General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGov Dean: No More Electing Dems who behave like Republicans- That's how we lost public option
Former Democratic National Committee chairman and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean said Tuesday that he wanted to see the left elect real progressive Democrats this fall at the Take Back the American Dream Conference, sponsored by the Campaign for Americas Future in Washington, D.C. Im not interested in electing Democrats who behave like Republicans once theyre elected. Thats how we lost the public option.
Dean, who can still fire up a progressive crowd, spoke about the need to push for the presidents re-election this fall. The 2004 Democratic presidential candidate received a standing ovation when he said, One of the reasons Im supporting Barack Obama for re-election is I want two more Supreme Court justices like Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.
He warned against supporting Koch brothers-backed companies and fighting against the unlimited spending allowed by the Supreme Courts Federal Election Commission v. Citizens United decision in 2010. How many of you buy Brawny paper towels? Dont do it. The Koch brothers make it, he said. America was not meant to be owned by corporations and Ill be damned if Im going to allow that to happen.
MORE:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/06/19/dean-america-was-not-meant-to-be-owned-by-corporations/
Woody Woodpecker
(562 posts)Bring out the bats, and we needs to start using 'em to beat the Blue Dogs out of our tent. The Blue Dogs has never belonged into the Democratic tent, and are far better off in a Rethuglican tent if they do not share the progressive ideals of the true Democratic Party.
There is no Third Way anymore. Either you're a Democrat or a Republican or just plain an idiot.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)newthinking
(3,982 posts)What's this "Blue dogs are dean's fault" and why is it a short quip being repeated over and over all of a sudden?
brooklynite
(95,070 posts)If not, I'll go with the Democratic candidates that can.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)where enough aware, intelligent people support them, instead of supporting the bankrolled candidates of the 1%.
Depends on the integrity of the voting system also.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Then Bill Clinton got elected and two things happened.
1. the Scary Looking Weapons Ban turned a lot of the electorate against Dems in general, and
2. local Democrats decided to emulate Clinton's electoral success.
Clinton famously spent almost as much time in 1992 running against the Democratic congress as he did against the incumbent GHW Bush. He was "not one of those Democrats" he reminded us time and time again. So Democrats in swing districts decided to copy his blueprint. And they began bashing Liberals and Democrats.
As a result those districts are no longer swing districts. Oh, they may elect a DINO from time to time. But a couple decades ago they used to swing between moderates from either side. Now they only elect Rightists. Because all the pols from both parties keep telling them how horrible non-Rightists are.
The district where I grew up is a perfect example of that as they rarely elect a Democrat nowadays. Only when the Repub fucks up. And that only ever seems to happen *after* the Democrats have already nominated a Rightist candidate for the next election.
More to the point, why do you want to win an election if you're just going to do what the other side wants once elected? The only reason I can see for that is pure selfishness: "I don't care what I do with the power, I just want the money and prestige that goes with that power."
We believe in what we believe. If the electorate disagrees, then we deserve to lose. That's the way democracy works. I don't mind losing. But at the moment we aren't even fucking trying.
brooklynite
(95,070 posts)...which is what I'll get if the Democratic candidate is TOO left-wing for a moderate-conservative district, and a Republican wins instead.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)We focus on the differences, but the truth is we and they agree 90% of the time. So the difference AT THIS PRECISE MOMENT IN TIME is not that big a deal. Over time, however, the constant drift Right has been destroying this country. Or did you miss how this country went from one of the best standards of living 30 years ago to not even breaking the top 20 today?
What about districts that are not moderate-conservative? A lot of the Rightist Democrats come from moderate-left districts. A district just west of Chicago was narrowing and narrowing with each election. A few years back it was almost close enough to call for a recount. 2 years later the Republican incumbent was unprimaried while caught in a scandel.
With the Democratic candidate from 2 years previously leading the Republican incumbent in every poll, fucking Rahm Emmanuel poured money into a primary campaign and succeeded in installing a Rightwing "Democrat" as our nominee. As an outsider she was soundly defeated in the general. Two years later, without any outside DLC/BLUEDOG/THIRDWAY interference, the woman who was "TOO left-wing" ... defeated the Republican handily in the general election.
