Which Democratic Senators should be replaced by another Dem

[Imagevision]

I believe Joe Lieberman and Diane Feinstein for openers...
any opinion/vieew is appreciated.




http://downingstreetmemo.com/

[ncrainbowgrrl]

1. When you say "another dem"

I take it that you mean a more progressive democrat, not just replaced for the sake of switching up the establishment?

[Melodybe]

100. Lieberman, Feinstein, and Bayh

[cyclezealot]

121. Hardly sold on Feinstein.

But, her performance before the Roberts hearing last two days , made me feel a little better about her.

[mike_c]

2. start with EVERY one of them that voted for the IWR....

That's one purge I'd love to see. Every stinkin' one of them.

[lindisfarne]

95. Dumb question: what is IWR? Iraq War Resolution?

Even Wellstone voted for that - but what people were voting for, vs. what the Bush admin. used it as, were two different things (yes, they should have been a little more picky about the text).

How I miss that man. My hope for this nation really died that day. And it died even more starting Aug 29, 2005.

[in_cog_ni_to]

103. I loved Wellstone too. It's a shame they had to murder him.

:cry:

For the IWR, everyone here KNEW this regime was LYING about the WMD. WE all knew he was lying about the yellowcake from Niger. WE all knew he was lying about a Nuclear bomb reaching the U.S. in minutes. WE all knew they were lying about the mobile weapons labs. WE all knew they were lying about Al Qaeda camps in Iraq. WE all knew they were lying about a connection between 911 and Saddam. WE all knew they were lying about Saddam and Bin Ladin being good buds (they HATE each other) and WE all knew Saddam didn't have underground Labs.

If WE knew they were lying, every member of Congress knew. I don't buy their excuse that they were lied to. They had every opportunity to come forward after the Downing Street Minutes Memo came out. THAT was their out and they didn't take it. They have a grieving mother, Cindy Sheehan, who has woken up the sheeple about the Iraq war LIES and did they (other than our usual people of honor from the Black Caucus) take that WIDE OPEN DOOR to speak up? Fuck no. Something more sinister is going on. They know/knew he was lying and won't speak out. WHY? The answer to that will tell us WHY they signed the IWR.

[Frances]

3. First, we have to replace Repubs with Dems

Replacing Dems with Dems will get us right where we are now--powerless!

For example, there are no 2 better representatives in Congress than the one I had in Maryland (Chris Van Hollen) and the one I have now in California (Anna Eshoo), but they need more Dems in The House of Representatives (no matter how bad) just so they can have the power that being in the majority would give them.

For another example, Senators Mikulski and Sarbannes (from Maryland where I used to live) and Boxer (from CA where I now live) are all very good senators. They need more Dems in the Senate so that they can be in the majority and have some power.

I hope people won't waste their energy trying to get the Dem party to implode while the Repubs gain more and more power.

[mike_c]

6. I'm green, so I view dems who work against progressive politics...

...as being, to paraphrase Nader, indistinguishable from their republican counterparts.

[Frances]

16. I'm curious

If you are anti-Democratic, why are you posting on the Democraticunderground board?

Why don't you start a Greenunderground board? I think that would be a very positive way for you (and other Greens who are also anti-Dem)to express ideas.

I have always preferred positive action to negative action myself, and I would like to see democraticunderground be a postive board for Dems.

[mike_c]

28. I was a lifelong dem, and still was when I became a member...

...of DU. I'm a member of this community. To a large extent, it was DU itself that shook me out of my complacent, but dissatified relationship with the Democratic Party. I changed my party affiliation in 2004 in direct response to the nomination of Kerry and the suppression of the antiwar movement within the Democratic Party. (I joined DU in early 2002). My core political identity is still dem-- I've voted solidly dem since the early seventies (on edit: until 2004)-- but I think the democratic party is changing, and not for the better. The Democratic party of 2004 would have been unrecognizable to many liberal dems transported from the Kennedy-Johnson-Nixon era. I would like to support dems again-- I just won't compromise my principles any longer just because some moderate-right-corporatist has a D after his or her name.

Lots of Greens post here-- it's a vibrant online community. I HAVE posted elsewhere on occasion, but DU has been my online home for the last several years. Besides, ya'll need us real liberals just to keep the echo chamber effect under control! :-)

[derby378]

31. We're listening...

...but, as you know, there's still so much momentum to change the Democratic Party from the ground up. We were lucky to get Dean as Chair of the DNC, but we've still got a ton of work ahead of us.

[mike_c]

35. and I wish you all the luck in the world....

I think pressure from the left-- from an unabashedly liberal party that embraces that label proudly-- can only help. And on a personal level, it makes looking in the mirror a bit easier.

[FreedomAngel82]

51. Yes

I also agree that the party has changed today then what it was of FDR, Kennedy, etc. We need to go back to our roots as a party and I think that is what Howard Dean is working on and I agree with his plans to replace democrats such as Liberman with more progressive democrats. I think Dean has a lot of work and hopefully we can all help him. The only way we're going to do that is by checking out canidates before we vote for them.

[PassingFair]

81. What is "negative" about trying to clean up our own house?

Many Dems are enablers, OBVIOUSLY.
What is your idea of "positive" action.
From the looks of the DINO's it involves unrelenting "inaction".

[longship]

24. Indistinguishable?

Well, if you want the Dems to be a monolithic party serving only some person's ideal of progressivism, that's maybe a good view to take.

On the other hand, if you want the Democratic party to ever again have a majority in Congress it would serve us better to allow some diversity of opinion in the party.

I am a fierce liberal. I do not agree with Joe or Diane. But they have D's after their names and that's okay with me. Of course I would prefer more progressives, but I am not delusional about the practicality, let alone the advisability, of purging moderates from the Democratic party. I do not want the Democratic party to be turned into a monolithic, ideological cabal like the Repug party.

Do the Dems need to find their backbones? Yes!
Do they need to start speaking out against the Repug cabal? Yes!

But I do not see your solution as a viable one. It can only result in division of the party and a permanent minority status. Then, we might as well just go ahead and let the Repugs have their dictatorship.

Just my opinion.

[mike_c]

32. I understand-- that would have been OK with me too, 30 years ago...

...or even 10 years ago (good god-- Clinton/Dole sounds like such an eternity ago now). It WAS ok. But many of today's dems are to the right of Richard Nixon in the 70's, and I've just gotten to the point in my life where I can't overlook that any longer. Chances are that I've voted in more past elections than I'll have an opportunity to participate in in the future, so it's time for me to start REALLY paying attention to how I cast those votes.

[cyclezealot]

92. I understand Mike C's frustration with the party..

But, I will not abandon the parties decent leaders by not being their to stand with and for them..The party as too many fighters to not stay standing with them.. The list is endless..
Dennis Kucinich, Henry Waxman, Edward Kennedy, Feingold, Cybthia McKinney, and on and on..To become Green disallows me to support these true fighters in their attempts to make the party progressive.
To not be there for them would doom the progressive cause.

[FreedomAngel82]

53. I think that

there's a difference between being a conservative then to being a DINO. A DINO is a democrat in sheeps clothing and hardly ever votes party line. Some people are just way too conservative for me.

[longship]

59. Yes, I agree in principle.

But a DINO still caucuses with Dems and votes for a Dem leader. If it takes a couple of DINOs to obtain a majority, so be it. We can support DINO opposition when it is another Dem. Then, support whichever Dem candidate gets the nod for the general election, even the DINO. There are ways to have ones cake and eat it, too.

[PassingFair]

85. I agree, we shouldn't purge "moderates"

...we should purge "war-profiteering, corporate pandering, * enabling, .com rip-off dems" from the party.

Call them what you will...

