OK...So HOW do we get rid of the "Centrist" Blue Dogs/DLC?

[bvar22]

The answer is TEAMWORK.

Simply withholding donations won't be enough.
The Chamber of Commerce "Centrist" Democrats are raking in MILLIONS from Wall Street, The Health Insurance Cartels, and the Armaments Industries among others.

What we On the Left need to do is Get Organized and pool our resources to target a few "Centrists/BlueDogs" this Primary Season by bankrolling Progressive opponents to the Blue Dogs. WE CAN make their "local" elections a National Issue if we pool our resources and focus our efforts.

I suggest we target Sen. Evan Bayh (Republicrat, Indiana).
He is one of the WORST offenders, and he is up for re-election in 2010.
I will be donating to ANY Democrat who opposes this piece of Republican shit, and encourage everyone to do the same.
WE may not be able to unseat Bayh, but if enough of us pool our efforts we CAN make his Primary nasty enough to send a STRONG message to the Democratic Party "Leadership" that they can NO LONGER take us for granted.

ALL Congressmen are up for re-election in 2010.
Mike Ross (Traitor, Arkansas) would be a good target, but there are some from "Blue " States that would be better.

To be effective, we need to limit our targets to just a couple, and focus our national efforts.

AccountabilityNOW is an Internet Based Organization that has the right idea.
I know nothing about them, and at this point can NOT endorse them, but they are saying the right words.

http://accountabilitynowpac.com/candidates/

AccountabilityNOW wants to target Specter's primary in Pennsylvania.
That sounds like a good idea.


Unless we work together and FORCE some "CHANGE", we are not going to get any "Change".
"Hope" is only a dream unless we MAKE it real.
I'm ready to storm the Democratic Party's Corporate Castle.


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[sui generis]

1. losing battle

convert from within - social judo.

I have a problem with defining the tent.

My take on your statement is that anybody who does anything to any American at the expense of any other American isn't American.

How bout that.

[bvar22]

10. If you really want to own that statement....

..."anybody who does anything to any American at the expense of any other American isn't American."
Why don't you start your own thread with that?
LOL



I will stick with:
The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

The RICH Corporate Owners already have their own Party...The Republicans.
We do NOT have to give them a seat at OUR Table.
They certainly DON"T give you a seat at theirs.
Just TRY to get into THAT Rich Country Club and see what happens.



"I don’t represent the big oil companies. I don’t represent the big pharmaceutical companies.
I don’t represent the Enrons of this world. But you know what?
They already have great representation in Washington.
It’s the rest of the people that need it.”
---Paul Wellstone’s Last Commercial

[sui generis]

41. I'm your mortal enemy if you are a class warrior

but unfortunately for you I'm here and staying.

What a load of utter bullshit. I agree that we need to expand the middle class and protections for the middle class but you are just another serf with a pitchfork and a torch gunning for "thuh rich" without an iota of understanding anything at all about economics.

I applaud your naive idealism, sincerely, but despise your conclusions.

[bvar22]

71. Fine.

"I welcome your contempt."

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens."

If you DON'T support the above, you ARE my political enemy.
At least you are honest about it, unlike the Blue Dogs/DLC who hide behind phony Democratic platitudes in front of the cameras, and then sell out the Working Class behind our backs.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[sui generis]

104. are you on crack?

what did your answer have to do with anything I said?

it's not a requirement of "class" to be against education or any other progressive value - please nobody light a match. There's an awful lot of straw in the post above.

[bvar22]

15. "losing battle"....so quit ?

or
Accept the fact that the Working Class has no representation in the Demopcratic Party?

or

Go 3rd Party?

What are you saying?

[sui generis]

42. there is no either / or

the working class has some representation.

You are wailing and moaning and catastrophizing and making all your observations black OR white.

The working class needs stronger representation, but let's also be serious about how you define working class before bandying about terms that defy concrete definition.

[aquart]

22. Stunningly ridiculous.

You're confusing religion with citizenship. There is no sainthood clause in the constitution.

[sui generis]

48. regarding class warfare

Aquart, I just hate lead-ins to class warfare.

We all want an einviger jew to blame the ills of the world on. I have an unreasonable expectation of fairness, and that means don't execute the tsar's children - it ain't their fault.

We aren't a whole lot different than any revolutionary - kill 'em all if they aren't with us!

I'm baffled what that has to do with religion - just saying, bitching about being excluded while volunteering to exclude is just hypocritical and unworthy of progressive values.

