House Dem: Liberal groups need to back off for party to win in 2012

[stockholmer]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/house-races/141135-house-dem-liberal-groups-should-back-off-for-party-to-win-in-2012

"For instance, the SEIU encouraged its members in Ohio’s 18th district to “skip-a-Space” on their ballots and not vote for Rep. Zack Space because of his opposition to healthcare reform. The two-term Democrat was subsequently defeated by Republican Bob Gibbs.

Liberal groups also targeted Alabama Democrat Bobby Bright because of his opposition to the healthcare reform bill. The group Blue America PAC spent almost $50,000 against Bright – in the general election, according to records compiled by the Sunlight Foundation, a nonprofit watchdog group.

And in New Hampshire, liberal groups helped Ann McLane Kuster defeat establishment-favorite Katrina Swett in a bruising 2nd district Democratic primary. Kuster went on to lose to Republican Charlie Bass in a tight vote................................"




A comment from me

IMHO Single-payer was the true liberal, principled plan to support, not the insurance industry influenced/written bill that emerged. This would allow, (as it does here in Sweden), for employers to return much of the massive savings they obtain by no longer having to foot the cost of employee insurance to the workers in the form of higher wages.

I find it extremely ironic that the very same SEIU who dumped millions into passing the Obama health care plan, and punishing those progressives who did not, have already received 7 EXEMPTIONS from it for themselves, covering 45,000 members.



http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/561404/201101281851/Wheres-Our-Waiver-.htm

The SEIU — whose former head Andy Stern was once the leading visitor to the White House, ahead of Cabinet members and heads of state — had three of its locals exempted from ObamaCare mandates in the first batch of waivers, which reached 222 total: Local 25 SEIU in Chicago, with 31,000 enrollees; Local 1199 SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund, with 4,544 enrollees; and SEIU Local 1 Cleveland Welfare Fund, with 520 enrollees.

In the latest round of waivers, the SEIU, which lobbied mightily to force everyone else into ObamaCare, added four more locals to the waiver list, which stands at 729. There are now seven SEIU locals that have waivers, covering a total of 45,000 workers

[purrFect]

1. If we have so much influence, why not listen and address our concerns?

:shrug:

[HereSince1628]

14. Because we are supposed to follow the leaders that's why the L

stands for LEADERSHIP.

We just don't know our place and because of that we are always unhappy.

[Selatius]

2. Single-payer, in terms of cost savings, was the best option, but the politicians had none of that.

The problem was that ideology trumped fiscal sensibility. The idea of essentially driving out of business an entire industry built on health insurance was odious to people who generally say that "the market" is the best arbiter of economic problems.

At maximum, the only thing they would allow is a Public Option in competition with private insurers, but even then, they wanted it limited to just those who were too poor to afford regular private insurance; everyone else had to purchase private insurance. Yet, even that failed. The only proposal that survived the Senate was a vaguely Nixon/Dole/Romney idea of making everybody purchase private insurance.

[DJ13]

3. What would 'backing off' mean?

More Blue Dogs in the next election, and more conservative laws passed through 2012.

Screw that.

[MrModerate]

4. Hear, hear! Just because you have a (D) by your name . . .

Doesn't mean you can oppose Democratic principles with impunity. We're not asking for ideological purity, just support on the most basic issues that define democrats: people first, justice, and humanity.

[grahamhgreen]

5. Not if they want my vote.

[Raine]

6. Which is it? Are we so unimportant you feel you don't

need us so you don't have to give us anything ... or are you so fearful that we are powerful enough to cause you to lose. :shrug:

[quaker bill]

7. Ya think?

If winning is important, then you back any credible candidate on your side of the asile, as it is better to have a representative that will vote with your side half the time than one that will never vote with you. No, you don't get as much change as you want, but things don't go quite as badly as they would otherwise.

[Tesha]

9. So it's okay to elect any number of anti-abortion Democrats?

Or anti-labor Democrats?

Or pro-war Democrats?

Surely at some point the (D) next to their name becomes
meaningless! (And I've argued for quite some time that the
Democrats' big problem is that thanks to anti-abortion, anti-
labor, pro-war (etc.) Democrats, the (D) *HAS* become meaningless.
People might as well vote for the Republican who is all those
things because at least he's also anti-tax.)

Tesha

[quaker bill]

18. as opposed to whom?

the anti abortion Repug? I am generally pro taxes, so voting for republicans is right out. There is always at least one good reason to not vote for the republican.

[Le Taz Hot]

8. No problem.

I "backed off" in 2004 after being a Democrat since 1973 and after witnessing first-hand what they did to Dean. If they ever decide to get back to populism, I'll certainly reconsider.

[Vinca]

10. Annie Kuster was a great candidate. Swett would have done worse.

In any case, I'm not going to turn into Republican-lite for any reason.

[Tesha]

17. If I recall correctly, Annie came the closest to winning of all...

...of the three Democratic contenders for Federal
office from NH this year.

Tesha

[mascarax]

11. The party doesn't "win" with the likes of Bobby Bright

One of the worst, and the DCCC poured a lot into that race. He received more money from them than anyone else. It was asinine. And he opposed more than just healthcare insurance reform.

And why bring up Kuster's race? Apparently it was close...doesn't seem like that lends much to their argument against "the Liberals".

If the Democratic Party will be filled with the likes of Bobby Bright...then it's not the Democratic Party anyway (at least my understanding of it, but then, I actually read the last Party Platform...full of stuff Bobby Bright doesn't support).

[pampango]

12. Repubs say the same thing to tea baggers. Neither is going to or should happen. n/t

[old mark]

13. K&R- Sounds like advocating not-voting to prove a point....again...

didn't work well in November, IIRC...


mark

[w8liftinglady]

15. or...worse...third party

I thought the R's had the market on THAT one

[Javaman]

16. Ah yes, the establishment Dems tell us once again to sit down and shut up.

And tell us to be quiet until they need our votes again.

Because, gasp, we might actually point out their hypocrisy which would upset their gravy train.

What passes for the Democratic party now is a sham. They love the props that go with the title but, heaven forbid them to actually stand behind the core principles.

They don't like us because we progressives do stand behind the core principles. And there is their rub.