Matt Stoller and Chris Bowers of OpenLeft are gathering data on Blue Dog Democrats and New Democrats in order to cull ammunition against them for “breaking with progressives”:
And so, you may have noticed a lot of chatter about ‘Bush Dog’ Democrats over the past few days. That’s not an accident. We’ve been working to identify the group of conservative Democrats in the House who are holding back progressives from being able to effectively govern. These are concentrated in two main caucuses, the Blue Dog Caucus and the New Democrat caucuses. Blue Dogs consider themselves heirs to the Southern conservative wing of the party, and tend to vote for socially restrictive policies and a hawkish foreign policy. The New Democrats tend to be more partisan, but often are key to passing important pieces of right-wing legislation, such as the Bankruptcy Bill. In the last few years, these two caucuses have expanded their numbers, and the Blue Dogs have become the swing vote in the House allowing for effective conservative control of the Congress. We want to put a stop to the embrace of conservative values among House Democrats, and make sure that when Democrats are elected, they act like Democrats.
…
The first step in stopping this behavior is to identify the people engaging in it and offer up criticism. There are a few reasons for this. One, many of these members feel no pressure to vote correctly or uphold progressive values. Criticism is the signal they are relying on to let them know when they err. Two, some of these members may need to face a primary challenge, and it’s useful for potential primary challengers to know that there is criticism of these members. Three, other members considering joining the Bush Dog caucus may be dissuaded if they know there will be criticism. Four, candidates running for office will finally have a signal on how they should talk about being good Democrats that are willing to take tough votes.
Now, you might say, “Meh — Another netroots purge attempt, big deal”, and I sympathize with that characterization of their effort, but for one thing…the regional warfare factor. Take a look at the target list:
*Jason Altmire, PA-04
John Barrow, GA-12
*Melissa Bean, IL-18
Dan Boren, OK-02
*Leonard Boswell, IA-03
Alan Boyd, FL-02
*Chris Carney, PA-10
Ben Chandler, KY-06
Jim Cooper, TN-05
*Jim Costa, CA-20
Bud Cramer, AL-05
Henry Cuellar, TX-28
Lamar Davis, TN-04
*Joe Donnelly, IN-02
Chet Edwards, TX-17
*Brad Ellsworth, IN-08
Bob Etheridge, NC-02
Bart Gordon, TN-06
Stephanie Herseth, SD-AL
*Baron Hill, IN-09
Nick Lampson, TX-22
Dan Lipinski, IL-03
Jim Marshall, GA-08
*Jim Matheson, UT-02
Mike McIntyre, NC-07
Charlie Melancon, LA-03
*Colin Peterson, MN-07
Earl Pomeroy, ND-AL
Ciro Rodriguez, TX-23
Mike Ross, AR-04
John Salazar, CO-03
Heath Shuler, NC-11
Vic Snyder, AR-02
*Zack Space, OH-18
John Tanner, TN-08
Gene Taylor, MS-04
*Tim Walz, MN-01
*Charlie Wilson, OH-06
(asterisks indicate non-Southern or Southwestern office holders)
Twenty-six out of thirty-eight (68%) of these targeted Democrats are from Southern or Southwestern regions (with the exception of Stephanie Herseth and Earl Pomeroy, courtesy SeanH in comments), which makes sense, since it’s primarily Blue Dogs we’re talking about here. That makes this another netroots war against regions of the country that elect these Democrats precisely because they are Blue Dogs. It’s obvious when you read netroots diaries that there is a lot of disdain for and rage against Democratic voters who don’t identify with the progressive movement, and efforts like this one by Stoller and Bowers (Northeastern liberals both) only serve to highlight that disdain and rage. Rather than “punishing” the Blue Dogs, the New Democrats, or the voters who elect them, the Democratic party is likely to be punished itself at the polls if this effort becomes associated with the party, rather than the progressives.
Writing off the South has never proven to be a winning strategy for Democrats. Even given the results of last year’s election, it’s unlikely to be one in the future.
Update: Where Stephanie Herseth and Earl Pomeroy are concerned, I think they are well representative of their respective State’s constituency — conservative Democrats).
Update 2: Left of Ohio isn’t fond of Bowers’ and Stoller’s effort.
Welcome again, Instapundit readers, and thanks to Glenn for linking!
Linked at AOL News Elections Blog, thanks, Scott!