The tent IS big enough, but we need to stop being serfs and take some ownership for making things better, the right way. Instead of making it a happening party, we piss and moan about the party favors and the guest list.

that's effective. :eyes:

[bvar22]

78. There has been open "Class Warfare" since Reagan.

The Working Class LOST.

" The vast inequality of this new Gilded Age didn't just happen.

Nature didn't ordain it, the market didn't require it, and Adam Smith's invisible hand doesn't sustain it.

What happened is the rich declared class war and spent what it took to win.

The rich buy the laws and loopholes they want from Congress, and from the White House, they buy executive protection of their privileges. "---Bill Moyers Commentary

http://www.pbs.org/now/commentary/moyers7.html

If it makes you uncomfortable for me to point out that there has been an active "Class War" for the last 30 years, thats YOUR problem.

[amborin]

98. it goes back waaaay farther than that!

[sui generis]

103. no, there are opportunists, and there are victims

if it makes you uncomfortable to see any other point of view, don't bother responding.

[sojourner]

94. so you actually support the idea of organizing to DO SOMETHING? Great! Welcome aboard.

If you want to bitch about why we want to organize, then go ahead, whine on. But don't give us shit about class warfare. It IS class warfare and you can kid yourself if you like, but that's what the game is about. They have the power to define the game, and they define the way the game will be played (making up new rules -- you remember that little gambit don't you, from when we were kids?) As long as we play to their tune we will lose. PERIOD! And that's the idea. You feel free to disagree, but what you're doing right now is just trying to obstruct an attempt to devise a constructive/destructive (depending on your point of view) plan that is intended toward ACTION rather than "pissing and moaning".

[sui generis]

102. you lost me at whine

trolls, republicans and wannabes use that word so please stuff it in your mansnatch.

Getting at me for not being a zombie class warfare troll is pointless - we disagree, and your ad hominem blather doesn't change that. I have a brain, I am a progressive and a democrat and a liberal and you can't change that either.

If you want real change you won't get it by lambasting me here missy. Legislature is where this stuff happens and THAT is reality, so you can get off your judgmental ass and do something the same way all of the rest of us are.

Unless you had some idiotic idea about stringing people up from lamp posts and trees? We've seen that movie, didn't like how it ended.

[sojourner]

112. wtf?

OP had an idea about organizing with a goal in mind that included using laws and elections to accomplish that goal. you can kvetch about that and compare it to "hangings" if you like but i say you're way over-reacting. as to what i am, or am not doing you have no freaking idea and given your tone, i'm not inclined to discuss it with you.

[Greyhound]

2. We do need to finance our own candidates. With the enemy controlling the party purse strings,

we know that the corporate candidates will get all they need to starve out any progressives.
:kick: & R

[havocmom]

4. Need to recognize that some districts are just very conservative to start with.

Moving them left will be a process, not do-able in one election cycle. Going too far left with candidates will not work in a lot of places. Go a little left, then when that makes an impression (better governance) to a little further left.

Fact is, some places just won't elect the candidates of our dreams... just yet ;)

[davidwestafa]

6. I agree

I would much rather have a Blue-Dog Democrat than a Repub.

[winyanstaz]

64. my question to you is how do you tell them apart?

[bvar22]

11. We SHOULD focus on "Centrists" from Blue States.

There are plenty.

I believe that a Populist Democrat running on a platform of Economic Justice for the Working Class can WIN anywhere.

[davidwestafa]

13. Take off those rose-colored glasses...

Here're your choices:

___ Blue-Dog Democrat

___ Republican

What's it gonna be?

[RaleighNCDUer]

65. That may be the choice AFTER a primary, but it need not be the choice before.

Parts of the country which are now the most conservative were at one time the most radical - everywhere you go in the midwest you see signs of co-ops - those were the offspring of prairie populists who banded together against corporate America before the turn of the last century.

The people of Kansas in 1890 were no less religious than today, no less conservative socially, but they DID recognize that the powerful interests, the financial giants of the day were working against them, not for them, and they did something about it.

It can happen again.

What good is a blue-dog if he's working for the same corporate masters as the republicans? All he is is a corporatist that we are less likely to vote out of office for screwing us over. Their corporate bosses don't CARE if he is Dem or Repub - just so long as he earns his paycheck doing their work.

We need people who will work for US.

[dflprincess]

95. For me?

Neither one.

