Skip to main content

View Diary: Why do 44 Democrats hate civil liberties? (32 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Absolutely disagree (none)
    That all depends on what you want - to win back a majority of Senate and/or House or not. If not - you can be as ideologically "pure" as you want, but you will be permanently confined to minority status without any hope of getting out. Kerry won 180 CD - that's, approximately, a number of Congressional districts with liberal or, at least moderate-liberal inclinations. It's in these districts, that you run your "progressive" candidates, you are unlikely ti lose many of them anyway (though 18 of these district are represented now by Republicans nevertheless..).

    But you need 218 seats, doesn't you? 41 Democrats are now elected from districts, carried ny Bush, in some cases - by very big margin. Whom will you run in these districs??? In AL-5, LA-3 or MS-4 for example??? Cramer, Melancon and Taylor are, surely, not a liberals, but only this type of Democrat can win in these districts (at least sometimes)! Nancy Pelosy-style candidates will lose very badly there. I doubt that they will even be able to win a primary.

    And that's not limited to the South only. May be - you don't like Holden (PA-17)?? Fine, but you will almost surely lose that district without him. The same - for Peterson (MN-7), Matheson (UT-2), Herseth(SD-AL), Pomeroy(ND-AL), Skelton(MO-4) and many others..

    If Democrats want to win a majority in House (or Senate) - they must not be ideologically "pure". It's Republicans. who, having won 255 CD last time, can allow himself ideological "purity": lost KS-3 some years ago, because their candidate was too conservative - so whaT??? Lost IL-8 last time - so what??? They have districts to spare - Democrats - don't...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site