Skip to main content

View Diary: The case for a Democrat in every race (199 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This is true (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Donkey Hotey, nimh

    and data show that members of Congress from both parties think their voters lean further to the right than they actually do.

    However, that's a far cry from saying that in R+ districts, it's more politically viable to run liberal Democrats than Blue Dogs. It's clearly more viable to run Blue Dogs, and even they have a low chance of winning such districts.

    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

    by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 06:35:15 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Much depends on prioritized time-frame and (0+ / 0-)

      goals, for the reasons mentioned in my other comments.

      •  I'll have to read those (0+ / 0-)

        because these comments don't compute to me. "Prioritized time-frame"?

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 02:57:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  MNY, by "prioritized time-frame", I mean: (0+ / 0-)

          in addition to the short-term priority of winning the current campaign in the district, one can put equal and or higher priority on longer-term goals, such as:

          1. laying groundwork for later wins (perhaps by a less Doggy Dem) in the district,

          2. gradually improving the district's influence on potential wins on statewide candidates and issues, and moving the statewide conversation and Overton Window to the Left,

          3. avoiding election of the type of Blue Dog who will vote, for example, in support of "slashing" social security, or enabling big banks' abuse of little guys with impunity. These types of votes can do long-term harm to Democratic prospects by confirming the suspicions, held by actual and potential voters in and out of the district, that Democrats are no better or even worse than Republicans in standing up for them.

          •  Doesn't really make sense to me (0+ / 0-)

            You take what you can get. In Mississippi, I'd  vote for Thad Cochran against the rabid neo-Confederate primarying him, knowing that though I'd vote for the Democratic candidate in the general election, s/he wouldn't win, but also knowing that a guy like Cochran, who believes in government spending, is to the left of a neo-Confederate maniac. The other part of my calculus is that by no means am I close to certain that even the strongest possible Democratic candidates (who probably won't run) would beat a rabid neo-Confederate in a general election in Mississippi today, especially a midterm election without presidential turnout from black voters.

            A practical leftist supports any politician who's more left or less right than the alternative. In Mississippi, that means Cochran, and in South Carolina, that means Graham, at least in the Republican primary, and I believe those are open (don't require Republican registration) in both states. I hope some credible Democrat runs in case either of those incumbents are toppled in the primaries, but you take what you can get.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 07:21:05 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site