And then what about those who come from solidly left districts like Chicago? What is your excuse for a Mayor Daley who was a Rightwing wet dream? Even Bob Novak called Daley, "a Republican in all but name."
I am about as centrist in my personal politics as it comes. But I can see that they are trying to game the system so the far right gets 99% of what they want regardless of who wins in the general election.
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)This is the way things hae been going for awhile. We really need to start primarying out Conservative Democrats.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)The Democrats here in Idaho can't get anyone elected to Congress that agrees more than 50% or 60% with the Democratic party, so we wind up getting Republicans year in and year out.
Representative Walt Minnick was the last example we had in the House of a DINO, but he was 100 times better that Raul "Maddawg" Labrador!!!
OneAngryDemocrat
(2,060 posts)The problem with electing democrats who vote with Republicans is that you can't hold them responsible for their votes.
They're responsible to their constituients, not their fellow democrats.
That being the case, it makes more sense to let the seat fall to the GOP, then at least we can promote a progressive as a potential replacement, and maintain a bona fide democatic party agenda that's not going to be abandoned by a bunch of DINOs.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)The south, midwest, and mountain states have very different voting blocs.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)*comes out of nowhere
*looks like the Marlboro man
*can ride a horse and shoot a gun comfortably
*speaks in easy to understand, folksy American English,
*has Party Support and Party Money
*avoids the Wedge Issues
*runs on a simple platform of Economic Justice for Working Americans
*Stands his Ground unequivocally
*and repeats over and over,
"You know, Americans who have to go to WORK everyday have been getting SCREWED by the RICH for over 30 years. Now, MY Party has to take some of the blame for sending all our good jobs overseas, but if you elect ME, I intend to DO SOMETHING about that."
[font size=3]...can get elected ANYWHERE![/font]
He doesn't have to say anything else.
In the debates or any interview,
ALL he has to do is repeat over and over,
"Well, I don't know about that,
but I DO know that Americans who have to Go to WORK everyday have been getting SCREWED by the RICH for over 30 years. Now, MY Party has to take some of the blame for sending all our good jobs overseas, but if you elect ME, I intend to DO SOMETHING about that!"
This man or woman can get elected ANYWHERE.
The key is Party Support and Party Money for TV ads.
Unfortunately, the owners of the Democratic party will make sure that his campaign is torpedoed with party Money in the early Democratic Primaries.
They WILL do to him/her exactly what they did to Dr Dean.
The LAST thing the Democratic Party wants is THIS man or woman receiving National Attention, or in a position of power.
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
montanacowboy
(6,116 posts)and he was tearing it up
We really lost something when they drummed Dean out - and it was the bastard blue dogs that did it.
northoftheborder
(7,575 posts)That's a fact. I'm very glad Dean didn't back off, but is still in there strong. I've always liked him.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)However...
The bad news is that we had to elect less progressive Democrats in order to avoid a electing a wingnut Republican.
I love Dean, but he has to finally admit that while his 50 State Strategy was great for electing Democrats, it was also great for electing Blue Dogs and Corporatist Democrats, too!
Raine1967
(11,589 posts)I really appreciate you saying that.
I am a big Dean supporter as well, but the reality is that we got so many Blue dogs because of the 50 state strategy.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)structure and leadership at the state level. It is the state parties that determine who is allowed to run. Failing to flush the OG reagan Democrats from positions of power leads to these DINO's, not the will of the people.
Harry S. said it and it's still true today, "Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time"
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)he reconciles calling for a more progressive Democratic Party while, at the same time, touting a 50 state strategy. There aren't enough progressive Democrats in states like Nebraska or Arkansas to choose from. Then what?
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)not courted nor allowed to get through the local hierarchy by the small-minded jerks that are more concerned with protecting their turf than in furthering the cause of progress. I've seen it first-hand over and over all over the west, in both blue and red states. The party is run by compromised, feather-nesters whose first and only concern is maintaining their own power.
We wouldn't win all the time, but at least there is a clear choice between candidates come election day. Then it's up to the voters at large.
nxylas
(6,440 posts)I suspect it has as much to do with image as anything. A candidate with tattoos and piercings who was into New Age spirituality would probably have an easier time getting elected in San Francisco than in Buttfuck, Idaho. That doesn't mean the candidate for Buttfuck, Idaho has to be a corporatist drone who believes that the 1% are paying too much in taxes. It just means that they have to appear more "normal", much as we may deplore the closed-mindedness of the electorate in that district.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)The notion that there are no liberal pillars of the community that will get the votes in Wichita, KS., for example, is such an obvious lie that it is insulting. The Party is the only reason we are left with a choice between corporate rep Tweedledee and insane corporate rep Tweedledum every two years.
