Skip to main content

There was much made before the election of House Democrats, and Democratic challengers, who said they would not vote for Nancy Pelosi for speaker, as a way to show they were an "independent voice" and not a "standard liberal."

The result: 8 out of 10 of these incumbent Democrats lost. Meanwhile, 100% of challenger Dems who took the same stance lost their bids as well, most by significant margins. It appears that demonizing national Democrats was not a winning strategy.

The full round-up of the anti-Pelosi Democratic losses (losers?) below the fold.

I am not going to vote for Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the House. ... Heck, she might even get sick and die.

—Bobby Bright, AL-02, lost 51-49

My candidate’s going to be somebody who’s a centrist, preferably somebody who’s going to be speaker of the entire House.

—Jim Marshall, GA-08, lost 52-47

I do think that leadership-wise the Democratic party would be better if in some of the leadership positions there were some more moderate people.

—Frank Kratovil, MD-01, lost 54-41

I’m not associated with her. She’s the speaker, but I’m an independent voice.

—Ike Skelton, MO-04, lost 50-45

I'd like to see somebody more moderate in that role. I'd like to see a Blue Dog, quite frankly, because I agree with them on most of the issues.

—Travis Childers, MS-01, lost 55-41

I will not be voting for her again.

—Gene Taylor, MS-04, lost 52-47

From what we're hearing, she's probably not going to run for speaker again. And if she does, I'm confident she's going to have opposition, and I look forward to supporting that opposition.

—Mike McIntyre, NC-07, WON 53-46

It's hard to answer a hypothetical question when you don't know who the candidates are, you don't know if she's running again.

—Mike McMahon, NY-13, lost 51-47

We'll see. We'll see what happens when the election's over and we'll look at the leadership.

—Scott Murphy, NY-20, lost 55-44

Certainly necessitate[s] new leadership in the Speaker’s position.

—Jason Altmire, PA-04, WON 51-48

And here are the Democratic challengers who had similar statements:

It’s time to have a leader of the House of Representatives who can heal the partisan divide ... Nancy Pelosi is not the person to do that.

—Patrick Miles, running in MI-03, lost 59-37

We all know Washington is broken, and I hold Nancy Pelosi accountable for that.

—Rob Miller, running in SC-02, lost 53-43

Voters in my district believe that you [Pelosi] do not represent their values.

—Brett Carter, running in TN-06, lost 67-29

Roy would not be supporting either Nancy Pelosi or John Boehner for Speaker of the House. Neither of them are in the common sense center.

—Roy Herron, running in TN-08, lost 59-38

I never once said I would support Nancy Pelosi.

—Mike Oliviero, running in WV-01, lost 50-49

Election results are the most recent I could find, and mostly are directly from online state election offices. If I missed anyone, please let me know!

Originally posted to quixotic on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 12:23 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Let me know if I missed any! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      understandinglife
      •  list and the amounts spent on the attackers (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        genocideisnews

        http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/

        "And while we're revisitin', let's take a first look at how savvy Jon Vogel and John Lapp were in spending the $65,279,406.73 they directed towards I.E.s. this cycle. Keep in mind that they spent virtually nothing to help progressive stalwarts who might have been saved like Alan Grayson, Carol Shea-Porter, and Mary Jo Kilroy. Instead, these are the races they spent over a million dollars each on:"

        Chad Causey (Blue Dog-AR)- $1,771,176.95- LOST
        Denny Heck (WA)- $1,747,599.58- LOST
        Dan Seals (IL)- $1,746,828.70- LOST
        Larry Kissell (NC)- $1,705,392.71- WON
        Gerald Connolly (VA)- $1,602,785.32- WON
        Frank Kratovil (Blue Dog-MD)- $1,514,468.48- LOST
        Zack Space (Blue Dog-OH)- $1,512,696.39- LOST
        John Boccieri (OH)- $1,449,104.74- LOST
        Bill Keating (MA)- $1,433,411.49- WON
        Joe Garcia (FL)- $1,422,238.20- LOST
        Bobby Bright (Blue Dog-AL)- $1,411,243.95- LOST
        Dina Titus (NV)- $1,382,353.12- LOST
        Mark Schauer (MI)- $1,377,652.69- LOST
        Baron Hill (Blue Dog-IN)- $1,376,746.34- LOST
        Gary McDowell (MI)- $1,319,440.14- LOST
        Colleen Hanabusa (HI)- $1,304,253.42- WON
        Debbie Halvorsom (IL)- $1,303,014.50- LOST
        Mike Oliverio (WV)- $1,264,731.94- LOST
        Ike Skelton (MO)- $1,256,818.68- LOST
        Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog-OR)- $1,247,472.30- LOST
        John Salazar (Blue Dog-CO)- $1,192,722.15- LOST
        John Spratt (SC)- $1,124,025.67- LOST
        Harry Mitchell (Blue Dog-AZ)- $1,089,932.74- LOST
        Phil Hare (IL)- $1,067,804.37- LOST
        Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ)- $1,056,844.12- LOST
        Jerry McNerney (CA)- $1,031,192.02-
        Julie Lassa (WI)- $1,027,637.45- LOST
        Mike Arcuri (Blue Dog-NY)- $1,008,038.47- LOST

        without the ants the rainforest dies

        by aliasalias on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 03:34:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Important information. Thank you! -eom (0+ / 0-)

    Save American Jobs - Just Say NO To Republicans on Election Day

    by understandinglife on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 12:27:42 PM PDT

  •  Duh! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    revgerry, Deep Texan

    Of course they lost.  Democrats in swing districts are inevitably the most vulnerable.  I don't think trading a sometime vote for a never vote is cause to celebrate.

    Oba-MA bumaye! Oba-MA bumaye!

    by fou on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 12:30:13 PM PDT

    •  The point is demonizing Pelosi didn't help (14+ / 0-)

      It played into the Right's message, helped nationalize the election, and STILL didn't save their asses. The point isn't that swing-District Dems, most of whom are Blue Dog/centrists, are more likely to lose. The point is that co-opting conservative talking points didn't save them.

      •  I get your point. (0+ / 0-)

        I just don't see the sense in making it.  The object of the game is to defeat Republicans.  It's not to relish a pyrrhic victory.

        Oba-MA bumaye! Oba-MA bumaye!

        by fou on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 12:34:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The object of the game is to learn from mistakes (8+ / 0-)

          The implicit message here is, "At-risk Dems in swing districts, there is no point in demonizing your own party. It won't help, and will make it less likely your base will turn out to save you."

          I'm not relishing anything. I'm trying to prevent this from happening again in the future.

          •  Wrong. (0+ / 0-)

            If you want to learn from mistakes, the first thing you need to do is to look at the world from outside the lens of your own interests and ideology.  There are many reasons these Blue Dogs went down.  Sure, running from Pelosi wasn't helpful, but to suggest that it was the only significant reason because it allows us to lick our wounds with a little bit of schadenfreude isn't learning from our mistakes.

            Second, any votes that we would have had some of the time are now gone.  Laugh at the Blue Dogs all you want, but if the name of the game is to defeat Republicans and to get shit done, we've just lose that many more votes to do it.

            Oba-MA bumaye! Oba-MA bumaye!

            by fou on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 12:40:21 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'm not "laughing at the Blue Dogs" (0+ / 0-)

              So if you don't understand this is a post about strategy and not schadenfreude then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

            •  Obviously I would rather have more Ds than fewer (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              enhydra lutris

              The question is how to get there. I'm suggesting demonizing national Dems is not the way to do it. I'm not sure why you think I'd rather have Republicans than Blue Dogs.

            •  blue dogs did win at one point before (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              aliasalias, enhydra lutris

              Question is did they do it by campaigning against their own party? I don't think so, those blue dog wins were mostly from 06 and 08, now those were mainly anti W campaigns. And it seems like simple logic. Ok maybe they could just downplay pelosi if she is so anathema in these red districts. But won't voters always prefer a real repub over repub lite? Or if the choice is just repub or repub lite they're more likely to just stay home or vote third party?

            •  Blisteringly lame. Cite where the diarist said (0+ / 0-)

              "only". Your love of blue-doggery is completely destroying your ability to read and understand the English language.

              That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt -

              by enhydra lutris on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 02:46:49 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Building on your (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            aliasalias

            point is that a lot of dems who voted against health care and stimulus also lost.

        •  Rahm (0+ / 0-)

          thought the object was to defeat republicans which is why he recruited blue dogs.  they turned out to be more trouble than they were worth on the important issues that really matter in moving the country forward.

          •  Wrong. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            revgerry, Deep Texan

            Say what you want about Rahm and Obama, but they got a lot of shit done.  An historic amount in fact.  Now, they paid the price last night, but you can't honestly say that recruiting Blue Dogs didn't have an upside.  Clearly it did.