Linked at Stubborn Facts, thanks, Tully!
Linked at BillHobbs.com, thanks, Bill!
Linked at Daily Pundit, thanks, Bill!
Linked at Volunteer Voters, thanks, A.C.!
Linked at Columbuser.com, thanks, Brian!
Linked at Wizbang Politics, thanks, Jim!
Filed under: Democrats, Election 2008, Netroots, Politics
This is great news! Watching leftists eat their own is a particular plaesure of mine. Now if they’ll just nominate Her Royal Thighness for POTUS the plan will come togethr fully.
I thought I just read that the Blue Dogs have recently gotten fundraiser windfalls – doesn’t sound like they’re outta step to me.
Just another example of how far out of touch with reality they have become.
Sure, destroy the only things that might give you a smidgen of hope.
Long since time for the democratic party to be resigned to the dust bin of history, just another failed socialist “experiment”.
Lyndon Johnson was once quoted as saying the difference between liberals and cannibals is that cannibals only eat their enemies.
Karl Rove may be gone, but the Stupid Powder he added to the drinking water of all Democrat activists continues to do its work.
This regionalist bigotry began in the 1968 convention in Chicago – a couple of days before the arrest of Dan Rather, before the street demonstrations that define that convention, the Democrats rigged a voice vote that threw out the legally elected delegations from several Southern states. The Georgia delegation was replaced by one led by Julian Bond. As a result, the Republican party, which was almost non-existent in 1968, now dominates Georgia politics. Such regionalist exclusion has never helped the Democrats.
So now that a few fairly responsible Democrats are getting the Reality Suppository and their probable candidate Ms Clinton sees her road to the White House as running almost as far to the right on foreign policy as Rudy, those inmates who thought they were running the asylum suddenly find themselves standing in the play yard beating themselves on the head while the the rest of us just look on hoping they’ll knock themselves unconscious so it’ll be easier to get the restraints back on and cart them back to their cells.
So they would foresake a majority in order to have ideological purity. Well, in a few years they can be forever consigned to the minority and take great pleasure in having every member vote the same way every time in a losing cause. When you think about it, it makes sense. In order for the netroots to be happy and to flourish, they have to have something to fight against. It is much harder to fight against the system when you are in charge of it. This is all about job security!
Is Openleft really out to get thees people or are they just trying to save their positions. Many of these are ones that the RNC will going after in 2008 because they are in right-leaning districts are ripe for picking off. OpenLeft may be using reverse psychology to help them. While they don’t always vote their way, they do allow for the Dems to hold all control of all the committees.
No trackbacks here but linked at the url below:
http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/08/22/a-september-showdown-on-iraq/
It is my contention that Southern Democrat is one of the most politically-confused species of today’s electorate.
Most folks I know (in TN) who ID themselves as Democrat are 1.) pro-gun, 2.) pro-life, 3.) support the war on terror, and 4.) conservatively Christian. (There are probably more ironies – just can’t think of them all right now.) So why do they identify with the national party that is overwhelmingly opposed to these ideals?
I welcome the Netroots effort to try to target these politicians. Maybe it will make voters around here do some soul-searching regarding their party identity. I just don’t see a lot Bay Area-type liberals winning seats in this region.
In ‘06 they targeted Joe Leiberman (in a liberal state, even) and look what happened!
Arthur: I resemble that remark, pal :-)
I guess the results of the Joe Lieberman debacle haven’t taken hold yet.
Excellent!
The phrases “holding back progressives from being able to effectively govern.”
“…vote correctly or uphold progressive values.” and
“Criticism is the signal they are relying on to let them know when they err.” have an ominous, Soviet, tone to them, don’t they? The attitude that progressives are the majority – they aren’t, they are part of a Democratic coalition but are only 19% of the population on their own – and that they have the right and responsibilty of doctrinal enforcement on other types of Democrats, echo a century of marxists purporting to speak for The People.
Don’t misunderstand and think that I am suggesting that these progressives want to send folks off to re-education camps or liquidate opponents. Some might, though I expect and pray their numbers are few. But this rhetoric is the same as what has gone before, with tragic result. It is the attitude of those who believe their correctness gives them the rights of a majority, rather than a simple ticket to the negotiations like everyone else.
It’s never good to have one weak party and one strong. Remember the democrats got elected because the Republicans got too fat and happy and lost touch.
