You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #116: Colorado isn't a purely red state [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Zodiak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-06-05 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #109
116. Colorado isn't a purely red state
But Salazar is one of our worst RW Democrats.

Carper (only one notch better than Leiberman) is a RW Democrat from Delaware.

Regardless, I define a moderate or "centrist" Democrat as a Democrat who votes for progressive issues 50% of the time (versus the Republican position). If they cross that line and vote for Republican issues more than 50% of the time (and by proxy, Bush), then I do not consider them "centrist" or "moderate". They are right-wingers.

reid (NV)
Rockefeller (WV)
baucus (MN)
Bingaman (NM)
Cantwell (WA)
Johnson (SD)
Kohl (WI)
Conrad (ND)
feinstein (CA)
carper (DE)
leiberman (con)
landrieu (LA)
lincoln(ark)
nelson (FL)
salazar (CO)
pryor (ark)
nelson (NE)

That is all of them that are 50% or less (Reid and Rockefeller are at 50% exactly). Washington, Wisconsin, New Mexico, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and California deserve better than RW Democrats who vote for Bush most of the time. (not one issue, but MOST of the time).

I would argue that many of those "red states" are no longer "red states" judging by approval ratings. We have to adjust (as progressives) to the new reality and try to get some pressure on these RW Democrats and gain some voice in the party...at least to remind them that it is DEMOCRATS who elect them to office, not Republicans. Of course, if these are really Republicans who had to register Democrat to oust an incumbent Republican (Ben Nelson fits that, if a Nebraska poster here is correct), then I wonder why they are in the party at all.

I don't buy the idea that "red staters" will always be conservative. I also want more representation for the burgeoning progressive movements in those red states. The last thing I will accept is the notion that liberals have to be put on the back-burner for those states. The truth is we never put much energy into "red" states to even know what they will respond to. As a consequence, RW lies gain a lot of traction in red states without a counter-argument.

Liberals have been put on the back-burner for far too long...and the populists long been pushed out of the party. I say the "big tent" should start letting people through a door long since closed. The open door is letting in the odious ones who hurt Democratic core positions and hurt our electoral chances because of lack of support from the base and morale-stripping betrayals.

But I'm just throwing this out there, too. I only qualify it by the fact that I have been in a "red state" all of my life. But I'm just one loser on a message board.

Thanks for the convo.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC