We Want You--For Primary Challenges To Bush Dog Democrats
Democrats.com is looking for people willing to launch primary challenges against Bush Dog Democrats.
In 2006, we elected Democratic majorities to the Senate and House for one overriding reason: to end the Iraq War.
In May 2007, both the Senate and the House voted on amendments to end the Iraq War by setting a March 2008 deadline for removing combat troops. Those amendments would have passed if all Democrats had voted to end the Iraq War - but some pro-war "Bush Democrats" voted to continue the Iraq War forever.
As Democrats, we have every right to expect our Democratic Senators and Representatives to vote with us on the issues we care about deeply. And if they do not, we have every right to support candidates who agree with us in Democratic primaries against them.
There are two good reasons to support primary challengers. If we win, we get a better Member of Congress. But even if we lose, a competitive race often persuades the incumbent to change positions on the issue that fueled the primary. In 2006, two key anti-war challengers brought dramatic changes: both Jane Harman (CA-36) and Al Wynn (MD-4) voted for the war in 2002, but voted against the war in 2007 as a direct result of anti-war primary challenges by Marcy Winograd and Donna Edwards.
Of course, challenging an incumbent Senator or Representative is a huge effort. To run a competitive race requires finding an excellent candidate and a building a strong grassroots organization. Happily, the Internet lets us do both.
Use our map or list of Representatives who voted to fund the Iraq War forever. If you are represented by one of these "Bush Democrats," click on their dot and help us find a candidate to challenge them in the 2008 Democratic primary.
Donna Edwards did so well against Al Wynn, she's facilitating a rematch, and hopefully, Wynn will have stepped in it so much, Donna should get the primary in a landslide.
I also think we need term limits on congressional members in both houses of Congress.
Public financing of elections would also improve things...:-)
frist pots
Is Hillary on that list?
marbotty @ 2:
Clinton won her re-election in 2006 and won't be up for re-election again until 2012. So, no.
But I get the point.
In IL-03, Mark Pera is fighting against Danny-boy Lipinski (pro-war, anti-choice, anti-stem cells) for the Dem primary.
Please support him if you can: http://www.markperaforcongress.com/
Taking politicians on a scale from 1 to 10, 1 being Hitler, Bush, and Chaney 10 being FDR, Jefferson, and Washington. I believe that a big contributor to the general destruction of the U.S. had been the Lefts constant claims that 3s and 4s are just the same as 9s and 10s. The same thing doesn't happen on the Right. This constant bashing of anyone but 1s and 2s is giving and continues to give the 9s and 10s more and more power.
Democrats Seek Vindication of Loudoun's Shift
By Jonathan Mummolo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 9, 2007; Page B01
Democratic State Sen. Mark Herring's landslide victory last year, in a district that had for years been led by a Republican, fueled speculation that traditionally red Loudoun County, like the rest of Northern Virginia, was turning purple -- maybe even outright blue.
But observers say the real test for Herring, and of whether political change has really reached Loudoun, could come Nov. 6.
Herring's ascendance in the 33rd District -- which includes populous eastern Loudoun and a part of western Fairfax County -- occurred during a special January election to fill the seat vacated when Republican William C. Mims became chief deputy attorney general. Politics was far from people's mind. The campaign lasted just weeks, and turnout was 13.7 percent.
Next month, opposed by conservative Republican Patricia Phillips, a nutrition consultant from Sterling and former head of the Virginia chapter of the Christian group Concerned Women for America, Herring will face a full-scale electoral test.
His performance might serve as a bellwether of Democrats' lasting prospects in a county once thought of as reliably conservative but undergoing rapid and dramatic change.
"Here's an opportunity for the Democrats to achieve a solid hold on a formerly Republican seat, and that would be quite an accomplishment," said Mark J. Rozell, a professor of public policy at George Mason University. "Just several years ago, nobody would have been thinking about having this conversation. It was widely assumed that Loudoun County was solid Republican and would stay that way."
Since 2000, Loudoun's population has grown by more than 50 percent, Census Bureau estimates show, particularly in the eastern half.
With the boom came an influx of new political views, ethnic backgrounds and congestion formerly unimagined in the once-rural county.