A few weeks ago all the Democratic Presidential candidates were talking about getting the troops out of Iraq. Now all of a sudden the surge is working and they want to stick it out for a while.
What the fringe says is not very relevant, there is no party purity in a two party system. If they want Party purity, they can join the Green Party, or the Libertarian Party, and see how far “purity” gets them.
Maybe it’s time for the Blue Dogs to come out openly and campaign as Red, White and Blue Dogs…
Pssst. The secret is, largely, Democrats have never “acted like Democrats” in the nutroots mode.
It has been said repeatedly that the Democratic party needs both wings to fly. These idiots think they can get by with just the wingtips on the left wing. Obviously trying to achieve the incredible success of the Libertarian party. Clearly no knowledge of the give and take that comes with democracy. I always wondered what would happen if the “progressives” got every wish. What excuses would they come up for the miserable failure that would accompany it. How long before fascism sets in. Purging the party because some members hold viewpoints closely held by the majority of those they represent, rather than the viewpoints of the NorthEast or the bay area is a step in that direction.
This is typical Stalinist behavior. When the Five-Year Plan (or its equivalent) if failing, it obviously can’t be because the Plan is wrong. It is correct by definition. Therefore, the cause of failure *must* be ‘wreckers’ — i.e. those who aren’t thinking properly and are blocking success.
There are only a couple of answers for the ‘false-conscious’ ‘wreckers’. One is re-education (usually in a camp that make Gitmo look like Club Med) and the other is death.
In this case, the death is political loss (quite possibly only because the politically correct thinkers don’t yet have the power to put those who disagree with them to death), but the impulse is the same.
Linked up to Stubborn Facts. Thank you for wading though the fever swamps and finding this for us, thus saving millions of brain cells from an ugly death….
Ann, it is, in my opinion, more about power and control than purity. The gloat and glee expressed when Ned Lamont got the Dem nomination over Joe Lieberman in Conn. was palpable and obvious in the internet even before one booted up the computer. (OK, hyperbole, but you know what I mean.)
If the useful idiots think candidates with New England-liberal positions can get elected in GA, TN, TX, and AR, I enthusiastically encourage them to nominate such people.
Clue train: it was because of these very “Bush Dog” Dems that they won the majority, and there didn’t get elected on a “run away from Iraq” platform. Oh, well, the sooner the idealogues drive the “progressive” Democrats to the dust-heap of history the sooner we can have two relevent parties in opposition instead of the screeching whine-fest we are too often treated to.
“You can’t fix stupid”
Ron White-Blue collar comedy
It gets even more of a shoot in the foot when you consider that 10 of the remaining 12 ‘targets’ are midwestern (Big-10 football) states, so I’d say you have an even larger problem than you thought. I’d say someone needs to double check the definition of “representative”
That should be 24 southerners rather than 26. Stephanie Herseth and Earl Pomeroy represent South Dakota and North Dakota. The “AL” at the end of their lines is for “At Large”, not Alabama.
At large means they represent their entire state because it’s not populous enough for more than one Rep. So “PA-04″ means Altmire represents or Pennsylvania’s 4th district and “SD-AL” means Herseth represents South Dakota at large.
“1.) pro-gun, 2.) pro-life, 3.) support the war on terror, and 4.) conservatively Christian.”
If they’re also 5.) anti-free trade, 6.) pro-union, and 7.) pro-welfare then they’re populists whose loyalties will be divided.
On the left they’ve got John Edwards. Were Republicans to veer toward populism it would sound something like Pat Buchanan.
so how do I get contributions to these guys? This is an effort well worth supporting. Obviously another ploy by that evil genius Karl Rove to get a Republican House in 2008 for which they fell hook, line and sinker. Whoopee!
Seeing as how no Red or Blue state votes 100% with a party, it’s absurd to think in terms of Northeasterners/Bay Area vs. the Rest. We’re all Americans getting our attention diverted by petty turf wars while the powerful and the crafty line their pockets.
Say what you want about Ron Paul, but his brutal adherence to the Constitution and Just War Theory and Small Government scares the crap out of both parties and their allies.
Do I believe in everything he stands for? No. I think we need oversight in some areas of our economy. I also don’t believe he could accomplish all that much in just 4 or 8 years with an uncooperative Congress. But what a civics lesson we’d all be engaged in as we watch both houses of Congress squirm as he puts the screws to them on the biggest stage.
