The motto I hear here over and over is that we want "more and better Democrats".
The problem I see is that many of you forget about the first half of that statement. Many here seem to only want "liberal" Democrats, or "pure" Democrats. Well all of you who decided not to be enthused, and not to support candidates because they weren't "good enough" for you got exactly what you asked for Tuesday.
I laughed at the tea party when it started to primary Republicans. I'm not the only one, at least I shouldn't have been, because it was a horrible idea.
Going after your own party rarely, if ever, works (historically speaking that is).
The tea party has already made some choices on who go to after.
John Barasso (WY)
Scott Brown (MA)
Bob Corker (TN)
John Ensign (NV)
Orrin Hatch (UT)
Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX)
Jon Kyl (AZ)
Richard Lugar (IN)
Olympia Snowe (ME)
Roger Wicker (MS)
The Democratic party lost dozens of voting members of congress this week. Most of those losses came from blue dogs. But those blue dogs were still Democrats, many put their jobs on the line for health care reform, financial reform, energy reform and the stimulus.
I'm not saying they were perfect, but they were Democrats, they were allies in the fight against extremism on the right, and they were legislators people like you and me put money, time, and effort into electing.
Heck - I'm still reading here how many of you "won't miss" those Democrats you had worked to elect before, and how you're not that upset about a Republican taking his or her place.
I think there is a good portion of this community that needs a reminder about the purpose of elections.
It's very simple - TO WIN.
If you don't win, you can't vote in congress. No vote in congress means no time on the floor, no ability to write bills, no ability to shoot down crappy bills, and no power to support good change. In other words, if you don't win, you're useless in political terms.
So, the question you have to ask yourself, would you rather have a blue dog voting with you 80% of the time, or a Republican voting against you 100% of the time. that's the choice you have to think of in your head. I'm going to go with option A. If you choose option B - you simply like to lose, and you cannot expect to get anything done in congress until you change your attitude.
So anyone who's "not upset" about losing the blue dogs - you simply don't get it, and you're going to get what you asked for over the next 2 years.
Oh - and I've seen a ton of comments talking about a primary challenger for President Obama. Here's something for you to chew on before you try to bit the hand that feeds you.
* Four of the last eight presidents (Bush 41, Carter, Ford and Johnson) prior to Obama faced serious primary challenges in their re-election campaigns.
* In all four cases, the challengers (McCarthy in 1968, Reagan in 1976, Kennedy in 1980 and Buchanan in 1992) ran on the implicit or explicit message that the incumbent had betrayed his party base. In all four cases, the incumbent was struggling in the polls to some extent, amidst shaky economic conditions (less LBJ than the others, though inflation was a big concern in 1968).
* In three of the four cases (all but Bush 41), the incumbent's party had done very poorly in the prior midterm election.
* All four challenges ultimately failed to secure the party nomination.
* The opposition party--twice Democrats, twice Republicans--won all four general elections.
Losing means getting bills passed we don't like. if you like cutting social security, if you like eliminating the minimum wage, if you like spending money on wars then Republicans are for you. that's what they're going to try to do. That's what they're putting on the table on day 1. It's very simple, they won, they get to set the agenda.
I like getting things done, i care about winning over pure ideology. I like getting bills passed (even though i may not be 100% happy with them. I like stopping the opposition from getting what they want, I like 31 million new people being insured, i like consumer protection bureaus, i like equal rights making its way slowly to the forefront.
Everyone here now has a choice. you can go the tea party route and try to purify the party with liberals who will vote lock-step with you 100% of the time. or you can engage the fact that we are a centrist nation, and go after that middle with gusto and build a coalition again.
So make your choice, we can either become the Democratic version of the tea party and fight from within, or we can embrace the party and fight for everyone under the tent.
It's your choice. Winning or losing. Victory or defeat. Future or past. Sanity or fear.