We're not republicans, we can think and understand what is happening. Treating us like idiots doesn't inspire enthusiasm.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)get drowned out by the money. We need to get rid of the money in our politics. Maybe then the Establishment Democrats won't be scared away by Republicans who typically have more money, so Democrats feel that they need to run a monied Democrat in order to win.
This issue is a lot more complicated than just going after progressives. We need to go after progressives who can WIN!!
WinstonSmith4740
(3,060 posts)Howard Dean SHOULD be the Surgeon General right now...his 50 State Strategy is the big reason Republicans had to spend money in states they normally didn't have to worry about in 2008. However, he basically crossed swords with Rahm Emanuel, who spent most of his career pulling Democrats to the right, and creating the "Republican Lite" candidate. I understood that Obama wanted (and needed) that "pit bull" mentality as his Chief of Staff, but I really think that's when things started to crumble. I don't think we were even out of January 2009 when Emanuel threw the public option under the bus. He was on TV saying that the public option was not absolutely necessary in the health care bill. When you've got someone like that deciding who gets in to see the President, then all he gonna hear is conservative leaning rhetoric.
whathehell
(29,115 posts)Dean is the man!
Citizen Worker
(1,785 posts)October
(3,363 posts)I hate how he's been so marginalized. For what? A scream that wasn't?
Stupid, stupid, stupid media and masses.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)nineteen50
(1,187 posts)they vote 1% er.
Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)Forget all these Centrist, GOP-lite policies. The Dems must move leftwards in order to balance out the right wingnuts and stir up passion from the base again. They've tried too hard to appease folks in the middle ever since * stole both of his elections.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Dean would not have conceded and likely had an Ohio recount...and forced the Chimp to once again openly steal it.
But that may not have even come up...Dean would have rallied people to the polls like Obama did....and so many things wold be different now with a President Dean.
Bluzmann57
(12,336 posts)Kerry (correct spelling) won the Democratic nomination in 2004 and the rest is history. You, me, nobody in here can say what Dean would or would not have done.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Clinton ran as "not one of those Democrats" and won. A lot of people thought they could copy his blueprint for success. Or, at least, that is the kind-hearted explanation.
A group in Australia claimed to be copying Clinton's tactics too. At some point it was discovered that this group was being funded by the same people who were funding the Australian Right. Australian's concluded this meant it was a front organization for the Right meant to mitigate any damage done by the political pendulum. When the Right wins, they get everything they want. When the Left wins, they get the most important things (the economic policy). So this group was discredited and drummed out of the party.
At which point many in the United States noted that the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) of which the Clintons were founding members were funded by the exact same people who are funding the Republican party. And we concluded that the DLC was very likely also a front organization. They represent the Right and are just pretending to be Left to ensure a win for the same economic masters regardless of which party gets elected.
Unfortunately, where this was a big story in the Australia media and outraged the electorate at these shenanigans, in the US it is mostly ignored and called a nutty conspiracy theory if it does get mentioned. I thing the Aussies might have outsmarted the Yanks on this one.
Of course, we have no DLC any more. But we do have Third Way and Blue Dogs. And I bet if we looked into their funding....
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)where it's safe". We know how that worked out. I would vote for him, I would donate to him, and I would work for him.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)to uncompromisingly support Business As Usual"
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)...the primaries. If you want to get your way then work harder to elect democrats that agree with you. Democrats are elected from all parts of the country and they all can't be liberal. It is a shame, but it is the truth.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)great success here in Michigan.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Democrats are allowed to vote for who they want in the primaries?
bvar22
(39,909 posts)SEE: Arkansas Democratic Primary, 2010.
We did everything right to replace Blue Dog Blanche Lincoln in the Democratic Primary.
We had Union support, the Grass Roots, and a very popular Pro-HealthCare, Pro-LABOR candidate,
Democratic Lt Governor Bill Halter.