[...] more on this at Cadillac Tight (via [...]
Is OpenLeft Karl Rove’s masterpiece?
I can hardly conceive a plan better designed to create a lasting Republican majority.
[...] OpenLeft directs netroots fire at conservative Democrats « Cadillac Tight [...]
[...] Hobbs reports on an element of the netroots that is declaring open season on Democrats like Jim Cooper: You may have noticed a lot of chatter about ‘Bush Dog’ Democrats [...]
If a “progressive’s” head explodes does it make a noise? Does anyone care?
I sincerely hope they keep this up, perhaps we can finally put and end to this “progressive” socialist claptrap and get back to building America.
They aren’t satisfied with gaining a majority which brought the leadership to the radical leftists of their party with the Schumer strategy of fooling the voters with moderate Dems and beating the Republicans with them.
Now they must bring those moderates back in line so that there can be no dissent. They want a Soviet style rubber stamp congress.
Melissa Bean (D-IL-18) won in a district that has been and still is mostly Republican. She did so because she worked her hind end off to understand her district (and because lightning struck, but that’s the way it goes sometimes). The Chicago Tribune just had an article this week about how Democratic Party leaders are studying pols like Ms. Bean to see how they managed to win in republican-leaning districts.
So apparently the nutroots really haven’t gotten the message: not only are the Blue Dogs key to the Dhimmicrats holding the Congress, the leadership wants even more of them.
[...] Tobacco takes a look at the Netroots taking aim at their swing district reps. Matt Stoller and Chris Bowers of OpenLeft are gathering data on Blue Dog Democrats and New [...]
[...] OpenLeft directs netroots fire at conservative Democrats Matt Stoller and Chris Bowers of OpenLeft are gathering data on Blue Dog Democrats and New Democrats in order to cull […] [...]
Henry Cuellar isn’t fron the southwest?
Where exactly would Texas be located, then?
In defense of Progressives, they are interested in not sharing power within the Party with others, and having their own way. Their own way reflecting the moneyed Eastern aristo class and the people who want to join that aristocracy. Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry, and their admirers.
It makes perfect sense from a self-interested point to exile or defeat the Blue Dogs even if it means no White House victory, or loss of Congressional Majority. Since the Progressives are not interested in policy issues per se but control of power internally and using that to extract money from others to themselves.
The various NGO-istans, “activists” etc. are part of that money-extraction process.
Moreover the class interests of wealthy elites is far different than those of the mostly ordinary working-middle class people.
The fundamental interests of the middle-working class which tends to be concentrated in the South, Midwest, and Mountain West is cheap land (easy home ownership and business start-up) and expensive labor (high wages).
The fundamental interests of the Dem Progressive Activists is cheap labor (easy to hire cheap nannies and gardeners, no threat to position from upwardly mobile middle-working class high-wage earners) and expensive land (which they already own).
Forget the rhetoric and that stuff because no one cares or pays attention — look at who benefits money-wise and the politics become clear.
This isn’t new — it goes back at least to Andrew Jackson vs. Martin van Buren.
Kurt,
I don’t have an asterisk next to Cuellar — he’s included in the Southerners/Southwesterners. Along with, amusingly enough, netroots hero Ciro Rodriguez, who is being targeted by Stoller and Bowers.
I think the netroots have taken the advice of John Kerry to heart.
A little interlude in a Concentration Camp where the Blue Dog brains can undergo a cleansing process is highly therapeutic, or so he says.
The Aushwitz “Starvation Diet”, like any good Fat Farm, will help shed a few excess pounds around the midriff, and everywhere else, too.
I thoroughly agree with Commisar Kerry. Sentence them to a vaction on a modern Ashwitz or Magyar. And if all else fails, there is always a joyous boat ride or a game of ‘Rocks Keep Falling on My Head” in the Elysian Fields.
Where can wee find such a vacation paradise? I’m sure the leftists can lease some space from Castro in his Tiger Cages, or from Kimjong Il in North Korea, or Junt Hiao in Beijing.
They have all the up to date facilities for a total brain lathering.
Then the Blue dogs won’t have any problems parroting the Party line.