So Democrats had ample reason to view Herring's victory, which came amid wins in Loudoun for Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) and U.S. Sen. James Webb (D) as well as a two-seat gain for their party among Loudoun's five state delegates, as a sure sign that Northern Virginia's partisan shift had finally touched Loudoun.
Too bad this isn't original...
http://www.electrealdemocrats.com/
Look at the map. It kicks ass!
Parents of active duty are mobilizing...
Here in Illinois...
A candidate has two children that has served in Iraq with tours in Okinawa, Kuwait, and Iraq. Their youngest son also recently spent a year deployed in Iraq. They are members of a group of over 3,700 military families opposed to the U.S. occupation in Iraq.
Another candidate is a veteran who served as a military intelligence analyst in the Middle East. He understands exactly what is happening.
And PARENTS all across the country are ready to mobilize...
Since 12 year old Graeme Frost was viciously attacked by the wacko right wing
and the White House Embraced a group involved....
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/12/white-house-redstate/
I'm not saying there is anything wrong with challenging our elected leaders with a primary but do we really want to do that in the close districts? All a primary will do is eat away at the funds they have for the general election. What would you rather have? Someone who votes with the Republicans some of the time or all of the time?
As Democrats, we have every right to expect our Democratic Senators and Representatives to vote with us on the issues we care about deeply. And if they do not, we have every right to support candidates who agree with us in Democratic primaries against them.
...well, you're only one for two on that one: we're a Republic, which means that we hire folks, through the electoral process, to USE THEIR BEST JUDGEMENT ON OUR BEHALF.
And those bush dogs (where did that one come from?) obviously are using their best judgement. As in, you might be wrong on this Iraq thing.
Not that you would read this sort of thing on this site, but the casualties are dropping, Al Qaeda in Iraq is failing to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqis they claim to represent, and maybe, just maybe, despite that moron in the White House and all his criminal cronies, there might be a good end to all this.
But then again, someone who adds gratuitous terms such as 'forever' probably isn't interested in facts or opinions that differ from his. So, by all means continue to be 'right', but you don't get to wonder why your blog fades into irrelevance.
Great idea.
The best thing about House races is that most districts are so safe for one party or the other that the primaries generally decide the elections. All you have to do is get motivated progressive voters to the polls for the primaries.
Bush Trimmer @ 10:
More than one million Iraqis are dead and almost five million have fled the country.
If it were true that the death rate is declining, then that is the obvious outcome of a successful ethnic cleansing, isn't it? Eventually you run out of people to kill.
But wasn't it the fact that the death rate is increasing, that proves that surge is working?
The winner of the ethnic cleansing, the one who successfully slaughters the most innocents, always gets to write the history books.
Sure, the Republican plan of ethnic cleansing, aka genocide has worked. You guys are winning. Not only that but oil has gone for m $20 barrel to $85 barrel. Gasoline has gone from 99 cents a gallon to nearly $3.00. Gasoline is now selling below cost with government subsidies covering profits. Wheat has quadrupled in price, milk keeps going up. We have a new market bubble popping and people losing their homes in record numbers. We have a city devastated by a storm, that we can't afford to rebuild because our war is costing trillions of dollars. Wages have declined over the last six years and the IRS is reporting that income continues to drop.
All of these are Republican successes are related to runaway borrowing and spending. The national debt has taken on a new trajectory and Bush claims to have gotten deficit spending under control because the way the government calculates imaginary economic indicators has been changed again.
The world is post-peak oil now and I expect the political divide to get worse as the uniter creates further divisions in the US public. As fuel prices continue to rise while supplies decline, I expect environmentalists to be blamed.
Yeah, success is at hand if we keep redefining what it means.
Remember when success meant ridding Iraq of the WMDs that the world knew they didn't have? Remember when it meant holding elections? It seems like every time we win, we change our goals so there's always one more reason to continue engaging in ethnic cleansing.
There are Bluedogs voting against the war who screw us up on other votes that cripple progress where it counts domestically.
Most Bluedogs will pick "token" issues to hide behind to make themselves look like democrats.