He was polling well against the virulently Anti-UNION, anti-HealthCare Blue Dog incumbent who was campaigning on I'm the one who derailed the "Big Government takeover of Health Care"!!
We did everything the White House asked us to do to "Elect More Progressives!"
Guess WHAT happened,
and Guess WHO we wound up fighting to "Elect More Progressives."
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The Obama White House!!!
They pulled out ALL the Stops to rescue Blue Dog Blanche Lincoln!
*An Oval Office Presidential Endorsement played over & over on local TV
*Funds from the DSCC
*the White House even sent the Old Dog (Bill Clinton) back home to Arkansas to drum up support for "the woman who wrecked ObamaCare".
Fundraisers and Rallies.
*After the White House had torpedoed the campaign of Pro-HealthCare/ Pro-UNION Bill Halter,
an "Anonymous White House Spokesperson" ridiculed Organized LABOR for "wasting $10Million Dollars" supporting a Pro-LABOR candidate in a Democratic Primary.
*Naturally, after being insulted and Steam Rolled by the White House, LABOR did NOT turn out for the Blue Dog Lincoln,
and she was soundly defeated by the Republican in the General Election.
If the Arkansas Primary was an anomaly,
I could write it off as the White House NOT paying attention.
But Arkansas was NOT unique.
This pattern of assisting Conservatives and even Republicans (see Pennsylvania and Florida Democratic Primaries) was repeated too many times in 2010 to be a mistake.
So, that naive nonsense about
"All you have to do is work to elect Progressives in Primaries"is Pollyanna Bull Shit.
The White House, The DSCC, the DCCC, the DNC, or ANY National Organization
has Absolutely NO Business interfering in local Democratic Primaries.
When they do so, it is ALWAYS to subvert the Will of the People!
[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)But the dems in AR like in WV are much more conservative than nation wide.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Especially if he:
*comes out of nowhere
*looks like the Marlboro man
*can ride a horse and shoot a gun comfortably
*speaks in easy to understand, folksy American English,
*has Party Support and Party Money
*avoids the Wedge Issues
*runs on a simple platform of Economic Justice for Working Americans
*Stands his Ground unequivocally
*and repeats over and over,
"You know, Americans who have to go to WORK everyday have been getting SCREWED by the RICH for over 30 years. Now, MY Party has to take some of the blame for sending all our good jobs overseas, but if you elect ME, I intend to DO SOMETHING about that."
[font size=3]...can get elected ANYWHERE![/font]
He doesn't have to say anything else.
In the debates or any interview,
ALL he has to do is repeat over and over,
"Well, I don't know about that,
but I DO know that Americans who have to Go to WORK everyday have been getting SCREWED by the RICH for over 30 years. Now, MY Party has to take some of the blame for sending all our good jobs overseas, but if you elect ME, I intend to DO SOMETHING about that!"
This man or woman can get elected ANYWHERE.
The key is Party Support and Party Money for TV ads.
Unfortunately, the owners of the Democratic party will make sure that his campaign is torpedoed with party Money in the early Democratic Primaries.
They WILL do to him/her exactly what they did to Dr Dean.
The LAST thing the Democratic Party Establishment wants is THIS man or woman receiving National Attention, or actually holding a position of power.
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)too bad you've got next to nothing with which to back it up.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHhhhh!!!!!!
That makes me unhappy!
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,514 posts)in the back by blocking or diluting his agenda. After all, liberals pretty much voted for everything Obama put forward. It was your so called bought and paid for "grown ups" who made it harder for the president to push through the change he promised. It's hilarious how the center right hacks in the Democratic party only demand party loyalty from the left and not the right.
Kingofalldems
(38,520 posts)and will attack him any chance they get.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)So now Dean is a bad guy and it is his fault that we have a "blue dog" problem. Where did this idea come from and why is it being spread with almost the same exact language from a number of different posters?
treestar
(82,383 posts)If there were Republicans there instead.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,464 posts)OTOH his strategy also swept in a lot of the same kind of Dems- those from more conservative parts of the country- that he is apparently complaining about. Progressives are going to need to break into some of those more conservative states (i.e. West Virginia) and start organizing to help elect more progressive Dems that "really act like Dems". At the end of the day, however, a majority is still the majority regardless of the precise composition thereof IMHO and the voting records of most Blue Dog Dems are still largely pro-Democratic.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Because when he sold us on the 50-State Strategy, he said we would be bringing a liberal, progressive message to all 50 states. In execution, I think he must have funded the local party assuming they mostly just needed funding to get their message out when in reality they were still following the DLC strategy of embracing the Rightist message.
