8 out of 10 Democrats who the Cook report just downgraded are Blue Dogs

[kpete]

Wednesday, August 18, 2010
8 out of 10 Democrats who the Cook report just downgraded are Blue Dogs
by John Aravosis (DC) on 8/18/2010 10:02:00 AM

It seems the Cook Report has just downgrade the election chances of 10 Democrats. Eight of them are conservative Blue Dogs. Adam Green of PCCC thinks he knows why.

"The big lesson of 2010 for Democrats will be that if you govern like a Blue Dog and put corporate contributors ahead of your constituents, you lose. If you listen to what progressives have been telling you all along and stand up to corporations on issues like the public option and Wall Street reform, you win -- especially among Independent voters." -- Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC)

http://www.americablog.com/2010/08/8-out-of-10-democrats-who-cook-report.html
http://www.cookpolitical.com/

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. This was always going to be the case for straightforward reasons

There are very few blue dogs from strong liberal districts.

There are very few strong liberals from semi-conservative districts.

Swing districts are precisely the ones that swing in swing elections.

2006-2008 saw a purge of moderate republicans, taking out the entire NE except Maine.

2010 will see a purge of blue dogs.

Just as 2006-2008 moved the pug caucus to the right on average, 2010 will move the dem caucus to the left on average.

I am quite liberal but I am not going to pretend that the blue dogs are going to lose because they were not liberal enough.

They were probably going to lose either way. So they should have done the right things on the way out.

[still_one]

2. Unfortunately the reason most likely is because the area where those blue dogs are

is even more to the right then those blue dogs, and I doubt very much that in those areas a progressive would stand a chance

However, in independent and traditionally progressive areas, the Democrats should take heed, and not dis or ignore preogressives

[geek tragedy]

3. Not rocket science--Blue Dogs represent conservative districts

that are the first to flip back to the Republicans.

[sandnsea]

4. More likely the health care mandate

Which Obama didn't want in the first place, and brilliant people like Paul Krugman, and others who will go unnamed, said was critical to the legislation.

If they did a couple of tweaks to health care for whatever reason, and removed that mandate, Democrats would win in a landslide.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

6. Krugman and Hillary cost us Congress.

And they would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those pesky kids...

[progressoid]

11. Jinkies!!

[bluestateguy]

5. Blue Dogs are weasels but I must say this

They have the toughest districts. Of course they are targets.

[Wilms]

7. Why vote for a DLCer when you can get the real deal by voting Repuke?

:shrug:

[DirkGently]

8. That's crazy talk!

[karynnj]

9. It might be more likely that there is a strong correlation between being a blue

dog and being from a red or purple district. Now, if the list of blue dogs includes as many (or more) in blue areas, I will take back my comment.

I think the reason there are so many Democrats in the House at risk is that in 2006 and 2008, we won many seats that no one thought were winnable. These are now representatives with either 2 years or 4 years experience. For those in normally red or purple areas, only if they have established very strong personal ties with the voters will they have a good chance of surviving.

In addition, they are moving to a likely voter model that appears to have built in very hig expectations of Republican turn out and low Democratic turnout. This is coming both from the way the voters respond, but it also is partly conventional wisdom. What it does say is that Democrats need to be positive and get people out. The polls include the assumption of mediocre Democratic turn out - and we can change that. It also assumes very high Republican turnout, which in some special elections did not happen.

[The Backlash Cometh]

10. Very profound.