Take Ken Salazar of CO, he didn't waste a second in the senate to betray those dem voters that gave him a job. You never see this guy hanging out with democrats. Yet he voted against the war to keep up appearances.
We can't afford to be simplistic about this.
Yeah, I might not know everything about the Iraq situation, but I do know that our elected representatives in both the Congress and the White House are either incapable or unwilling to do anything to turn things around or even admit that there is a problem to be fixed. Some of them are still asserting that if we only give the surge 6 months then we'll definitely see Iraq become more stable and democratic. Meanwhile thousands of Iraqis (who, you know, actually live in Iraq) have to flee the country because it isn't, you know, anywhere near as stable or free or safe as our government would like us to believe.
Thank you for doing this. We need more and BETTER Democrats.
Once exception: I'm supporting Cindy Sheehan over Nancy "Worthless" Pelosi.
Aren't these conservative blue dogs the best we can muster up to challenge republicans n consevative areas?? If they aren't really conservatives, republicans will beat them. Remember, these are consrvative areas, it's not easy to win if ur gonan go do big gov't policies or hold liberal views.
kudos to everyone at democrats.com
I think challenging these stinking blue dogs is one of the most important things the Democratic Party can do to insure any real change. Unfortunately the Party is infested with many war mongering, corporate whore DINO's. That along with the weak leadership of the Speakers has created a weak, bribed, and ineffectual current majority. The Democratic Party will not be the opposition party until the NeoCon enablers in our own midst are hung out to dry.
I'm all for challenging democrats in the primaries to defend their positions. If indeed what you say is true, that democrats did well in 2006 for only one reason: end the war, then this should work like a charm.
However this particular democrat wanted democrats in office for a plethora of reasons, not just one. And each of those reasons were equally important, and some more important, than ending the war.
Nicole many thanks for linking to this and thanks to everyone here who can lend a hand to replace a Bush Democrat with a REAL Democrat!
How are these "real" and liberal democrats that WE want are supposed to win in conservative areas like red states? ppl arent gonna be exicted about democrats raising taxes and supporting labor unions.
The number one "Bush Dog Democrat" is Nancy Pelosi.
We need three impeachments.
...
This is scattershot as Hell.
There are individuals who sorely need to be removed (Melissa Bean comes immediately to mind), but the ones who vote Republican most or all the time should be first in line.
It would be far more effective to concentrate our efforts and our money toward defeating a few really bad apples. Not only would our chance of replacing them improve, it would also send a clear signal to the remaining Bush Dogs that it's time to start acting like Democrats or risk a strong primary challenge. Remember, your Rep has to run every two years; it isn't such a long wait. Focus on the uber-jerks first.
RasslinGod @ 21:
I don't know how many ppl will be exicted about raising taxes and supporting labor unions, but I think a hell of a lot of people will be excited about voting for anything except a Republican. And most working people are fed up with low wages and running the country on a credit card that their grandchildren will have to pay off. You'd be surprised at how many people are rethinking their attitude about organized labor, and most people would gladly pay more in taxes if it provides their family with health care and gets rid of their rip-off health insurance premiums. Conservatism is a dying brand.
Spiffarino @ 23:
You're missing the point. It's not an either/or situation. We are finding and supporting strong progressive candidates in key districts. Every week we highlight Blue America candidates we feel have strong chances to win seats and represent the progressive values we want to bring back to Congress.
But even if the reps are in solid districts, we want them to feel the power of the netroots. Winning the seat is not the cake, but the icing. We want to primary challenge politicians who are so complacent in their districts that they are ignoring their constituents. We want to force them to come back to their districts and campaign. We want them to have to sit face to face with these constituents they're ignoring and tell them why they are ignoring them and why they aren't trying to get us out of Iraq.
Wow I didn't know that about Allyson Schwartz (PA-13). Of course, she also voted for the Bankruptcy Bill.
If I was 25 I'd be tempted to see what I could do. Of course, my family might disown me if I ran in a primary against her. (They knew her back in her PA Senate days, and helped her get elected to the US House.) At least she is good on SCHIP.
Spiffarino @ 23:
Getting involved in EVERY challenge is exactly what Dean is trying at the DNC. And that's working. So...
Comments are closed on this entry