I'm done with voting against my own interests - I don't care what letter the corporate stooge puts after their name.

[cascadiance]

29. Put up REAL moderates not FAKE moderates like the DLCers are!

We tried and almost succeeded in getting a REAL moderate (who was moderate and conservative on some issues like gun ownership rights, etc.), Paul Hackett. We need more like HIM in these conservative districts that tea baggers might actually appreciate that is still NON-corporatist!

I don't buy that all moderates have to be DLCers or corporate.

[havocmom]

31. I agree: not all moderates have to be DLCers or corporate

I am looking for sensible candidates whose loyalties rest with doing what is best for the American people, not just one class of them.

[jgraz]

20. That's part of the problem

but you also have the congresscritters who accept 7-figure jobs with lobbyists and defense contractors immediately after leaving office. How do you stop that?

[NightWatcher]

3. Is "TEAMWORK" a corporation that is ready to bribe reps to become Progressive

Our current system is wholly corrupt. It is bought and paid for by lobbyists representing corporate interests who outnumber the reps in DC. The corporations have way more reps in DC than we do and they have won. They have bought a government that is friendly to their needs.

All we do is vote or donate $50 on paydays in the Fall. The lobbyists throw multi million dollar fundraisers for the reps in a successful attempt to buy them off.

We've lost to the corporations who own us, our government, and the planet. All we've left to do is to try to eek out an existence in the cracks.

[bvar22]

7. Precisely WHY we need to focus our efforts.

Unseating Lieberman WAS a national effort.

[davidwestafa]

5. Forum Rules

Sorry, but isn't this entire thread a violation of forum rules?
Quote:
"You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website."

- David

[NightWatcher]

9. wow, using your second post to tell us how to behave

Did Rahm send you?

[davidwestafa]

16. Nah....

Just read the rules when I joined like they asked me to. No biggie, just wondered if the rules applied on this forum. Guess not, huh?

[Name removed]

21. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[davidwestafa]

54. Oops.

Wuz it something I said or did someone tell me to get fucked?

[bvar22]

12. LOL.

I am supporting REAL Democrats in Democratic Primaries.

Go read the OP again.




"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[AndrewP]

50. That SHOULD be obvious. We are talking about progressives winning

AS Democrats.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

49. Primary challenges do not fall under this rule, since the challengers

would also be Democrats.

[RaleighNCDUer]

66. We aren't talking about general elections - we are talking about

primary challenges - putting up GOOD dems against traitor dems.

But of course, you already know that.

Enjoy your stay.

[laughingliberal]

85. We don't currently have any nominees or candidates running nt

[Richardo]

8. Easy. Replace them with Republicans

Because it's either/or.

If you think a Kucinich Democrat or anything except a Republican will replace a Blue Dog Democrat you are seriously mistaken.

[bvar22]

14. That really doesn't make any sense.

See: Joe Lieberman
His unseating was a successful national effort.

Granted, he was let back in through the back door, but his career is over.
The Conservative Incumbent Protection Program in The Senate has also been exposed.

I call this progress, and will work to strengthen the collective voice of The Working Class INSIDE the Democratic Party.
You are certainly free to oppose empowering the Working Class and maintaining the Status Quo.

[Richardo]

18. Joe Lieberman represents a 'blue' state

Replace the Blue Dogs in the West, Midwest and South, and you're replacing them with Republicans. It's a miracle some of those districts and states elected ANY kind of Democrat in the first place.

[Hippo_Tron]

43. The OP is suggesting targeting centrists in blue states/blue districts

[treestar]

75. ??

Lieberman still has a seat. He is an Independent. It's an example. The Dems ran someone to the left and the Independent won.

[laughingliberal]

92. Ah, but a lot of states do not allow a failed primary candidate to then run as an independent nt

[dflprincess]

96. He won because the Republican candidate was so awful

that Republicans flocked to Liebermann - not because Lamont was on the left. Had the Repukes had a half way acceptable candidate, Lamont would have won.

[JoeyT]

109. Didn't the Democratic party back Lieberman anyway?

[rudy23]

23. Do the Rahmbots know there's more than one kind of Progressive than a "Kucinich Democrat"

Of course they do, but they get points every time they can brand the "left of the left" with nutty Kucinich instead of Howard Dean, Bernie Sanders, etc.

[Richardo]

25. OK make that "anyone to the left of whoever is there now."

Rahm himself wouldn't get elected in the West or South.