[Imagevision]

122. Lieberman - Kick...!

[lindisfarne]

97. That kind of thinking is what got us this administration in the 1st place

Nader was my hero from the first time I read about him in my Weekly Reader in elementary school. He was a great consumer advocate. I don't think he'd be effective as president. He'd just alienate everyone. Even Paul Wellstone learned in his first year in the senate that he had to work with people, if he wanted them to work with him. (A bit of "you pat my back, I'll pat yours" but isn't that life? You just have to stay ethical about it.)

[mike_c]

110. the thing is, I was still a solid dem in 2000....

It was the democratic party of 2002-2004 that drove me out. The party HAS changed, and it's just plain silly to refuse to acknowledge that. I was a loyal dem for 30 voting years. I simply will not take responsibility for "that kind of thinking" that "got us this administration in the first place." My party abandoned me, not the other way around. Somewhere along the line my democratic party decided that "liberal" is a dirty word, and that the antiwar movement must not be supported. It's just not my party any longer, so I am not responsible for its travails.

[Southsideirish]

4. The old line Democratic establishment - Kerry, Kennedy, Biden, etc.

[Armstead]

13. Don't include Kennedy in that list

He's been one of the few who have kept the real flame of liberalismn alive for years, and through its darkest hour.

He should be the damn Senate Minority leader.

[wryter2000]

21. Agreed

Kennedy has been one of the most consistent Dems. Sure, Bush hornswoggled him with NCLB, but Kennedy's been fighting back ever since.

[mike_c]

33. I completely agree, re: Kennedy....

Ted's had his ups and downs, but he is one of the most stalwart old-school liberals left. He still reflects the days when the Democratic party was the opposition to Nixon's republican party, and Goldwater's republican party. These days, Nixon would fit right in to the "moderate, centrist" wing of today's DEMOCRATIC party, and Goldwater would be a moderate republican at worst.

[FreedomAngel82]

54. Yes

I think so too next time around. Reid has been great but I don't think he's quite as progressive as Kennedy. Kerry is pretty liberal as well (he's right after Kennedy according to earlier this year's stats of who's the most progressive and conservative). I'm proud to call myself a Kennedy democrat.

[never_get_over_it]

30. Kennedy are you crazy - eom

[belle]

42. Hell no not Kennedy. Not even Kerry, though I don't want him to run again

for President. But he's done a good job as a senator, on the whole.

Biden...wouldn't say no, if you could find someone better.

Loathe DiFi. Loathe Lieberman.

[blm]

49. Smart. Get rid of the one Dem who has effected this nation's history more

positively in the last 35 years than many in the party put together.

History wil tell a much different story than the implications in your post.

BTW...the old line Democratic establishment stood against Kerry for the entire 5 years of his BCCI investigation. That is why he was ostracized by most of Washington DC for most of his career.

Obviously you are underinformed about the reality of Kerry's efforts and his career. Possibly you were schooled only by corporate media perception?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

57. I love Kennedy! nt

[LittleClarkie]

66. Yes! Put them on Carousel! They need to renew!!

:sarcasm:

[Zodiak]

84. Kennedy and Kerry are the 8th and 9th best we have n/t

According to their votes this year.

[TayTay]

5. None.

We need more Democratic Senators. not less. We don't have enough which is why we can't get legislation passed in the Senate. If we had 60 or 65 Dem Senators then I would consider wasting energy on replacing ones who weren't pure enough. Right now, we don't have that luxury.

Same for the House. I may have differences with some, but I'm not working against any. After all, if we get the House majority, we also get John conyers as Chair of the House Judiciary Comm.

I have better things to do than get rid of Dems right now, like getting rid of Rethugs.

[Imagevision]

7. umm... I did say with another Democratic Sentor?

http://downingstreetmemo.com/

[TayTay]

15. Don't care

I got bigger fish to fry. I want a Dem majority and I am not going to waste money on an internal fight. We need more Dems in office, not less and I don't care about the Dem purity wars right now. It's a distraction that will help.

Do what you want. I'm not on board for this. I want more Dems and will not participate in a process that drags down the party at this time.

[Imagevision]

26. TAY TAY - Lieberman has become a repug in case you haven't noticed...?

http://downingstreetmemo.com/

[TayTay]

27. And in case you haven't noticed, we don't have a majority

We need more Dems, not less. There are probably people in CT who are working on a primary opponent for Leibermann. Goodie for them. That's how the process works. You don't like someone, you find someone to run against them in a primary. The you come together and support the nominee of the Dem Party for that office. And if it's Leibermann, he's got my support.

I still want that Dem vote in a Dem senate. I do not have the luxory of refusing Leibermann's vote on who becomes chair of the committees and so forth. This is important. Much of what gets to the floor of both houses is shaped by the ledaership of the party in charge. A Dem Senate is a more liberal Senate, even with Leibermann in it.

You don't like him, don't work for him. Again, I am FOR electing more Dems and that's were my energy goes. If you want to work AGAINST Dems, then so be it. I like the positive course more than the negative.

[Imagevision]

46. Yes and the 2006 elections haven't passed yet either...!

[tx_dem41]

ONLY replaced by Dems that have an equal or better chance of winning...

the General Election.

[tallahasseedem]

8. Hands down...

Lieberman. Of course he really could be considered a Repug now.

[zanne]

9. All of them.

We've gone unrepresented for five years now. We're half the population of this country and we don't have a voice. The Democratic senators won't stand up for us. Let's fire them.

[William769]

10. Talk about beating a dead horse.

[thereismore]

11. Ideally, all of them except Boxer. n/t

[Zodiak]

86. Boxer is #2.......Harkin is #1

accordoing to their votes in this last Congress.

Harkin (Iowa) 95
Boxer (CA) 90
Lautenberg (NJ) 90
Akaka (Hawaii) 80
Corzine (NJ) 80
Dayton (MN) 80
Durbin (IL) 80
Feingold (WI) 80
Kennedy (MA) 80
Kerry (MA) 80 - DLC
Levin (MI) 80
Dodd (CN) 70 - DLC
Leahy (VT) 70
Mikulski (MD) 70
Reed (RI) 70
Sarbanes (MD) 70
Shumer (NY) 70
Wyden (OR) 70
Clinton (NY) 65 - DLC
Obama (IL) 65
Bayh (IN) 60 - DLC
Biden (DE) 60
Dorgan (ND) 60 - DLC
Stabenow (MI) 60 - DLC
Byrd (WV) 50
Inouye (Hawaii) 50
Murray (WA) 50
Reid (NV) 50
Rockefeller (WV) 50
Baucus (MN) 45 - DLC
Bingaman (NM) 40
Cantwell (WA) 40 - DLC
Johnson (SD) 40 - DLC
Kohl (WI) 40 - DLC
Conrad (ND) 35 - DLC
Feinstein (CA) 35
Carper (DE) 30 - DLC
Leiberman (CT) 30 - DLC
Landrieu (LA) 20 - DLC
Lincoln(ARK) 20 - DLC
Nelson (FL) 20 - DLC
Salazar (CO) 20 - DLC
Pryor (ARK) 15 - DLC
Nelson (NE) 0 - DLC

[Douglas Carpenter]

96. thank you for this list -- it's a great reference point

[flygal]

101. Baucus is MT not MN

but he's been a * kisser and needs to be replaced. He also has no spark - but first we need to get Burns the hell out and it looks pretty good.

[Zodiak]

105. Sorry

I used two letter abbreviations for states, but I must admit I'm not that good a remembering all of them. Notice Hawaii doesn't have a two-letter abbreviation. The mark of research on the fly.

[flygal]

112. Oh no problem - meant to add that list is very helpful thanks!!

[Individualist]

12. Replace all republican enablers

with dems who have the courage to stand up for democratic principles.

