What Will DUers Say About When Webb Joins The "Group of 14?"

[Infinite Hope]

The former group of 14 moderates is http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3026186">apt to grow in the U.S. Senate. Webb is someone I've considered for a while to be likely to join. Currently, he's hailed as a hero, but how will he be received after joining the ranks of the moderates?

Other contenders off the top of my head who are or may generally ally with the group of 14**:
1)Klobuchar (D-MN)
2)Coleman (R-MN)*
3)McCaskill (D-MO)
4)Hagel (R-Neb)
5)Tester (D-Mont)
6)Martinez (R-Florida)
7)Webb(D-Virg)
8)Murkowski (R-Alaska)
9)Conrad (D-ND)
10)Specter (R-Penn)
11)Dorgan (D-ND)
12)Voinovich (R-Ohio)
13)Feinstein (D-Cali)
14)Casey (D-Penn)
*To seize opportunity to improve image before election.
**There are certainly others who are not on the list who could join. Most of this group won't join. This is merely a pool of possible and plausible new members.

The original group:
Robert Byrd (D-WV)
Daniel Inouye (D-Haw)
Mary Landrieu (D-Louis)
Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn)
Ben Nelson (D-Neb)
Mark Pryor (D-Ark)
Ken Salazar (D-Colo)
Lincoln Chafee (R-RI-gone)***
Susan Collins (R-Maine)
Mike DeWine (R-Ohio-gone)***
Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
John McCain (R-Ariz)
John Warner (R-Virg)
Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)
***Republicans will need 2 more new additions than Democrats.

[knowledgeispwr]

1. Interesting thought

Some DUers clearly won't be happy with some of their one-time heroes joining the "gang of 14" but that's politics. I think with the Dems controlling the agenda that won't be a problem.

[Jim Sagle]

2. Fuck 'em all.

[Der Blaue Engel]

3. We'll be saying

Democrats control the Senate! Committee appointments!

This was the goal, and it was a very important one. I don't regret the money I donated to his campaign. Anything is better than a Republican.

[jgraz]

4. Why do you think he'd do that?

I've heard him speak and read his interviews and the guy is about as progressive as they come on economics and class. He's also fiercely anti-war. I can't see him wanting to align himself with Joementum and the Rethugs.

[Infinite Hope]

6. Because...

First, he wouldn't be allying with the Republicans. It's a moderate group and with us in power this time it will benefit us more than them.

As for your question, he's a moderate in general and has declared himself independent-minded many times. On elect night, or perhaps it was the day after, he again stated he won't be beholden to either party. Obviously, it's more to the left on many issues, but he's going to be his own man. Joining the group of 14 doesn't unravel his progressive ideals. If anything, especially with us in power, it strengthens them. Klobuchar is also very progressive, but she, like Webb, seeks to be pragmatic and independent-minded.

Senator Byrd is a prime example of another progressive who was a member of the original group of 14.

[jgraz]

9. If I were Webb

I wouldn't be able to stand being in the same room with pro-war Loserman. I'm hoping he tells the Gang of 14 to go fuck themselves and joins the progressive caucus. He's got more in common with them, politically.

[JI7]

5. he is from a conservative leaning state

where someone like George Allen came close to being re-elected even after all the crap.

so it's more on how he will do things. he can be excused on some things . but it's a matter of whether he will go out of his way to bash Democrats when it's notn ecessary. that's something Lieberman regularly does. and worse for Lieberman as he is from a strongly Dem state.

but usually others like Pryor don't go out of their way to get on tv when they disagree with a Dem. they usually just vote maybe and then stay in the background.

[Infinite Hope]

7. A comparable Senator to how I think Webb will be...

...the closest that comes to mind at this moment is Harry Reid. That means fairly progressive, but moderately so and he comes off as credible, pragmatic, and independent-minded to the public - difficult for Republicans (or the far-left) to attack overall.

[JI7]

8. not sure about Reid,

his voting record is pretty moderate to conservative.

i would say maybe Byron Dorgan would be closer except Webb might be more outspoken. i can't wait for the new Senate to start and see how it all plays out.

[Infinite Hope]

10. Well...

there may be a better example. It's late and that was a quick example. But I don't think Webb will be as progressive as many think. He'll be a progressive, yes, but a moderate one.

[stevedeshazer]

11. You cite no evidence to support your position

Help me out here.