[rudy23]

27. I'm in the South, and I call bullshit on that cartoon stereotype. I'm from Huey Long country.

Huey Long basically invented modern populism. Rahm is the anti-populist. Who likes that guy besides other insider sleazebags?

[Richardo]

34. I'm in the south too.

And I stand by my assessment.

[rudy23]

37. Where is Grayson from? nt

[RaleighNCDUer]

67. So you think your state, which gave us LBJ, Ann Richards, Jim Hightower and

Molly Ivins, cannot elect a progressive?

There's the Alamo spirit.

[Richardo]

72. Richards was the last Dem elected to statewide office. No Democrat holds statewide office in Texas.

I am not saying there are no progressives in Texas, I'm saying that no Democrat who IS a progressive will be elected to statewide office in Texas in the foreseeable future. How Hightower did it I'll never understand, but he's been out of office for almost 20 years.

We'll have our Dem caucus in the House from Dallas, Austin, Houston and the Valley. That's about it.

[laughingliberal]

86. I'm in the West and my state went for Obama nt

[AndrewP]

51. Exactly.

[iceman66]

17. We don't have to.

Many of them will lose next year when they are up for re-election.

The downside is that they will be replaced by real Republicans, perhaps enough to tip the balance of power.

[quiller4]

38. Well said. Why do some liberals assume that if Blue Dogs from conservative districts

are challenged then liberals will some how win the seats? Many of our heartland voters are deeply conservative. If they don't have the opportunity to support a Blue Dog, they'll vote Republican. We are better off with Blue Dogs than Teabag Republicans in both the House and Senate. For that reason I'll send contributions to all the Blue Dogs in tough re-election battles.

[dflprincess]

97. Run on economic issues

and you'd see a real progressive populist win in even conservative areas. The trick is to control the message and not let the voters be distracted by wedge issues or name calling.

I think Thom Hartmann is right, we need to be talking to tea baggers calmly and rationally there are a lot (certainly not all) of them who could be reached and convinced they should start voting in their own interest.

[stray cat]

19. Let them get replaced in their conservative states with Repubs!

Kucinitch is not going to be a senator in Nebraska ever even if he lived there

[rudy23]

24. "Don't like it---what are you going to do?" Keep running with that strategy, DLC

Like 2000 never happened.

[Johonny]

28. I think peoples point is

In conservative areas of the country there is likely to be conservative Democrats. There is a low probability of a "purist" candidate to win there. The problem with the party isn't the size of the tent or that there exist conservative blue dogs from conservative blue dog districts. There is some what a problem that blue dogs also come sometimes from rather progressive districts. If you wanted to increase progressives inside the party tent that actually get elected to office you would be better off targeting those districts than a district where a conservative dem is the only likely winner of that seat.

[rudy23]

32. I agree with you, but I don't think that's their point. I could be wrong.

It just doesn't seem like the Blue Dog defenders on here would be in favor of targeting Blue Dogs in progressive districts. They're welcome to prove me wrong.

Also--whatever happened to selling constituents on a candidate or a platform? I appreciate the realities in certain districts, but why just sit back and accept the landscape as it is without trying to sell frustrated conservatives on a populist message?

[bvar22]

74. I agree.

It is a MYTH propagated by the Blue Dogs.

Corporate Lap Dog does NOT equal "social moderate", though the DLC wants YOU to believe that.

A well financed charismatic Populist running on a platform of Economic Justice for Working Americans who was careful to avoid the "wedge" issues can WIN in any state. (a la Huey Long).

The SOUTH is ripe for the picking if the Democratic Party would spend a little money.
LBJ was correct when he said that we had lost The South for a generation.
Well, THAT "generation" has come and gone.

Of course, the Democratic Party would have to actually provided some "Economic Justice for Working Americans" ...
and looking at their track record since 2006, there is NOT much "hope" there.



bvar22 & starkraven, helping turn The South Blue.
We moved to the Deep South from Minneapolis in 2006...
and LOVE it here.
The South is beautiful, and belongs to ALL of us.

[RufusTFirefly]

35. Prairie states have an important but largely forgotten history of populism

"Centrist" Democrats and Republicans serve the same masters: corporations. The Democratic Party is ignoring its traditional constituency: working people of all states, colors, and backgrounds.