[hang a left]

14. With the exception of Conyers, Kucinich

Every Dem in DC ought to be fired and replaced.

[wryter2000]

23. Keep your hands off my Barbara Lee

The only member of Congress to vote against invading Afghanistan? The only one out of almost 450.

Listen to the good House members who call in to Randi, and tell me they ought to be replaced. We have lots of great Dems in the House.

[mitchtv]

76. except Lynne Woolsey

The Best as are many of the Bay area Dems. Barbara?Lee Alameda for example.

[cyclezealot]

17. The answer is easy to find

Go to COPE or the ADA..Any senator under about 75% fails. As to Feinstein at times she gets pretty fleckless with Bush's judicial appointments and she voted for Bush's war.

[graywarrior]

18. All of them

especially Zell

[wryter2000]

19. DiFi

DiFi's not hopeless, imho. If the political wind shifts, she'll be back.

On reading the above...you're right. CA has to be able to do better than DiFi.

[mike_c]

36. fellow californian here-- DiFi is shameful....

She's been at the absolute top of my replacement list since her betrayal on the IWR.

[wryter2000]

44. I agree

Her only saving grace (if she has any) is that she has accumulated some power and when she does the right thing (she didn't vote for the bankruptcy bill, for example) it makes a difference.

I have to agree with the folks in this thread who say it's more important to go after Repugs. I wish DiFi would retire and we could get someone good in.

[leanin_green]

88. She's not much different than when she was mayor of S.F.

She tries so hard to be one of the boys.

[kentuck]

20. Let's work to get rid o fthe Republicans first....

No sense in cutting off our nose to spite our face.

[tx_dem41]

22. I would rather replace Republican Senators with Democrats....

always perplexed why we spend so much energy here trying to get rid of Democrats?!?

[Frances]

25. That's my point too

If we had a safe majority in both houses, I could see trying to get rid of wishy-washy Dems, but we don't. And right now the country could easily lose its democracy--all because Repubs dominate both Houses.

I wonder why some people on this board don't seem to care that our democracy is at risk.

[mzmolly]

34. Here here!

:toast:

I fully agree!

[Imagevision]

62. More qualified Dem Senators running should be considered also

example: Liberman can't be replaced with a more qualified democratic Senator

[PassingFair]

89. Because when its real close, and its BEEN REAL CLOSE

on VERY important legislation involving taxation, WAR, and bankruptcy, ETC., these wolves in our clothing cynically vote with the bad guys. They take turns, but they throw over for the corporate dollars.

They don't deserve to be kept in a sinecure just because they have a (D) after their names and they promise not to steal from us anymore. Now that it's politically inexpedient for them to stay on the take.

[tx_dem41]

104. I guess you would rather have an (R) than a (D)?

Most of the (D)'s that you dislike live in state's that either have an industry that you dislike (e.g. Landrieu/Oil) or are in fairly moderate to conservative. By all means, if you can find a progressive Democrat that can do better than the existing Dem, push them to run in the primary.

[PassingFair]

116. Exactly!

I wouldn't rather have an R, I'd rather have a democrat who votes like a democrat.
I will back progressive dems every time.

[mzmolly]

29. I'm focusing on Republicans first.

I'll get to Democrats later.

As for Lieberman, he's a great man - I just don't agree with him on everything. The Iraq War was his big fumble, and he's obviously misguided on that note, but otherwise he's been a pretty solid Democrat.

[Imagevision]

60. Other Dem Senators running should be considered while we're at it

[Walt Starr]

37. None of them

The power structure is such that you will never defeat a current Democratic Senator in a primary, all you can accomplish is weakening them enough to replace them with a Republican in the general election.

Sorry, but that's political reality and I've stopped engaging in the DINO rhetoric about Democratic Senators. Every last damned one of them, regardless of their voting record, is needed. It's all about numbers and whichever party has the majority sets the agenda.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. All those that voted for Bush's war (IWR).