How is this effort different from Club for Growth-type Republicans who tried to purge Arlen Specter or Lincoln Chafee or other “RINOs.” The GOP practices the same form of “bigotry” against the Northeast and Upper Midwest – the ancestral home of the Republican Party. My former Congressman, a sensible moderate named Joe Schwarz, was primaried out by an absolute moron named Tim Walberg. Now the Democrats are likely to pick up that seat (MI-7) when they run the popular (and moderate) Democrat Mark Schauer in 2008. If Toomey had won in PA in 2004, Joe Hoeffel would be the Senator right now. In RI, at least Chafee gave Republicans a fighting chance.
Both sides practice this form of purge politics. There is clearly a center that the bases of both parties avoids. But is that center socially conservative and economically liberal (most Blue Dogs and Buchanan-type Republicans) or socially liberal and economically conservatives (New Democrats, old-school Yankee Republicans). That’s the real question.
Elrod – maybe. But the rhetoric sounds a bit different, so I can’t call “running against” the same as a purge.
The netroots AND the Republicans against Heath Shuler? I love it! Heath isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer but he was young, handsome, and energetic and running against a Republican, Charles Taylor, who was a hog when it came to pork barrel politics, and who was not always the most ethical.
You could see the Asheville liberals just cringe when the first person Heath thanked when he won was “his Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.” I always wondered how long it would be before they turned on him after he served his purpose of defeating Charles Taylor.
So they would foresake a majority in order to have ideological purity.
That attitude leads directly to electoral irrelevance. It’s the same pit the Libertarians have been wallowing in for decades, now…
Altmire? He got elected in a middle-of-the-road Republican suburban district; there’s no way in hell he could be replaced by a hard-left Democrat. Same thing for Baron Hill – the “Bloody Ninth” couldn’t conceivably elect somebody Kucinichy enough to make these folk happy, not unless you disenfranchised 80% of the district’s electorate, and only then if it were a well-chosen 80%.
[...] Win 2008 August 23, 2007 Posted by taoist in Politics. trackback The Nutroots are actually trying to destroy the Blue Dog Dems for not being crazy like [...]
Just one quick point of clarification:
Melissa Bean is the Congresswoman from the 8th District. I lived in her district for about a year after she was elected.
The 18th District is represented by Ray LaHood from Peoria. That’s one of the three districts that split up my hometown.
How is this effort different from Club for Growth-type Republicans who tried to purge Arlen Specter or Lincoln Chafee or other “RINOs.” … Both sides practice this form of purge politics. There is clearly a center that the bases of both parties avoids. But is that center socially conservative and economically liberal (most Blue Dogs and Buchanan-type Republicans) or socially liberal and economically conservatives (New Democrats, old-school Yankee Republicans).
No different at all (remember the AZ 8th and Chaffee), absolutely, and both of the above.
The “middle” is simply those who don’t march in lockstep with the wings, and who are not seriously attached to either party, whether they are registered to it or not.
Whenever one party gets too locked in to control by its more wing elements and starts excluding its moderates as legitimate members, it WILL lose ground in swing districts, and handicaps itself in national elections.
Wingers, OTOH, want that uber-control of the party power, which includes punishing the heretics and apostates.
[...] Cadillac Tight has more on that today, and notes exactly how many of those Blue Dogs are in southern states: Twenty-six out of thirty-eight (68%) of these targeted Democrats are from Southern or Southwestern regions (with the exception of Stephanie Herseth and Earl Pomeroy, courtesy SeanH in comments), which makes sense, since it’s primarily Blue Dogs we’re talking about here. That makes this another netroots war against regions of the country that elect these Democrats precisely because they are Blue Dogs. It’s obvious when you read netroots diaries that there is a lot of disdain for and rage against Democratic voters who don’t identify with the progressive movement, and efforts like this one by Stoller and Bowers (Northeastern liberals both) only serve to highlight that disdain and rage. Rather than “punishing” the Blue Dogs, the New Democrats, or the voters who elect them, the Democratic party is likely to be punished itself at the polls if this effort becomes associated with the party, rather than the progressives. [...]
[...] post on OpenLeft’s “Bush Dogs” effort: And of course, the wingnuts are freaking out, it’s always a nice bonus to hear them squeal and defend conservative Democrats. It’s [...]
I suspect most of you are missing the point. Right now, the Democrats nominally “won” an election last fall, and possess a decent margin in the house and a narrow one in the Senate. Fine. Yet Bush continues to be able to govern, passing his totalitarian FISA thing, funding his idiotic war, etc.
