It's Time to INVADE the Republican Party

[Laelth]

We have been betrayed by 18 Senate Democrats who voted FOR cloture on the debate over the Alito nomination. A complete list of the traitors (with addresses and phone numbers) can be found here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x277179

So, what are we going to do about it? The cooler heads in DU are looking for ways to channel our outrage and desperation, but I have yet to see a suggestion that gives me any hope for the future of our country or our party. Splitting the party is not what we need to do. That only empowers the Republicans. I think we need to INVADE them. I intend to send letters, e-mails, and faxes to all 18 traitors strongly encouraging them to join the Republican party, immediately.

For a moment, before you respond, just think about what the result would be if they did switch. These Senators would still be incumbents in their home states, and they would likely be re-elected. Most likely, the party switch wouldn't change the way they actually vote on the issues. They'd be moderate Republicans and might even create some healthy dissent within the Republican party. For the moment, the switch wouldn't change any Senate committee chairmanships (the R's would still control them all). If, in November, we win nearly enough seats to take control of the Senate, one or two of the defectors could switch back to the Democratic party in order to give us control. In this scenario, the R's would face tough primary challenges against our DINO incumbents, and we could run real Democrats against them, Democrats who, most likely, would not face tough primary challenges. We could then donate money to real Democrats and let the R's spend their money to keep our DINOs in place.

For the life of me, I can't see why we shouldn't strongly encourage these 18 Senators to just GO!

Comments?

-Laelth

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

1. No.

Just cut off their funding from the DNC and DSCC. I don't give a shit where they go. Just go.

[Laelth]

4. As far as I know ...

The DNC doesn't fund Senate campaigns. And I don't want to hurt the party. In fact, the party is the only hope we have. Splitting the party only hurts our cause (as did Nader in 2000).

No, I'm advocating strengthening the party by kicking out the DINOs.

-Laelth

[insane_cratic_gal]

2. Can we call it the RLC?

then again the GOP is pretty well a corporate's bitch too so

[Sheri]

3. Great idea!

Might even work!

Recommended!

[Laelth]

5. Thanks.

:)

Kind of you, but my idea doesn't seem very popular this evening. Oh well. I'm going to send my letters, faxes, and e-mails anyway.

:dem:

-Laelth

[upi402]

6. Creative, but just licking it around the edges.

I think we need to disinfect our own house and crush theirs after. Like they've done to us. Destroy without civility.
Never pause, never relent, never be reasonable.
It works for them. It's like a prison mentality. Blame Americans, but accept the situation as it is.

[wiley]

18. Brilliant!

Now that's the ticket! Crush theirs first, though.

[Laelth]

7. Shameless kick.

:kick:

-Laelth

[onenote]

8. seems like a pretty muddled idea to me

We're going to encourage 18 Democrats to jump to the repubs and if we get enough seats in 2006, one or two could switch back? Sorry but the math doesn't work. By my count, only 10 of the Democrats that voted against cloture are up for re-election. So, you'd need a lot more than 1 or 2 to switch back. Moreover, there's a good chance that a Democrat that switches won't get reelected -- some other repub will. Why? Because the Democrats money isn't going to follow the candidate to the repub party and the repub money will back the primary challenger. So you end up with a repub non-incumbent against a Democrat who's not an incumbent. Not a scenario that is very pretty in most of the states where these particular Senators are from: mostly states that have elected at least on repub as either the other Senator or as the governor -- in other words, states that are anything but "safe" for a Democrat.

onenote

[Laelth]

10. Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

At least you did me the courtesy of actually considering my suggestion.

If, as I suggest, these folks are bought and paid for by specific donors/lobbyists, I think the money you're talking about will follow them, and their voting patterns will not change. On that point we will have to agree to disagree.

-Laelth

[onenote]

11. The one way it might work is what will keep it from happening

Many of the Democrats that voted for cloture have pro-choice records (as well as more liberal voting records than the typical repub on the environment, labor, etc etc). They'll get clobbered by the repubs in the primaries. Now, that's the one thing that could work in favor of getting another Democrat elected: whether the pro-choice vote comes out in large enough numbers to counter a anti-choice repub. That could happen. But the effect is that you're asking Democrats to cut their own throats by leaving the party for a dead end spot as a Repub. Not likely to happen. Why wouldn't they just stick around and see whether anyone could mount a successful primary challenge. Personally, I don't see the established Democratic interest groups (unions, civil rights, etc) throwing over some of these Democrats for an primary challenger.

onenote

[Laelth]

12. It's true.

I am asking them to take a big risk for the sake of the country. But seriously, if any of them claim to be pro-choice, they have now lost all credibility on that issue. Alito is the greatest threat to the 4th Amendment that I've seen in my many years of following politics. And if their choice is to risk a damaging primary challenge from either a Republican or a Democrat who will call them out on the Alito vote, wouldn't they be better off against the Republican? The Republican can't use the Alito vote against them.