And, any that still support the occupation. I'll be voting against my Dem Senator (Maria Cantwell) in '06 by voting for whoever the Greens run.

[mike_c]

39. I'll be doing the same with DiFi....

eom

[Frances]

40. why are you posting here then?

this is democraticunderground, not greenunderground

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

41. I'm a Democrat. Next question.

I've been a Democrat since 1965. Which doesn't mean that I owe my vote to the Democratic Party.

Do you?

[Frances]

45. If I were a Green

I would not come to democraticunderground.

Until the greens are strong enough to get their own message board, then they won't be strong enough to do more than throw elecions to Repubs. For example, greens can take enough votes from the moderate Cantwell to elect a very right wing Repub as senator, but they caanot elect a green senator in Washington state.

[mike_c]

48. don't you think that's a valuable lesson that the democratic party...

...is ignoring at its peril? If the party continues to piss on the left, it will lose elections because the left will increasingly vote green. You just said that yourself. I think that's especially true after 2004, when MANY greens abandoned Cobb to vote for Kerry in a gesture of solidarity with dems, and ended up simply undercutting their own state organizations-- and STILL got four more years of Bush. That is simply not going to work in 2008, IMO. Greens (and the left more generally) will need a real committment to progressive, liberal issues before they'll do that for the democratic party again anytime soon. And that's as it should be, because if the dems can simply count on progressives' support as the lesser of two evils, then liberalism is dead in America.

on edit-- IF you accept that the Green party threw the 2000 election, and many do not accept that, but if you do, then it was largely in response to Clinton's corporatist sympathies, and in particular his support for the WTO. Gore did not differ in that respect, at least not that I'm aware of. That's just the sort of outcome that I'm talking about.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. Well then, the Dems better nominate somebody who isn't a "moderate".

In 1994 the Democratic rep we had sold her soul to the NRA. The progressive dems sat the election out. She got her sorry ass beat by an ultra-right repub. 2 years later the Dems were smart enough to nominate a liberal Dem. He's been in office since.

A simple equation. You want progressive votes - be a progressive. You want progressive Dems in office, don't vote for moderate Dems.

[Frances]

64. So, you prefer a Repub to a moderate Dem?

You have every right to support whoever you want.

Many greens did support Kerry and Kerry still lost, not because he lost the liberal vote, but because he lost the people in the middle, particularly the fundies who voted against their own economic interests.

I will be more impressed with greens when they can at least get their own message board. Then Dems can go there and complain about green candidates just like greens come here and complain about Dems.

Bottom line: If greens aren't strong enough to get their own message board, then they certainly aren't strong enough to elect a senator from a moderate state like Washington. All they can do is ensure that a right wing Repub is elected. That should give the same amount of satisfaction as having Bush as president. All it means it that many people from this and other countries will die needlessly. And don't tell me that Dems voted for Iraq. If Gore had been president, no one, Repub or Dem, would have had to make that choice.

[depakid]

75. I hope the Greens do just that

It's in the Democrat's best interest to cut the DINO cancers out of the party. That's the only way that people will ever come around to believing that they stand for anything again- and standing for traditional Democratic principles- not Republican lite- is THE ONLY way that the Dems will ever become the majority party again.

If the Dems can't knowck out the likes of Lieberman and David Wu- (my sell out Congressman) then the Greens will have to help do it for them.

btw: if you're so concerned about the integrity of the board how about ponying up a little money for Skinner & Elad? ;)

[PassingFair]

90. Come again: Please explain this...

"but because he lost the people in the middle, particularly the fundies"

On WHAT planet would fundies be considered "moderates"?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

118. I prefer a progressive to a pro--war "moderate".

You don't like the war? Don't vote for those who support it.

"If Gore had been president.." is right up there with "If the Dodgers hadn't left Brooklyn.."

They did, he wasn't.