“Forsaking a majority for ideological purity?” If we have a majority, then why did the FISA bill pass? We need party discipline, or just having a bunch of names with (D) after them is pretty much useless.
Regional warfare? BS. This is how the Republicans have generally operated (right-wing primary challengers, etc.) and how they put much of their agenda into law, corralling votes from the Lincoln Chafees and Olympia Snowes. (do you call it regional warfare, then?) Without it, the Dems don’t have a majority. What Stoller et al. are trying to highlight is this group of Dems who have joined a de facto Republican governing coalition.
Karl Rove just called me from his Secret Underground Lair (he’s still paying rent on it even though he’s “officially leaving”). Karl says this cannibalistic behavior is all part of his master plan and it’s unfolding brilliantly.
The “Rovester” also let me know some future components of his plan:
1. Suck all the precious bodily fluids out of every Kos Kid and DU’er, and then bake their craniums with his patented “Rove-a-Matic Brain Scanner.”
2. Secretly flouridate the entire U.S. water supply starting with Berkeley, Ann Arbor, UNC-Chapel Hill, and Martha’s Vineyard.
3. “Borrow” the original Constitution from the National Archives and rewrite it so Chimpy McHalliburton can hold office indefinitely (y’know, sort of like Hugo Chavez).
4. Turn the entire state of Louisiana into a concentration camp, which he will rename “Uncle Dubya’s Holiday Retreat.”
And, oh yeah, Karl also let slip that Ron Paul, Kos, Matt Stoller, and Chris Bowers are his personal sock puppets and are all part of his Grand Royal Arch Masonic Conspiracy. He says Stoller and Bowers were “real bitches” to bring on board, because they were holding out “for multi-year package deals.” The Rove-Man finally snagged them by tossing in “free dental care and a 401k .”
You have all been warned. Trust no one!
I suspect most of you are missing the point.
LMAO. I suspect most of us understood it quite well, much better than Stoller and company. The lefties are PO’d that the entire party doesn’t dance to their tune.
If we have a majority, then why did the FISA bill pass?
Because “we” is not Kos crowd, but the entire Democratci party, which is not the same thing at all. The entire Dem party is not composed of the Kos left. Some of them are New Dems and Blue Dogs. And they were elected because the VOTERS in their districts found them a better match than their opponents, not because their VOTERS wanted them to promote some leftist “progressive” agenda. I realize the leftist “progressives” find that terribly annoying. If they think they are the entire party, then they should have no problem at all maintaining a majority after chasing out those pesky moderates and centrists and (dare we say it?) Democratic conservatives in the primaries next year.
Curse those Blue Dogs and New Democrats, doing what their actual voting constituents want them to do, instead of what the “progressives” demand! How dare they? Don’t they know that the wishes of the people of their districts absolutely pale in comparison to the glory that is Kosism?
““1.) pro-gun, 2.) pro-life, 3.) support the war on terror, and 4.) conservatively Christian.”
If they’re also 5.) anti-free trade, 6.) pro-union, and 7.) pro-welfare then they’re populists whose loyalties will be divided.”
—
“Both sides practice this form of purge politics. There is clearly a center that the bases of both parties avoids. But is that center socially conservative and economically liberal (most Blue Dogs and Buchanan-type Republicans) or socially liberal and economically conservatives (New Democrats, old-school Yankee Republicans). That’s the real question.”
Speaking as one of the Blue Dog supporters, these two comments are pretty much on the mark.
The Reform Party picked up a lot of this populist constituency briefly during the 1990s. Lacking an outlet like the Reform Party, these voters will swing toward whichever major party reaches out to them. In 1994 it was the Linda Smith Republicans, in 2006 it was the Heath Schuler Democrats.
What Matt Stoller and Chris Bowers are after is a power grab within the Democratic Party to purge supposed heretics. They are about to make the same mistake Republicans made after 1994 – dismissing the largely working class, largely rural populist swing vote constituency that just swept their party into power and making it clear they are not welcome. Stoller and Bowers were playing this same game on MyDD even before the 2006 elections. OpenLeft is just a more obvious version of the same thing.
