Well of course a bunch of blue dogs lost.

[LoZoccolo]

They are in red districts.

Hello.

[gratuitous]

1. Every one of them?

Still doesn't explain why 75 out of 79 Progessive Caucus Democrats won.

[LoZoccolo]

3. Uh, because they're in blue districts?

Hello again?

[csziggy]

11. My Blue Dog rep, Allen Boyd, is in a red district

He lost to a borderline Tea Bagger from Panama City FL which is very red mostly because of the military bases there, but in an area formerly run by old style Dixiecrats. All those old Dixiecrats became Reagan Democrats and then Republicans. Many voted for Boyd because he was an old style Democrats, at least they thought so. His opponent painted him as a Pelosi follower so they smeared him by claiming he was more liberal than he is.

Oh well, maybe this will rally the Democrats to run a stronger campaign and a more liberal candidate next time in this district!

[notesdev]

8. It's called gerrymandering

All across the country Congressional districts are drawn up to ensure as many safe seats for each of the two parties as possible, with a minimum number of competitive seats. All the blue dogs sat in the competitive seats, that's why they were blue dogs. We basically lost all the competitive seats, and even took a couple of blows at seats that were specifically designed to produce a Democratic office holder.

It's easy to be a progressive when your district is progressive. If you do it in a competitive district then you're rolling the dice at poor odds.

The fact of the matter is that the electorate as a whole is more conservative than liberal, by about a 2-1 margin, and then there's a big mass of independents whose votes are up for grabs. Democrats need to grab 3 of 4 independents to win, and progressive candidates don't pull independents - blue dogs do.

[sinkingfeeling]

2. Arkansas went from having 2 Democratic Senators and 3 out of 4 Dem. Reps to

having a new Republican Senator and 3 out of 4 Republicans in the House. The only survivor was ..... wait for it, Blue Dog Mike Ross.

[notesdev]

9. Virginia went from 6 Dem reps to 2

We did have a majority of the delegation here, no longer.

When I look at the broader map, I can see exactly three seats that went from GOP to Dem, all three having been under unusual circumstances. A number of states the Democratic delegation got wiped out entirely. We're down to five New England states, Hawaii and urban cores - outside of the west coast and New England the country has turned a near solid block of red.

There are so many bad things about the map it's hard to pick just one as most disturbing; but if I had to pick one I'd say that the loss of IL and MI would be it. Without Illinois there is basically no electoral math that can elect a Democratic President in a two-candidate race, and Michigan is nearly as important.

[Bluenorthwest]

4. Everyone who lost, whatever sort of 'dog' they might be

lost in a district they had previously won. That is the fact.

[stray cat]

5. Feingold and Grayson were not spared - we didn't just lose moderates

[Raksha]

6. Yeah, but Feingold and Grayson were public enemies #1 and 2 to the Repukes

and they were specifically targeted. They had MORE corporate cash dedicated to defeating them than any of the other Democrats, or maybe all of the other Democrats put together. That has to count for something. Plus Grayson was a freshman Rep from a very red state. I don't know about the demographics of his district, but Florida definitely tilts Repuke. That has to count for something too.

[Recursion]

7. We promised results and didn't deliver, or didn't explain when we did

I think either ideology has a chance to get a lot of America behind it if it can show results.

[jpgray]

10. Of course x happened, but for reasons that do not conflict with my beliefs

The tale of faith on all sides today.