Meanwhile, the whacko, narrow-minded, vitriolic segment of the Republican party is taking advantage of this abandonment and appealing to Joe and Sally Sixpack directly, but in the most cynical and demagogic way, not by tapping into their hopes and dreams, but by appealing to their fears and prejudices.

A Democratic Party that returns to its roots could not only oust Blue Dogs but even gain some converts from angry working-class Republicans who are far more progressive than they realize.

[Hippo_Tron]

44. Yea but that was before abortion was a big deal

It doesn't matter how much the Republicans screw over working people, pro-lifers in the prairie states think of themselves as modern day abolitionists and won't vote for anybody associated with the pro-choice party for that reason.

[laughingliberal]

91. The pro-lifers and wedge issue people scream loud but are they a majority

even in more conservative districts? Would a candidate who stood up for the workers against the corporations sending there jobs overseas and stealing their money have no chance in these places?

I think a lot of people vote the 'wedge issues' when there is no real choice on the other issues. For example, if I have a choice of a Democrat who is a corporate tool and a Republican who is a corporate tool and the Democrat advocated for gay marriage or choice I am stuck voting for the Democrat because, "oh, well, at least he's socially liberal."

But would I vote that wedge issue if I had a choice between someone I thought had my economic issues at heart and someone who didn't? Would the wedge issue matter as much to me if one candidate championed the working class? I don't know. Just some questions I have about that.

[Hippo_Tron]

111. Read "What's the Matter with Kansas" if you haven't

Thomas Frank does argue that the DLC has indeed contributed to this problem by promoting non populist candidates. However, he spends less than half a chapter talking about that and the rest of the book talking about how Republicans have manipulated working class people into voting against their own interests.

Running more populists candidates simply isn't a grand strategy to make these people start voting more Democratic. The problem is ultimately that working class people are split between the two parties. White working class people vote Republican and minority working class people vote Democratic. Both parties then try to appeal to constituencies that don't benefit from populism. For Republicans it's the uber rich. For Democrats it's the upper-middle class.

That is the issue in the plains states anyway. In the south economic populism won't even sell in a lot of places because since Reagan they have believed that social welfare programs only benefit lazy black people.

[RaleighNCDUer]

69. Like Ohio is such a hotbed of liberalism. nt

[glitch]

26. The only hope I see is for many many people to get involved at the level where election systems

are chosen and implemented.

As long as we have corporate voting machines that count our votes we won't get anywhere no matter how well informed we become.

However, corporate media reform and campaign finance reform are also a huge part of cleaning up the election systems.

I honestly don't think we'll get anywhere until we clean up all three issues that are hobbling us, and I think that clean up will have to come up from the bottom. The top is too invested in keeping the system as corrupt as it is.

[WI_DEM]

30. You will never get rid of moderate or conservative elements in the dem party

they have always been there and always will. You could try to primary, but could a liberal win in some of these conservative states/districts. Keep trying, but I believe it's a losing battle.

[emulatorloo]

33. I think we could find moderates who are less pro-big business that could win

You are absolutely right, in some of those states/districts a true liberal could not win.

But take Blanche Lincoln -- polling indicated her constituents liked the idea of a strong public option.

I feel like we could find BETTER conservatives moderates who were truer to the ideals of the Democratic party.

So all is not totallly hopeless,

JMHO

[rudy23]

36. Tell your low-information voting friends all about the DLC.

That's their biggest fear. They thrive on the low-information voting Democrat. Make DLC and New Democrats mainstream, household terms so that people can understand what's going on, and they help us use our strength in numbers to defeat fake Democrats.

[dmallind]

39. ...by becoming as irrelevant and powerless as the Constitution Party

Ideological purity outside the mainstream = impotence. Everybody in the party agrees, and everybody in the party stands firm on the same principles. They can just all do it in a VFW meeting hall.

[rudy23]

46. How irrelevant was the Green Party in 2000? It's like you NEVER LEARN.

JESUS!

[dmallind]

56. For their purposes? Completely. In fact self-defeating in the extreme to boot.

They (or rather he) were spoliers and no more. How much did their agenda get realized under a Bush they caused to be close enough to steal power? Did the environmental cause get better or worse after their role in the 2000 election? Is that what you want for any progressive causes? If so by all means split off or turn into a party that abandons the center and you will get your wish, guaranteed.

Like you say, it's like you never learn. Your refutation proves my point completely. A group of people with ideas outside the mainstream who stood on principle and would not compromise with the more centrist elements, and were treated to a complete and utter slaughter of every aim and hope they held dear because a diametrically opposed group that turned out to not be anywhere near "the same thing" as the dreaded centrists won the plurality of the remaining votes.