            Oba-MA bumaye! Oba-MA bumaye!

            by fou on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 12:46:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  No, they didn't. My Rep voted with us 80% (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Deep Texan

            Replacement - still too close to call- will repeal everything we have done and is batshit crazy and racist to boot.

            I think one lesson to learn is that insisting on idealogical purity is a losing strategy, and you don't ask people to make votes they can't sell at home very often.

            Blue Dogs are VERY valuable players.  80% of the country are NOT progressive.  How can we expect to get everything we want?

            Our job is to have their backs, and to get out there and educate votersabout why our vision works.

            Let's break our dependence on foreign goods and our multinational masters. Shop American. May Peace Prevail

            by revgerry on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 01:04:21 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Um... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              revgerry

              I'm not suggesting that Blue Dogs aren't useful, that having a bigger Dem caucus isn't good, or that you have to pay some attention to your constituents when you vote. But there's a way to do it and NOT be an asshole and co-opt conservative talking points. And then there's a way to joke about Nancy Pelosi dying, and lose the race anyway. And while in general I'd like to have more Democrats than fewer, I'm not going to be too upset over those particular Democrats that were the biggest assholes.

              I'm not talking about ideological purity. I'm talking about not being an asshole Dem. In some districts a Blue Dog is the best you can hope for, and I get that.

            •  80% of the country are also not right wingers (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              aliasalias

              and Republicans. The right wingers and Republicans will always vote for the real Republican, and the independent/unaffiliated swing voter types who voted in some of these Blue Dogs based on the Democratic platform and agenda stopped supporting them when it turned out that they were just Democrats in drag.

              Plase take a little time to review a bit of history. The Democratic party has gone down in flames time and time again for failing to even try to enact its published platform and agenda time and time again. Try not to make the traditional follow on mistake of moving even further to the right in the hopes of picking up the mythical moderate GOP voters, it has never yet done anything but generate even more losses.

              That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt -

              by enhydra lutris on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 02:57:34 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  I do. People do the same to the Prez. nt (0+ / 0-)

          Let's break our dependence on foreign goods and our multinational masters. Shop American. May Peace Prevail

          by revgerry on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 12:59:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  If you at all understood the point, you would (0+ / 0-)

          not misrepresent it so egregiously. Even this silly post still has room to apply the diarist's point. If, as you say, the point is defeating Republicans, then we obviously need to study and learn how to do so and therefore, need to know what does and does not work. It Therefore is important to note that this harebrained strategy did not work. Hence, you should not advocate it next time the opportunity to discuss potential strategies arises. Try to remember that until then, o.k., coopting GOP talking points doesn't work for Dems.

          An outright loss, BTW, is not a pyrrhic victory, nor any other kind of victory.

          That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt -

          by enhydra lutris on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 02:45:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  and as I linked above the $ allotted (0+ / 0-)

        ...imagine that money directed elsewhere in races to elect better Dems.

        without the ants the rainforest dies

        by aliasalias on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 03:38:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Make sense (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    enhydra lutris

    Why have Republican-lite when you can have the real Republican? Of course some of the most useless "Democrats", such as Oliverio are more than just Republican-lite.

    "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is." - George W Bush

    by jfern on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 01:01:26 PM PDT

  •  Flame me, I guess. I want to scream at purists. (0+ / 0-)

    Let's break our dependence on foreign goods and our multinational masters. Shop American. May Peace Prevail

    by revgerry on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 01:05:20 PM PDT

    •  Well, I'm not a purist (0+ / 0-)

      So you'll have to scream at other people.

    •  If you (0+ / 0-)

      want to call me a purist then so be it, but I strongly believe in the democratic platform and I support democrats who believe in it too.  Having said that, I only vote D, whether or not they are "purists" as you say because I'd rather have an asshat blue dog than a republican any day even if they are pretty much the same.  Saying that the blue dog votes 80% is good, but look at what they don't vote for - no health care; no stimulus; many are pro-life.  They run from the core issue of the democratic party, and again, I'm not sad to see that caucus cut in half.  Also, the republicans can try to repeal anything they want - they dont control congress, just the house.  Any bill still has to get through the senate and get signed by the president.  It's not gonna happen.

    •  Yeah, slogans are so much easier than rational (0+ / 0-)

      thought, and screaming is so much easier than thinking and planning for the future.

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt -

      by enhydra lutris on Wed Nov 03, 2010 at 02:59:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site