Comments on: Far left Democrats to newly-elected Blue Dog Democrats

By: Great White Rat

Great White Rat — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:57:24 +0000

Dan must be thinking of some other Daily Kos site that no one’s ever seen:

Daily Kos is extraordinarily partisan. Not uber left.

Then explain why Kos is calling for a political jihad against any Dems who aren’t lurching far to the left. If the Kossacks were simply partisan, not extreme left, they’d be happily supporting people like, say, Joe Lieberman.

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:49:08 +0000

Call me crazy, but I find it hard to believe that Sister Toldjah has a lot of concern about dems getting elected.

LOL … you think my post implied a ‘concern’ over moderate to conservative Dems getting elected? Keep dreamin’!

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:19:56 +0000

Oh and incidentally, Jim Webb was endorsed by Daily Kos. In fact, he posted on Kos’s website several times during his campaign, as did other Blue Dogs.

He supported most of the Blue Dogs and they happily accepted his support. Daily Kos is extraordinarily partisan. Not uber left.

By: ervington

ervington — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:19:54 +0000

A few things. 1) the dems elected that helped win the majority were NOT moderates…they ran on things like ending the war and environmental issues. Not really sure where this myth that all the new dems were moderates came from.
2) People would actually like all dems to be a little more liberal. 60% or more of the nation wants out of Iraq, did not want to capitulate on FISA, wants congress to stand up to Bush, so yeah, I’m guessing asking for less moderate dems isn’t going to be that bad.
3) Call me crazy, but I find it hard to believe that Sister Toldjah has a lot of concern about dems getting elected. Maybe she should focus on getting Repubs elected? Isn’t “None of the Above” the favorite in Iowa right now?

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:17:46 +0000

I was watching Conservative Radio talk show host Laura Ingraham on Hannity and she pointed out that trying to attract moderates on either side is a pretty risky proposition. Her point was that the middle has no set of positions to advocate and it shifts depending on circumstances. So pandering to them is not a good idea politically.

The middle right now is with the left so the Dems can swing further to the far left wing base. When the pendulum comes back..like when everyone was with the Prez after 9/11, you can push further and harder to the far right wing base.

As for the OP..I think the exception is a little silly. Because they were happy with them to get elected, now they’re bastards for criticizing their views or targetting to get more liberal people into power? That’s just dumb. The right…hell, anyone…would do the same thing. Be happy your whole side generally won and then push for people closer to your line of thinking in the future.

There is hypcorisy enough on both sides but this isn’t really an example of it.

By: UrbanGrounds » Blog Archive » Going After the Blue Dogs

UrbanGrounds » Blog Archive » Going After the Blue Dogs — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:10:09 +0000

[...] As Sister Toldjah notes: Newsflash: These Blue Dog Dems were elected in their states/districts, in part, based on their moderate to conservative positions on the issues. Why the hell should they change them because the Daily Kos, Morons.org, etc don’t like them? Those people weren’t elected by far lefties nationwide: they were elected by the people in their states/districts to represent them, not the far left. [...]

By: Great White Rat

Great White Rat — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 01:55:15 +0000

Actually, those Blue Dog Dems are their party’s hope for the future. Giving the entire party over to the loopy leftists like Kos would destroy it everywhere except in the one-party enclaves like Massachusetts, SF, Seattle, and the like.

By: ME

ME — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 01:24:10 +0000

No kidding… just look at what those Nader voters have done to this country!

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 22:30:43 +0000

Riiight. If those differences were merely ’subtle’ and ‘nuanced’ then we wouldn’t see the far left going after these people as if though they were traitors.

By: Reluctant Republican

Reluctant Republican — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 22:20:21 +0000

The angry blogging right usually portrays the democrats as a monolithic bunch of unpatriotic, tax n’ spend librul enemies of the state, so I suppose that this discovery of subtle and nuanced differences among them should be taken as a positive.

That being said, if it is indeed some smaller “far left” contingent of the dem party is responsible for all the noise against a more populist centrist faction, then it doesn’t seem like it all ought to add up to very much.

Not that I would care much if it did.

By: iaintbacchus

iaintbacchus — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:58:04 +0000

So, how many moderate Republicans (also known as RINOs) have been targeted by the Republican leadership in the primaries in the last 12 years?
I suspect that it will be about as productive a policy for the Dems as it was in the last couple of election cycles for the Repubs.