Great idea for advancing progressive causes! Worked wonderfully.

[rudy23]

59. I'm not saying I wish for that to happen, I'm saying it will if the DLC takes us for granted.

Again. Like it didn't just happen 9 years ago.

[dmallind]

70. But what the OP suggests is not stopping "the DLC" from taking progressives for granted

It is completely severing ties with "the DLC" (I use the airquotes because I generally see the term used for any Dem who is not a consistent left-leaning progressive on all issues rather than for the actual DLC - similar to the use of "Blue Dogs" who are often blamed for a vote where the majority of actual Blue Dogs voted as the progressives would have wished. Both the DLC and Blue Dogs are actual groups with defined membership of course)- either by ousting them from the party or refusing to be in a party with them. That IS what the Greens did.

I have no problem with progressives seeking to advance their (in many but not all policy areas OUR) agenda. You do that as members by getting voted onto platform committees and nominating committees. You do that as officials by forming your own caucuses just like the Blue Dogs have done (and of course this caucus exists). You don't do it, at least with hope of success, by removing all centrists and moderates until the party becomes nothing more than a potential spoiler that can never win power and is most likely going to increase the power of the least acceptable alternative.

[LoZoccolo]

58. How relevant were they in 2004 after four years of thorough drubbing for their asspipery?

It's the kind of trick they can only pull once. Seriously, if someone came up to my face talking 5% of the splinterist bullshit I see here I'd be so tempted to kick their ass bodily. They retreated hugely for fear of their asses getting unmitigatingly whipped. They talk this shit here where no one can retaliate against their violent threats.

[rudy23]

60. There will always be opposition from the left. How relevant they are depends on how many of us

continue to feel shit on and backstabbed by the people WE worked and donated money to put into office.

I would love for a splinter party to be irrelevant, but it looks like they will be very relevant as more and more of us cannot stomach what Obama and the New Democrats are doing to our country.

[treestar]

76. You were not shit on

If you know you are far out of the mainstream, you know you're not going to get that much of what you want.

I do not expect - with the voters in this country - to get far leftward politicians into office. I will vote for the Democrats and live with what I get rather than playing the victim.

As long as we are not under President McCain, we are making some progress. I consider it almost a luxury of self indulgence to claim to be a victim. If the freepers want to cry, then can. They are the ones in bad shape right now. And hopefully to stay that way.

[bvar22]

80. Far out of the mainstream?

Which "mainstream" is that?
The "mainstream" of "Free Trading" Corporate Executives and failed Wall Street Bankers?
Or the "mainstream" of Main Street?

THIS is The Center:

In recent polls (2005) by the Pew Research Group, the Opinion Research Corporation, the Wall Street Journal, and CBS News, the American majority has made clear how it feels. Look at how the majority feels about some of the issues that you'd think would be gospel to a real Democratic Party:

1. 65 percent (of ALL Americans, Democrats AND Republicans) say the government should guarantee health insurance for everyone -- even if it means raising taxes.

2. 86 percent favor raising the minimum wage (including 79 percent of selfdescribed "social conservatives").

3. 60 percent favor repealing either all of Bush's tax cuts or at least those cuts that went to the rich.

4. 66 percent would reduce the deficit not by cutting domestic spending but by reducing Pentagon spending or raising taxes.

5. 77 percent believe the country should do "whatever it takes" to protect the environment.

6. 87 percent think big oil corporations are gouging consumers, and 80 percent (including 76 percent of Republicans) would support a windfall profits tax on the oil giants if the revenues went for more research on alternative fuels.

7. 69 percent agree that corporate offshoring of jobs is bad for the U.S. economy (78 percent of "disaffected" voters think this), and only 22% believe offshoring is good because "it keeps costs down."

http://alternet.org/story/29788/

8. Over 63% oppose the War on the Iraqi People.

9. 92% of ALL Americans support TRANSPARENT, VERIFIABLE elections!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x446445

[treestar]

81. How have you been shat on with those 9 things?

And your polls are taken by Wall Street and those evil corporations! You'd have thought those corrupt evil bastards would not have allowed such results.

I would like #1 to be true but wonder how that poll question was asked. And "guarantee health insurance for everyone" could easily support the mandates that are such a boon to the insurance companies.

