Let’s Give ‘Blue Dogs’ the Boot

[depakid]

In American politics, exceedingly few positions generate overwhelming agreement across the ideological spectrum. Even propositions that ought to be uncontroversial — such as whether there is scientific evidence for evolution or whether Saddam Hussein personally planned the 9/11 attacks — produce sizable portions of the citizenry lined up on each side. One notable exception to this rule is the issue of whether the current U.S. Congress is doing a poor job. That question produces a remarkable consensus that is close to unanimous.

Earlier this month, Rasmussen Reports announced the humiliating finding that “the percentage of voters who give Congress good or excellent ratings has fallen to single digits <9 percent> for the first time in Rasmussen Reports tracking history.” That extremely negative view of Congress cuts across partisan and ideological lines, as only small percentages of Democrats (13 percent), Republicans (8 percent) and independents (3 percent) believe that Congress is doing an “excellent” or even a “good” job.

Perhaps most remarkable, some polls — such as one from Fox News last month — reveal that the Democratic-led Congress is actually more unpopular among Democrats than among Republicans, with 23 percent of Republicans approving of Congress compared with only 18 percent of Democrats. One would be hard-pressed to find a time in modern American history, if such a time exists at all, when a Congress was more unpopular among the party that controls it than among voters from the opposition party.

<snip>

...the only question worth asking among those who are so dissatisfied with congressional Democrats is this: What can be done to change this conduct? As proved by the 2006 midterm elections — which the Democrats dominated in a historically lopsided manner — mindlessly electing more Democrats to Congress will not improve anything. Such uncritical support for the party is actually likely to have the opposite effect.

It’s axiomatic that rewarding politicians — which is what will happen if congressional Democrats end up with more seats and greater control after 2008 than they had after 2006 — only ensures that they will continue the same behavior. If, after spending two years accommodating one extremist policy after the next favored by the right, congressional Democrats become further entrenched in their power by winning even more seats, what would one expect them to do other than conclude that this approach works and therefore continue to pursue it?

If simply voting for more Democrats will achieve nothing in the way of meaningful change, what, if anything, will? At minimum, two steps are required to begin to influence Democratic leaders to change course:

1) Impose a real political price that they must pay when they capitulate to — or actively embrace — the right’s agenda and ignore the political values of their base, and

2) decrease the power and influence of the conservative “Blue Dog” contingent within the Democratic caucus, who have proved excessively willing to accommodate the excesses of the Bush administration, by selecting their members for defeat and removing them from office. And that means running progressive challengers against them in primaries, or targeting them with critical ads, even if doing so, in isolated cases, risks the loss of a Democratic seat in Congress.

More: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/07/29/10675/

[Mz Pip]

1. The primaries are over

so who will be on the ballot has already been decided. I would not ever actively support a Republican for any national office. White it might night matter if the Dems hold a 46 seat margin or a 56 seat margin, that could easily change in another election cycle.

Blue Dog Dems may not be perfect but many of them are elected in much more conservative districts than Berkeley. Like it or niot conservative Democrats do exist.

[jwirr]

2. In 2006 we exchanged Dashel (D-SD) for Thune (R-SD). We need to

be sure that we do this during the primary or we are merely adding to the repub side of the aisle. Dashel was not good in his job but he was still a solid Democrat when it came to voting with the party. Thune is just another *ss kisser.

[Dr.Phool]

3. At least spay and neuter them.

I will never again support a blue dog.

It looks like my district may come down to a lazy, irrelevant, repuke, or a blue dog.

Looks like I'll be an undervote. I decided that after 2006, you have to earn my vote. Just having a "D" after your name ain't doing it anymore.