[Infinite Hope]

12. There's an article cited...

in the main post in the words "apt to grow" about the group and its possible expansion. This thread is about how those will react if Webb is one of them, as he is a plausible addition. The first is others that I could think of who have some possibility of joining. The disclaimers are all above in the main post.

[Leilani]

13. The man has not taken his seat in the Senate

& you are already stirring the pot & causing trouble.

Webb is an honorable man, which is more than I can say about some of the others.

Give it a break!

[Infinite Hope]

14. Causing trouble?

If, like on the cited post, there's a strong push in the Senate for adding to the moderate group, he'll be a likely candidate. No one can say he absolutely will be nor say he absolutely won't be, but, as we've seen from the comments above, there's thoughtful discourse to be had on this issue.

[Leilani]

16. The truth of the matter is

you don't know what the hell he will do.

He's a complex person. On military matters, I expect him to be conservative.

On economic issues, I expect him to be a populist.

But I predict he will be difficult to put in a box.

[Infinite Hope]

17. The truth of the matter is

I never claimed to know what he will for sure do - only that he's a plausible consideration for joining the group, not only because he's independent-minded, but because he represents a conservative state and sometimes will have to vote or at least act accordingly.

[Trajan]

42. So then you admit this is pure speculation ...

and just as likely to be wrong as right ...

I see ......

[Infinite Hope]

45. Try reading the thread cited in the main post and in a comment following.

This is based on another thread by someone else. Read more than just headlines.

[AtomicKitten]

36. good analysis

And Webb is pissed off about the war. I know what I hope he will do, but would never presume to even guess. He is most certainly a decent man and is going to be fascinating to watch.

[Leilani]

40. At the very least, I think he'll piss off lots of people

& I'll cheer him on.

The status quo needs some shaking up.

[bobbolink]

38. For me, this was a very interesting thought to consider--one I hadn't

yet thought myself.

So, let it be.

[H2O Man]

44. But what if Webb

climbs onto a rooftop with a rifle and begins to execute innocent puppies, to make fur coats for Katherine Harris. Will he still be your hero?

[demnan]

15. I don't agree

Webb has come out of the box as strong on certain economic issues. He is also passionately against the Iraq war. I can't see him sitting in a room agreeing not to agree with Lieberman or John Warner on the war. The guy has too much integrity for that, he's not a career politician.

On the other hand, I don't see him as a liberal either. He's not going to support every item that Wellstone would. But give him time, you will be pleasantly surprised.

I also don't see him wanting to spend the rest of his life in the Senate, like Warner and Lieberman and how many other tired old names that reside there (term limits! I want term limits!) I would be very surprised if he stays more than two terms in the Senate.

[cleveramerican]

18. the message of the election is......

moderate is not a dirty word. This is a time when moderates are blessed with the perfect storm of good politics aligning itself nicely with good public policy.

[greenman3610]

19. any group that Byrd is in cant be all bad

[paulk]

20. they will heap on him the same amount of abuse

they heaped on the original seven.

and life will go on....

[KingFlorez]

21. So what?

We have a narrow majority in the Senate, we're going to need to have the moderates negotiate with the moderate Republicans to get some things done. It's not a bad thing.

[Infinite Hope]

24. Agreed. n/t

[knowledgeispwr]

34. Finally!

Some sense on this thread.

[Catchawave]

22. I think the State Dems and DLC

threw their support at Harris Miller in the primary. We all know how that turned out :D

[sandnsea]

23. What will the endless whiners say

When he and Tester go into the Senate and kick ass?

I think some people would prefer the Democrats fail.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pithy Cherub]

27. Glad there are more who notice a certain

hopeless poster's specious framing proclivities in that regard.

Merry Christmas! :toast:

[Eurobabe]

28. Thanks Pithy, back at'cha!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

[knowledgeispwr]

30. Dense.

Poison? Please. :eyes:

Just because someone opens topics of discussion based on reality and poses questions they are "poisoning the well?"

Are we such bad readers, are we that sensitive and weak that a couple of threads can bend us out of shape?

Not being purely idealistic but instead pragmatic isn't poisoning the well.
Planting topics on a discussion board is what we're suppose to do, isn't it?

Unbelievable.

[Infinite Hope]

32. Actually...

I posted an article written by someone else for mere debate and others have stated the same things I stated on that thread. I never agreed with that article other than to say *in the primary* Obama won't automatically get all the black vote.