#5 is vaguely worded. Come up with some specific proposals that effect people's livelihoods and that might change.

[laughingliberal]

93. Here's a few thoughts on that

#3 Bush tax cuts not repealed. Perhaps will be allowed to expire in 2010

#4 Obama's nominee for Fed Chairman proposing 'reforming SS and Medicare' ie: cut domestic spending. No reductions to Pentagon budget.

#5 Does that really need pointing out?

#6 Have not heard the words 'windfall profit tax' out of Barack Obama's mouth since he won the election.

#7 Maybe I missed it but has anyone suggested any solutions to this?

[rudy23]

61. Also, obviously they were relevant to Democrats. You know that's what I was saying. nt

[LatteLibertine]

40. We could always

bribe them, like the lobbyists basically do. If everyone sent them a few dollars and tell them why, it would add up.

I don't believe meaningful change will occur in Washington. The system is far too corrupt and full of politicians interested in power and wealth. Replacing them doesn't really work because the odds are extraordinarily high you'll just end up with another politician who sells their votes. It's not about blue and red, it's about green.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

45. Some of us Minnesotans are trying to persuade on of our own DUers to challenge Klobuchar

who has never found a major issue that she couldn't waffle on.

[Freddie Stubbs]

55. You have plenty of time. She isn't up for reelection until 2012

[Lydia Leftcoast]

57. Excellent news

We'll get right on it and start strategizing now.

[andym]

47. Have progessives move to low population conservative areas.

Montana,
Wyoming,
N Dakota
S Dakota
etc

[Echo In Light]

52. Gee, wonder where all the "terror" attacks would occur if that were to happen?

[treestar]

77. If possible that would help

Is there still an influx of Californians trying to get away from the smog?

[Freddie Stubbs]

53. Tamyra d'Ippolito is challenging Bayh for the Democratic nomination:

http://tamyraforsenate.com/

[Jester Messiah]

62. I have the perfect solution!

Use logic, conviction, and irrefutable arguments to bring them around to your way of thinking!

[CrunchMaster]

63. Blow the lid off 9/11 and blackmailed politicians... that's how n/t

[WeDidIt]

90. Truther?

[MellowDem]

68. Start a third party...

other than that, there is no way to get rid of them other than the passage of time.

[mdmc]

73. If no one decent runs in NYS in 2010 I will focus on Sen. Evan Bayh

I think I may need to be an all in democrat if Ghouliani runs for Gov or Senate in NYS.
I am supporting Cuomo for Gov. I don't really care about the senate seat, except to make sure Ghouls don't get it.

[LostInAnomie]

79. Obviously, you know nothing about Indiana.

Bayh is well liked by the majority of Hoosiers. Apart from a few Democratically leaning larger cities, Indiana is solidly red. Bayh is as liberal as it's going to get statewide in Indiana.

[bvar22]

83. The Majority of Democratic Hoosiers.....

...also want a viable Public Option.
Do they KNOW the Bayh is working against their interests?

Do they KNOW that Evan Bayh's wife sits on the board of Wellpoint and that they both hold $Millions in Health Insurance Cartel stock?


The Majority of Democratic Hoosiers also OPPOSED the bailout of failed Wall Street Bankers.
Do they KNOW the Bayh is working against their interests?

Do they KNOW that BAYH supports Free Trade Policy that has devastated manufacturing in Indiana?

Do they KNOW that Evan Bayh is a ringleader of the BlueDogs/DLC that works to derail Obama's Democratic agenda?

Wouldn't YOU like to see Evan Bayh forced to defend his Anti-LABOR, Anti-Working Class record on a NATIONAL stage?



Evan Bayh still cashes in on his Daddy's name (Birch Bayh) who was a decent Democrat.
The point is to spotlight Bayh's Corporate Connections and Anti-Working Class record in a Primary by adequately bankrolling a Progressive Challenger. The Left may NOT be able to unseat Bayh, but we CAN make his primary a living hell, and shine a national spotlight on another Republican who is masquerading as a Democrat.

Bayh is UP for re-election in 2010.
The time is NOW.

"Centrism"...for those who are 1/2 Republican.