Just more food for thought.

-Laelth

[carolinalady]

9. We need to put our money where our hearts are and hire a

lobbyist. I posted a thread to Skinner and I hope he sees it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x278330

[GemMom]

13. If they all switch while they're in office...

They create a super majority. And who is to say they'll be defeated in the next general election if no one runs against them in the GOP primary?

Just some thoughts.....

[Laelth]

14. But that's just it ...

I don't think their voting patterns will change. Even if they get re-elected, they're still our DINOs (i.e. better than a lock-step Republican). And so what if the R's have a super-majority? If our DINOs continue to vote the way they do (with no party unity, generally just protecting their own hides), then a Repuke super-majority means nothing.

See what I mean? Or am I not making my thoughts clear? (entirely possible given my fatigue level at the moment)

And thanks for the reply. :)

-Laelth

[GemMom]

17. This kind of thing would affect the makeup of

the Senate committees and chairmanships as well.

[Laelth]

21. Um ...

How so? Repukes already control all the committee chairmanships, no? What would change if there were, all of a sudden, more Repukes? As far as I can tell, nothing would change.

Am I missing something?

-Laelth

[onenote]

22. the committee assignments could change

The percentage of repubs to Democrats on each committee is a reflection of the overall percentage held by each party. There would be nothing to prevent the repubs from reassigning the Dems that switch to different committees. Again, while some people think of these senators as DINOs, I guarantee that the repubs and their most conservative supporter (the one's who they play to these days) don't share that view. They will make sure that no pro-environment (former) Democrat is on a committee with jurisdiction over environmental or energy issues, no pro-choice (former) Democrat is on a committee with jurisdiction over health care issues, etc etc.

onenote

[jfern]

15. Here are some ideas if you want to do this

Vote against Chafee in the RI primary.

Vote for Guilani in the 2008 Presidential primary. I'm sure a pro-partial birth abortion cross-dressing New Yawker who cheated on his wife and sometimes would crash at his gay friend's place will do great in the south. And even if he somehow wins, he's the best Republican we can get.

[depakid]

16. Unlike the Dems

The Republicans wouldn't stand for that. What do you think they'd do to their members who repeatedly crossed over to vote with the opposition?

There's reason why they're the majority party- and the Dems aren't even relevant in national politcs anny more.

[LeftCoast]

19. How about invading the Democratic Party?

We're already half-way there.

[Laelth]

20. Ah, a glass-half-full person.

I hear ya. ;)

But here's the problem we face. I think we need to get rid of these DINOs. If we run liberals against them in the primaries, our candidates will just beat each other up while the Republicans grin from ear to ear watching us eat our own. I don't want that. If we can get the DINOs to become Republicans, though, we can avoid a costly primary battle and focus on beating whomever wins the Republican primary. This way the Republican party will bear the cost of opposing our incumbent DINOs in the primaries. Worst case scenario, our DINO loses and our new Dem. faces a new repuke (except this way our new Dem. wasn't trashed and exhausted in a costly primary battle).

Even if our old DINO wins in the general election as a Republican against our liberal Dem., I am fairly well convinced that a change in party affiliation will not affect the way these Senators vote. Calling themselves Democrats certainly seems to have no effect on them. Why would it matter if they called themselves Republicans?

-Laelth

[onenote]

23. "even if our old DINO wins as a repub": that's the problem

If that happens, the repubs still control the Senate and they get a bigger margin on committees that would otherwise be the case.

You really should check out the voting records of some of these so-called "DINOs" and see how they measure up against repubs, including other elected repubs in their own states. Then think about how little effort it will take the repubs to replace them in the primary with a different candidate (seeing as the repub party won't give most of these guys a dime of money and neither will the Democrats). Now you've got a race between two non-incumbents -- you've given up a likely safe Democratic seat (most incumbents are safe) for the risk of losing further ground to the repubs, all because these guys didn't vote for a filibuster and have made other choices that piss off the most liberal wing of the party (but are still, in most cases, far more progressive than virtually any repub when it comes to labor, choice, gun control, and environmental protection.

onenote

[marions ghost]

24. and just how

do you propose to get DINOS to become Republicans? They think they are serving the people best by being
Demo-Publicans. They pride themselves on their 'moderateness' and their responsibility to their conflicted red-blue constituency. The Democrats' predicament indicates a need for a multi-party system, but we don't have that.

What we need to do is continually expose the Dinos as Republican supporters and show their constituents how this strategy is failing them. The old clubby attempts at compromise are not working...because the
predators have changed the rules. You're with us or you're with the terrorists.

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. If you couldn't convince them on this one vote,

what makes you think that you can convince them to switch parties?

[Laelth]

26. You have a point.

I doubt I could convince them. But at the very least I feel compelled to suggest it. The suggestion might plant a seed. They need to learn to stand with the party when it matters. On Alito, it mattered.

-Laelth