And this post was, again, based on a thread already started by someone else about the Landrieu deal and that thread was cited with a link in the main post here. There's been talk the moderate group will grow, so I posted a pool of senators from which there may be a couple or a few who join a group - which would be to the advantage of Dems now that we're in the majority because, as a commenter on this thread said, it pulls moderate Republicans into our majority on key issues.

You can read whatever "slant" you want into it, but to do so would be to put words in my mouth and ignore the disclaimers I included above. And it would also be to take a mere thought of mine and make it into a concrete position I hold. Sometimes it's worth posting things we don't entirely agree with simply because they're worthy topics that may become a major issue.

I have a resume of liberal activism. I can comfortably take an objective look at a potential issue without worrying how it reflects upon my resume. Open-mindedness in discussion is a virtue and is liberal. It can be done without being reflected negatively.

Not everything in life has to be so strictly tied to our concrete beliefs, as if in need of self-validation.

[knowledgeispwr]

31. Deleted

[IndianaGreen]

25. With the Democrats in the majority, there is no longer a need for this group

and Joe Lieberman has already bolted to a new conservative group.

[Ninja Jordan]

29. They will dump on him like they dump on all other dems not named Kucinich or Dean

[TSIAS]

33. As usual

Many people practice hero worship until the politician does something they don't like.

I suspect that newly elected Senators like Tester and Webb will become unpopular on this site when their moderate views are revealed.

Webb may be pretty liberal on the war, but I doubt he'll be the liberal icon that he's seen as now.

[Infinite Hope]

35. My thinking exactly.

Even I have a "slant" not for even bringing up this topic from another thread (linked in the main post) and for also seeking dialogue about Obama on another thread. Yes, dialogue is now anti-liberal. :sarcasm:

[Infinite Hope]

37. HERE IS THE REFERENCE FOR THIS TOPIC ABOUT EXPANSION OF THE GROUP OF 14:

For those who didn't follow the link that was in the main post, where it belongs, but apparently that isn't good enough for those who prefer reading headlines only:

Senators Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Mary Landrieu (D-LA) issued a joint press release yesterday announcing that they want to convene a group of Republicans and Democrats in the new Senate to "build on the success of 'Gang of 14'" and "forge bipartisan consensus on key issues in the 110th Congress."

Not to be outdone, Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) also heralded the arrival of a similar entity yesterday, also issuing a joint statement saying they are forming a "Bipartisan Members Group to create an opportunity for Senators to know one another better across party lines."

GO HERE...RIGHT HERE....THERE'S A LINK RIGHT HERE...RIGHT BELOW THIS....READ IT...THERE'S A LINK FOR THOSE WHO MISSED IT THE FIRST TIME...RIGHT HERE:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3026186

[renaissanceguy]

39. I'd say the Gang of 14 has been disbanded

since the 2006 elections. Shrub won't get nearly half his ideologues past the Dem-controlled judiciary committee. And now the Dems have to hold their own and show leadership over these next couple years for the 08 elections.


http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues/479862

[Greeby]

41. Lets see

Writing Op-Eds in the WSJ about class warfare, having a son in Iraq, almost taking a swing at Shrub. Explain to me how Webb fits the current bullshit idea of a moderate? :shrug:

[Infinite Hope]

46. They don't have to be like Lieberman to be moderate. Byrd was in the group of 14 as well. n/t

[DFW]

43. I have met both Webb and Klobuchar

Even if Webb joins the gang of 14, which I consider by no means a certainty,
they will not be able to count on him to roll over just to achieve some watered-
down "concensus." Webb had the guts to tell Bush to his face where to shove it,
and he will not pull punches for appearances' sake just to join this group.

Klobuchar is an extremely bright woman, thinks very well on her feet, and thinks
for herself. If she has some positions that agree with the so-called moderates,
then so be it, but she is also not one that will bend with the wind just to fit in.

Concensus at the cost of common sense and principles is not in the repetoire of
either Webb or Klobuchar, and I'd be astounded to see either of them make a 180°
just to grab a headline or two.

[Infinite Hope]

47. You're right.

Joining the group of 14 doesn't mean automatically giving in to whatever those like Lieberman nor the Republicans decide. It doesn't mean they have to agree with them. Certainly, there is no agreement until all of them agree as was the case last time with members such as Byrd. Being a part of the group of 14, especially with Dems in control, means having leverage over moderate GOPers.

That being said, I also know Klobuchar as do you. Her mention above was, as I've said many times, just that she's one among several who merely could join that group. The disclaimers are all in the main post. I don't know how people keep taking everything as concrete. It's mere "food for thought."