I don't recall the DNC under Dean backing rightist candidates against liberals during Democratic primaries. They backed whomever won, but they did not interfere before that. Conversely, we saw Emanuel as DCCC head in 2006 and Dean's successors since he left the DNC do exactly that.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,464 posts)We should not be leaving stones unturned anywhere and it's frankly embarrassing that in some areas, Republicans run totally uncontested every election and where the only *choice* people get is in the primary. I think that we need to get candidates for as many races as possible and support them to whatever degree possible. Even if they lose, they will have made the Republicans spend some money somewhere they didn't have to worry about spending money before. As a party, we need to stop ceding territory to the Republicans by default and even when we are in the minority or locked in a fight that we (probably) can't win, we need to make the Republicans fight for every single inch of ground.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Republicans in Pennsylvania got embarrased recently when a White Supremicist gave himself a write-in vote for a state party committeeman during a primary in a district that had nobody running for that position. He was elected 1-0. Since it is a party position there is no general, and they are stuck with him.
In his final gubernatorial election Adlai Stephenson III was saddeled with a LaRouche Lt Governor nominee. Adlai ended up campaigning for his Republican opponent.
I really don't see these Third Way/Blue Dog/DLC types any different. We don't need 100% purity. But there is no reason to ever support a local candidate who does not support the national party. Since our Senator from West Virginia refuses to endorse Obama for President, I wouldn't give him one fucking penny. I used to be a $100/month sustaining member of the DNC and quit precisely because my money was going to support traitors like that.
11th Commandment according to Republicans: say nothing bad about your fellow party member.
11th Commandment according to DLC/BD/TW: get yourself elected over the bodies of your fellow party members.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)The 50-state strategy did lead to more conservative dems being elected.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)They came from the DLC, not the DNC. Third Way. They have been growing it for 15 years. Sure, Dean learned that he should not have enabled the Dino's that came along with the territory. But there are people in this forum trying to deflect the real cause of loss of momentum in the party. I think there is plenty of evidence that Dean is on the side of progressives.
mazzarro
(3,450 posts)Can anyone say that this is not the man wee need at the helm of the democratic party? Instead we get all these namby-pamby democrats that will not fight back or who will put some tepid fight like in Wisconsin!
ProSense
(116,464 posts)The 50-State Strategy gave us three of these Senators:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=827686
McCaskill, Tester and Webb were elected in 2006.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)catbyte
(34,557 posts)Cary
(11,746 posts)No offense to Governor Dean but WE, THE PEOPLE have to speak loud and clear at the ballot boxes.
knitter4democracy
(14,350 posts)We can't out-Republican the Republicans, so we should just be true to ourselves as Dems.
Uncle Joe
(58,596 posts)Thanks for the thread, kpete.
kpete
(72,062 posts)Bush Knew.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=147395
peace, kpete
Thanks for the link.
peace to you, Uncle Joe
WillyT
(72,631 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Please keep speaking for us! We need more of this!
MrTwister
(76 posts)The real Dem got pushed aside by the corporate Dem.
On edit--his organization, Democracy for America, is still around and very much alive. I sent them 50 bucks the other day, and I encourage DUers to chip in too.
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/
I'd say Dean in 2012, but I know that isn't going to happen.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)One of the 99
(2,280 posts)who was one of the most conservative democratic governors in the '90s.
MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)Howard Dean 'gets it' and speaks for the Democratic wing of the Democratic party. Run, Howard, run!
progressoid
(50,032 posts)He wouldn't kowtow to the neoliberals now running our party.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)funded Republicans? Campaign finance costs are the major reason Dems act like Republicans. Trying to get Dems to act better without campaign finance reform is like putting the cart before the horse.
flpoljunkie
(26,184 posts)but I am not holding my breath. They evidently don't like a level playing field. The Fair Elections Act is repeatedly introduced in each Congress, but never seems to go anywhere. There are only 16 cosponsors in the Senate this session.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.01404:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:s.00750:
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)In some places, lefties will NOT be elected. The choice is either a Blue Dog or a Republican. That's it.
