Skip to main content

View Diary: The most vulnerable House members in 2014, in two charts (150 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Eh, let him stay in the House (0+ / 0-)

    For the sake of the argument, if we keep Jim Matheson and other blue dog Democrats in conservative districts around the country where no other more real Democratic challengers are emerging, then that's what we may have to deal with come November 2014.

    However, we can always challenge blue dog Democrats after 2014 and replace them with progressives if say we are able to.  I know in these crazy situations we're dealing with the lesser of two evils but these Tea Party Republicans are even worse than the Republicans we normally hate.

    However, we got a lot of House Democrats who are genuine Democrats and less blue dog Democrats.  If we can challenge the blue dogs and its viable, great.  If we can't, then we keep the blue dogs in there so Pelosi can get back her damn gavel for the LOVE OF GOD.

    •  If we want to take back the House (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      We need Blue Dogs to run in conservative districts.  That should be the #1 takeaway of 2010.

      •  I agree with your premise (0+ / 0-)

        but not your conclusion. The Democrats lost so many seats in 2010 primarily because the economy sucked. So if the Blue Dogs hadn't helped force the stimulus to be less than it could have been, the economy might have been better, and the Democrats might not have lost as many seats.

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Mon May 20, 2013 at 04:31:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site