[liskddksil]

82. Here's a few candidates we can start with that I posted in another thread

Jennifer Brunner, is Secretary of State in Ohio, and much more progressive then the establishment backed Lee Fisher, in the race for Ohio's senate seat.

http://www.jenniferbrunner.com /

Rhode Island State Representative Betsy Dennigan, who is progressive and pro-choice, is running in a primary against current Rep. James Langevin, who voted for the Stupak amendment.

http://betsydenniganforcongress.com/?page_id=10

Andrew Romanoff is the former Colorado House Majority Leader, who has bucked the establishment and even the President to run a primary against Michael Bennet, who voted against the Cram-down legislation, and until very recently was not generally supportive of the public option.

http://www.andrewromanoff.com /

Doug Tudor is a progressive Democrat running in the primary against self-proclaimed "blue-dog" Lori Edwards in Florida's 12 Congressional District.

http://www.teamtudor.org/index.asp

Also keep an eye on Lt. Gov. of Arkansas Bill Halter, who could be persuaded into running against Sen. Lincoln.

[BREMPRO]

84. thanks for posting this- this is my favorite thread of the month!

real constructive action discussed along with the real world obstacles (conservative voters in red states voting for blue-dogs) I think the best use of our time, effort and money is to target blue-dogs in blue-states or at least mixed districts where progressives have a chance to win. The real problem is the Senate- LIEBERMAN should be TARGET NUMBER 1!!!! CT is a blue state and hopefully the republicans will actually support their candidate next time. If the choice is between a republican and a blue dog- i'll go with the dog.

[TexasObserver]

87. We don't. We target seats held by the GOP, like Snowe and Collins.

This notion that if could only defeat blue dogs all would be well is one that will not work. The reason blue dogs are blue dogs is because their constituencies are blue dog. Anyone who thinks you can replace those folks with Dennis Kucinich doesn't understand politics. Your choice is going to be a blue dog Democrat or a GOP right winger.

Better to focus on seats we can take from the GOP, which then minimizes the blue dogs.

[newportdadde]

88. Won't work unfortunately - look at Joe Lieberman.

What happened was exactly as you described and instead the Blue Dogs/DLC threw their money behind 'independent' Joe Lieberman.

[laughingliberal]

100. Not all states will let the primary loser turn around and run as an independent

It was our everlasting misfortune CT is not one of those states.

add on edit:

Sore-loser laws prevent the loser of a primary from then running in the general election as an independent. There are, also, states where the registration dates for the primary and general election are the same date. The only states where it is possible to lose the primary and then run as an independent in the general election are CT, IO, IA, NY, and VT

[WeDidIt]

89. Pick the right districts and states

There are dozens of Blue Dogs in very progressive districts.

Go after them. The job will be easier and the person who beats them in the primary will still win the GE.

[laughingliberal]

101. Exactly right! nt

[sui generis]

108. agreed. all the class warfare trolls upthread

are mindless zombies - if you eliminate the opportunity to take an unfair advantage by ANY group then one doesn't require membership in some straw man war on ideas.

Call me pragmatic - but it seems that the idea of "class warfare" we espouse here only has one army and one side. The other "side" is merely exploiting an opening, and yet we are immature enough to ascribe malice to that.

If we want to fix the problem, first we have to correctly identify the problem, and the problem lies in who we elect and to whom they are beholden.

[sojourner]

113. calling you out on your name calling......

you want to discuss ideas, do it, but you are surely educated enough to do so without calling those who disagree names.

[seeinfweggos]

99. to be honest

public financing of campaigns. which will probably never happen. it certainly doesn't look likely soon.

[RoadRage]

105. And replace them with what? Right Wing Republicans?!

I live in Nebraska.. Senator Nelson is my rep. I feel the blue dog pain.. really - I do.

But, Nelson is by far the most liberal "thing" to ever possibly get elected in this state. Anyone who is one micron further to the left in this state will not even stand a chance. In fact.. after this healthcare thing - he will probably lose his seat to a Republican (and he knows that.. which is why he introduced a Senate version of Stupak - because many in NE demand it).

I know that many here can't fathom it - but there are places in this country where people don't think the same as the left.. and Nebraska is one of them.

So, ask yourself - is it better to have a Nelson, who votes "D" 75% of the time.. or a new Republican Senator who votes "D" 0% of the time. Do you want TWO Mike Johans.. or 1 & 1/4th?

Because in states like mine.. those are your 2 options.

[Odin2005]

106. K&R

[adamuu]

107. We don't. We're big tent. We just need to outnumber them. n/t

[Umbral]

110. Quit voting for them, quit giving them money, quit supporting them in any way

And most of all quit voting for the lesser of two evils.