Blue Dogs are frustrating, for sure. But they at least will vote for the Democratic Party bills most of the time. Even a moderate Republican won't do that.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)That helped so many blue dogs and centrist Democrats get elected in conservative districts? Those same blue dogs that "progressives" were happy to see lose in 2010?
Sid
Chan790
(20,176 posts)provided we were ousting them in primaries to run real Democrats.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)newthinking
(3,982 posts)What has there been an op ed recently is is this a new talking point? This thread is the first time I have seen this accusation and it seems to be coming on like it is ochestrated?
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)Right? That's what he called it.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96956854
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2008/05/16/deans-50-state-strategy-for-the-democrats
Or are you asking if the "new talking point" is that we got saddled with some blue dogs? Because we absolutely did in some cases.
Is it his "fault"? No. Ultimately it was the failure of the party leaders to whip those dogs into shape. But it's a bit disingenuous to not accept that it lead to us getting stuck with some cowards in stupid districts that would never accept a true Democrat.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)I know about the strategy, but I have never heard people blame him personally for blue dogs in the party.
Marr
(20,317 posts)Those links were nothing but talk about how the 50-state strategy was working, and describing what it was. I've never heard people blame Dean for the DINO's in the party and really, those are usually the people these same "moderates" spend time making excuses for. So it's kind of an odd sales pitch.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)If it really is a conservative district, a liberal will have a very hard time winning. In those cases, it's better to have a blue dog than a Republican.
The problem is a lot of non-conservative districts are represented by blue dogs or Democrats who for various reasons aren't terribly helpful. Such as Feinstein and Lieberman (before he switched to the prima donna party).
You accept a blue dog only when you have no other realistic option. But we should not accept a blue dog when we have better options.
RainDog
(28,784 posts)Blue Owl
(50,605 posts)K&R
PufPuf23
(8,859 posts)Most of our Democratic leaders behave more like moderate Republicans than what I was lead to believe were the policies that were heart and soul of the Democratic Party.
Its not just that the corporations don't act in the interests of the American People (or World) but American corporate brands and ownership do not act in the best interests of the USA (or World peace and prosperity).
Edit:
PS The Democratic Party leadership conceded the public option early and IMHO any mention by our own Party was "happy talk" for public consumption.
ELI BOY 1950
(173 posts)The public option was SO IMPORTANT and we could not get it done...Senators who are not real democrats
need not apply...Joe Lieberman ...Cory Booker do you get the message...
and how about Rachel stating last night that Cory was mistaken...sad...as Mr. Dean says we don't need them...
Comrade_McKenzie
(2,526 posts)sakabatou
(42,207 posts)That'd be a great ticket.
herberto55
(6 posts)I was just reading about The New Democratic Coalition today. Apparently they are all about protecting human rights while working to promote industry and free trade. They call themselves moderate Democrats. I used to be pretty moderate too but have been pulling to the left in direct reaction to the T Party's push to the right. At first I thought hey, this might be a good idea, but after reading this thread you guys have convinced me to stand my ground and keep fighting for what's right. It seems that the T Party's idea of compromise is them standing firm and us caving in. So, after due consideration I'm back on track. Thanks.
Canuckistanian
(42,290 posts)I say that he and Bernie Sanders should start a 3rd party. Call it the "Democratic Reform Party"
I know, I know, 3rd party means division and vote splitting. But I really think people would like a refreshing change from the conservatives and conservative appeasers in Congress now.
Just putting it out there.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)I d\o not want a repeat of up north, where Harper is playing the various factions of the left against each other like a harp. Bush is gone, Harper is still there.
donheld
(21,311 posts)I've, just in the last two to three months, realized Denver, once a bastian of liberals is run by very conservative "democrats"
eridani
(51,907 posts)The answer to that question determines my voting behavior. Even the worst Dems are better than the best Repubs. The graphs are lifetime voting record on issues of concern to seniors in the House and the Senate. I did this in WA State for environmental issues, and got similar results.
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)Janice7
(4 posts)emsimon33
(3,128 posts)moderates were still allowed in the Republican Party.
The Democratic tent has become so large that even Republicans are taking refuge!