This populist voting bloc is often the decisive factor in elections. It is strong not only in the South and Southwest, but also in the Rust Belt, the Farm Belt, the mountain West, and the rural parts of the Northeast and Northwest. No party that dismisses their very real concerns is going to get very far – whether those be loss of jobs to globalization, the demise of unions, the loss of the job bases in many parts of the country (family farms, coal, timber); or cultural issues like out of control immigration, and attacks on traditional U.S. culture coming from urban east and west coast interests such as gun control and anti-Christian bias. This is what the Matt Stoller-type “netroots” fails to understand. It is also what the Republican leadership failed to understand after 1994.
This could be seen as a regional struggle against the South, or as Beltway insiders vs the rest of the country. Or more likely, as a culture war, dare I say it, of the east coast and west coast vs. flyover country. To those of us from flyover country the rapid cultural and economic changes sweeping the country are unwelcome. The party that can successfully turn the tide and bring cultural and economic stability will govern the country for a generation. The “netroots” left and “club for growth” right are working overtime to deny their own parties this status.
As an aside, if the “netroots” has now turned on Jim Webb maybe they should have read his book “Born Fighting” before deciding he was their man, because he isn’t. Webb is the same person he has always been, a cultural conservative and economic populist with roots in Southwest Virginia, same area my roots are.
Nick Lampson, TX-22
Assuming that the Republican candidate in 2008 doesn’t crash and burn like the last guy did, it’s not very likely that Mr. Lampson will be returning to the 111th Congress anyway, given the makeup of the district.
Sorry, read that wrong.
Wow. Do you folks want us to stay in Iraq or what? 70% of the populace disapproves of this war. How hard is it to understand that math?
[...] Third Way Cadillac Tight reports that the leftist netroots are going after center-left congressmen (H/T: Instapundit), while [...]
“Wow. Do you folks want us to stay in Iraq or what? 70% of the populace disapproves of this war. How hard is it to understand that math?”
No, I do not want us to stay in Iraq. We should have never gotten involved in Iraq, not in 1991 and not now. But Iraq is not the most important issue. Iraq is not even on the list of the 10 most important issues. Are you people who are only politically active because of Iraq going to disappear back into the woodwork once the Iraq quagmire is over? The problem is the planned destruction of the America we once had from the 1940s-1970s, the closest thing there has ever been to an ideal society, not just specifically Iraq. The multiculturalist left and the anti-labor right are both equally responsible for attacking and destroying the country I once knew. The left attacked it because it was too white and male, which they hate, and the right attacked it because of the New Deal and organized labor, which they hate. I hardly recognize the country I grew up in anymore, and I want it back. This all happened long before Iraq.
Iraq is not the issue. Iraq is a symptom.
Yeah .. until you realize that conservative Democrats (who are really centrists tho, have been SOMETIMES called DINOs but that is cool too) are the real Democrats ..
Democrats are centrist, republicans conservative. If you’re a conservative you’re a republican, a centrist you’re a Democrat. Liberals are not Dems and, have unjustly hijacked the term ‘progressive’
The DLC is progressive. Liberals are.. go figure.
America is moderate conservative.
Now, if you take conservative and put them in the Dem party .. that is not a conservative Dem. Such a Dem’s views would be moderate. In this case, they are conservative. So that is A conservative..in the Dem party.
Essentially that is a Southern Democrat. And that’s different from anything above. Read my blog.
A Southern Democrat now they would be a DINO. Whereas a Conservative Democrat is a centrist.
Think of JFK and Bill Clinton as Conservative Democrats (altho, yes, Clinton did raise taxes) and Zell Miller as a Southern Democrat.
The only difference between repubs and Dems should be education and health. That’s it. The right wants pvt education, the centrists public (or both) and no single payer healthcare vs UHCoverage (not care).
it’s normal. We come from different school of thought. They’re honest differences. But the left, who wants UHCare etc, we don’t want. The left we don’t need nor the right if you are a Dem.
Even taxes we can come together on. The flat tax is flat and fair. It’s in between. However a conservative idea. Yet not progressive or regressive.
Yes, those who have more should pay more. But not to have any one syste, favoring those who have or those who don’t. Beautiful.
This is a true way to break the gridlock in Washington as well. Not Obama. Not liberalism. Or Bush. Neoconsarvatives hijacked the GOP an otherwise conservative party .. which is now moving to the center with McCain.
THAT is the ticket for America. That is change. It’s where the country is.
I expect Joe will have fun with this one. *grin*
Wow coming back a month or so later and revisiting ..nothing.
And nothing. Nada.
Thx, red pill.
Ya, they can’t say anything. ‘cos it’s true.