Skip to main content

So yesterday the kerfuffle du jour was to vote or not to vote for Bob Kerrey which of course led to a bigger of discussion of whether or not to vote for "bad" Democrats. Which then of course leads into the discussion of what is the goal of this site, and how it relates to the Democratic Party and I read some very opposing views on that. Well, this morning I was listening to yeserday's The Majority Report with Sam Seder, and he happened to be running an interview that he did with Markos at Netroots Nation last week and I found it very helpful and interesting. I have directly quoted key points, but I don't have time to transcribe the whole conversation.  It is in the members only segment so you have to join to hear it, but it is a great show so there is no risk there. ;)

Seder starts off by talking about NN and how it has evolved over the years from Yearly Kos, both similarities and differences. This leads to a discussion of  DailyKos and what it's mission is and it's goals are, which leads to a discussion of voting for and supporting Democrats, both good and bad.

Seder asked where our leverage is if we vote for someone that in turn goes to Washington and votes against our best interests in some cases and John Tester as an example is discussed.

Markos' answer:

On a realistic standpoint, Jon Tester represents Montana and he's going up for reelection in a presidential year where Republican turnout will be maximized, so he's doing what he thinks is necessary to win.
He then talks about how the site's mission has evolved from more democrats to more and better democrats, which we have heard him say before and completely makes sense, but he fleshed it out a bit which I think is helpful:
There are places where we'll do the best we can. I mean I'm not going to sit there and raise money for Joe Donnelly in Indiana, but I hope he wins because that would get us one seat closer to retaining the majority. On the other hand, there are places where either by primary or by selectively targeting states we can get better democrats. So we have a finite number of dollars we can raise for Senate races, why not Elizabeth Warren who's going to be a rockstar progressive or, you know, the way we did for Al Franken in Minnesota a couple years ago. There's people that we know are going to be solid because there is a history there. We are being more saavy in how and where we target knowing that the party is going to care of the blue dog types, but we can take care of the progressives that need all the help they can get.
Seder asked him if his perspective on the Democratic party being an effective vehicle for progressive ideals has changed.  Markos said, no not at all, it is the only vehicle we have. If there was another realistic alternative, he would jump at it, but there isn't. He also said that he strongly favors primaries in all cases, even the most progressive candidates because it is like a job review and holds candidates accountable for there actions.

There is then an interesting discussion of the tea party and Wisconsin.

Finally, he asks Markos "what do you say to people that say you are giving up all of your power if you vote for them and they are not giving you what you want?"

I point to 2010. Progressives sat home. We sat it out. Did things get better? No.

Seder agreed that "we did not see things move to the left" and more discussion ensues regarding staying home and withholding your vote and its repercussions.

Markos:

Bad democrats are still better than the best republicans.

Originally posted to kirbybruno! on Thu Jun 14, 2012 at 09:13 AM PDT.

Also republished by Political Language and Messaging, I Vote for Democrats, and Realistrati.

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

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site