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)I don't know about the rest of the country but around here we like people who stand up and fight for what they believe in. Instead of bending further inward we should be standing tall. Instead of acquiescing to monied interests we should be publicly whipping them. We must never be afraid to stand up for the things that cant stand up for themselves. The folks around here like to see someone standing up for themselves and others and having the courage of their convictions to fight for them tooth and nail. They generally respond very positively. Even if they disagree. Around here that is.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)and he is STILL right today!
"I've seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the Fair Deal, and says he really doesn't believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign."
---President Harry Truman
[font size=4]Leadership! "The Buck Stops HERE!" NO Excuses![/font]
[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
Nanjing to Seoul
(2,088 posts)clang1
(884 posts)Fmr Gov. Dean is spot on.
davidwparker
(5,397 posts)Don't like the DINO. Run somebody against him/her.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)SEE: Arkansas Democratic Primary, 2010.
We did everything right to replace Blue Dog Blanche Lincoln's failing campaign in the Democratic Primary.
We had Union support, the Grass Roots, and a very popular Pro-HealthCare, Pro-LABOR candidate,
Democratic Lt Governor Bill Halter.
He was polling well against the virulently Anti-UNION, anti-HealthCare Blue Dog incumbent who was campaigning on I'm the one who derailed the "Big Government takeover of Health Care"!!
We did everything the White House asked us to do to "Elect More Progressives!"
Guess WHAT happened?
and Guess WHO we wound up fighting to "Elect More Progressives"?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The Obama White House!!!
They pulled out ALL the Stops to rescue Blue Dog Blanche Lincoln!
*An Oval Office Presidential Endorsement played over & over on local TV
*Funds from the DSCC
*the White House even sent the Old Dog (Bill Clinton) back home to Arkansas to drum up support for "the woman who wrecked ObamaCare".
Fundraisers and Rallies.
*After the White House had torpedoed the campaign of Pro-HealthCare/ Pro-UNION Bill Halter,
an "Anonymous White House Spokesperson" ridiculed Organized LABOR for "wasting $10Million Dollars" supporting a Pro-LABOR candidate in a Democratic Primary.
*Naturally, after being insulted and Steam Rolled by the White House, LABOR did NOT turn out for the Blue Dog Lincoln,
and she was soundly defeated by the Republican in the General Election.
If the Arkansas Primary was an anomaly,
I could write it off as the White House NOT paying attention.
But Arkansas was NOT unique.
This pattern of assisting Conservatives and even Republicans (see Pennsylvania and Florida Democratic Primaries) was repeated too many times in 2010 to be a mistake.
So, that naive nonsense about
"All you have to do is work to elect Progressives in Primaries" is Pollyanna Bull Shit.
The White House, The DSCC, the DCCC, the DNC, or ANY National Organization
has Absolutely NO Business interfering in local Democratic Primaries.
When they do so, it is ALWAYS to subvert the Will of the People!
Can you IMAGINE the message it would have sent to the Blue Dogs if the White House
had thrown their support behind the Challenger in the Arkansas Democratic Primary?
But NO!
The White House and the National Democratic Party leadership sent the message that they will go to extremes to protect the Blue Dogs and Big Business Conservatives who are running our Party,
AND to protect the worn OUT excuse of "We really wanted to, but we didn't have 60 votes."
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
davidwparker
(5,397 posts)given that indications seem the supreme court is going to strike down the individual mandate and then Obama's health care goes with it.
I agree with your last statement. Protecting the 60 vote threshold gives cover to those selling us out. I think as we were cheering in 2008 for the Obama win and the retaking of Congress's houses, the Dem leadership were terrified: cover blown and now we have no excuses. Split houses give them cover to not pursue a progressive agenda.
Like you say, keep Blanche, part of the club, over somebody who would vote for real health care reform.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)in the last election. You'd think the remaining ones would wake the fuck up!
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)I'll participate in the dog and pony show we call Democracy even though that isn't what it is anymore. Corrupt supreme court, congress, military, ect, all catering to corporations. They don't represent me and what's left of the middle class and poor. God bless America ...pffft ...whatever
bobthedrummer
(26,083 posts)Arkana
(24,347 posts)We elected "Democrats" like Parker Griffith and Artur Davis during the wave elections of 2006 and 2008--both of whom have defected to the Republican Party since.