for nearly 40 years. The way we have been doing it with a mix of incompatible ideas with the leadership always choosing the conservative path doesn't really work for me nor make me feel I'm represented. I have a right to not vote for those that constantly are against me and I suffer no delusions as to the score.

[Gold Metal Flake]

35. Harry Ried is a moderate.

It's working great!

[girl gone mad]

36. I guess I'm confused. Wouldn't the take away from last night be:

don't run to the right?

Politicians who pandered to the right wing or were perceived as corporatists lost (with the exception of Bloomberg, who still faced a tougher race than expected).

[Toasterlad]

37. If You Can't Threaten Them With Replacement, How Exactly Do You Propose to "Keep Them In Line"?

Given that our president can't take a leak without getting permission from the nearest republican, who exactly do you imagine is going to strike fear into these oh-so-valuable blue dogs?

[PVnRT]

42. Our Great White Fathers in D.C. know what is best for us

Now fall in line like a good party member and let other people decide what you should believe in.

[MattBaggins]

39. I'll agree but with two exemptions

Corporate Dems: Baucus, Bayh and Lieberman. They are bought and paid for by the insurance companies and will put the pay checks EACH of their wives receive before the needs of us as citizens.

Gay Marriage and other rights: I can understand squabbling over monetary issues; military needs, and many other issues, but letting gays live their lives as they see fit and with dignity is such a simple god damned no brainer. I'm not even gay and it outrages me to no end. Two other people getting married is non of my fracking business and has no effect on my life. I will not support a dem who is against basic civil liberties.

[Odin2005]

40. IMO we need more activity in the primaries to keep the moderates on their toes.

It's my understanding that many incumbents face no primary challengers.

[eridani]

41. But we sure as hell should be taking on Dems who are too conservative--

--for their own districts. This strategy takes more time, but is far more likely to succeed in the long run.

[cali]

44. Completely agree with that.

[democrank]

45. I`m not for purging moderates from the party.

What I am for is ceasing to pretend that there`s something to celebrate when we sacrifice our principles in order to win. Regular folks in Vermont have plenty in common with people in Nebraska...or Louisiana...or anywhere else. Unemployment is unemploymet. Foreclosure is foreclosure. No health insurance is no health insurance. A dead soldier is a dead soldier. The big problem is in our "leaders" and their lack of courage or vision. If they weren`t so anxious to please their big donors, they could rally more than half the country behind them on economic and social justice issues alone.