[LittleClarkie]

68. I thought you were a Socialist Anarchist

So that would make you a Socialist Anarchist Democrat, right? Or do I have the wrong guy?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

117. So? It's a "big tent" isn't it?

[flyarm]

43. Lieberman!!!!!!!!!!!!! Feinstien!!!!!!!!!! n/t

[screembloodymurder]

47. Great question.

I'm not sure there are many I'd keep.

[FreedomAngel82]

50. I agree with the person

who said we should replace republicans first and foremost. Then we can worry about others such as Liberman. I think we should replace those who are really, really conservative such as Liberman. Being a conservative democrat is one thing but voting for something that you know goes against everything isn't right and I don't want in my party. At least Hillary didn't vote for Condi or Gonzalez's confirmation hearing and last I heard didn't say she liked them.

[rman]

52. A shorter list would be which ones not to replace.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

56. Feinstein, Lieberman and Zel Miller is a no-brainer nt

[holboz]

58. Both AR senators

Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln - they're not real movers or shakers. I want to see them get out and fight. I wish they were more like Conyers or Pelosi and less Dixiecrat-ish in most matters.

But on the flipside, we're fortunate that both Arkansas senators are Democrats. I just wish they were a bit stronger.

[Zomby Woof]

61. The 2 you listed

[mvd]

63. The ones who voted for Gonzales..

or the bankruptcy bill. Or those who still support the war in Iraq.

[Dave Reynolds]

65. Stabenow from Michigan.

Votes corporate DLC, her answer to my letter about the bankruptcy bill read almost identically like the repuke talking points.

I was not impressed.

[MisterP]

67. for everone wailing about "we need a majority"--we don't:

CAFTA would NOT HAVE PASSED if it were not for several turncoats of OUR PARTY--even many Repubs were against that atrocity

[sendero]

107. Exactly..

.... those who vote against our interests might as well be Repubs, there is no functional difference.

Please don't talk about those stupid-ass "scores" that weigh a vote to save the hairy woodpecker with the same relevance as something like CAFTA.

The folks who vote against Dem principles on every IMPORTANT issue should be run out of town on a rail.

[salin]

69. for now - I would rather get a majority

and put some breaks on the administration - before looking for party purges.

[Beaverhausen]

70. Feinstein better do the right thing on the Roberts nom or she's out

Her opening statement today was great though. Very moving. Seems she will be tough as far as making him answer questions on "privacy."

[Zenlitened]

71. I think, if we got ourselves a solid majority in Congress, we'd see...

... a lot more of the pseudo-Dems acting like Democrats. Doesn't say much for their character, if they're willing to be 'brave' only when it's safe, but there ya go.

So I think the first step in our little experiment is to replace repukes with Democrats. Then we can set about turning the heat up on those we'd like to see acting more like Progressives.

[Frances]

72. I agree with you

Right now the fundy preachers are out registering poor people as Repubs. The corporations are funding the Repubs big time so that they will have the money to continue their brainwashing of the uninformed.

You would think that people at DU would see the huge need to get more people to register as Dems so that this country would not become a theocracy that takes away our rights while taking our money and jobs and giving them to the super rich.

But instead of focusing their energies on defeating Repubs, many here at Du are focused on defeating Dems.

This is extremely demoralizing to me.

[Zenlitened]

73. Yeah, it can be demoralizing. But I'm just not willing to be...

... manipulated by random posters on a message board.

If you can tune out the let's-bash-Democrats stuff, there's plenty here to feel energized about.

:hi:

[RallyInDC]

74. all of these senators should be replaced.

lieberman, herb kohl, both bill and ben nelson, dianne feinstein, daniel akaka, max baucus, evan bayh, jeff bingman, joe biden, maria cantwell, thomas carper, kent conrad, mark dayton, christopher dodd, tom harkin, tim johnson, blanche lincoln, barbara mikulski, mark pryor, jack reed, john rockefeller, ron wyden

honestly, all of these well known democrats need to be replaced RIGHT AWAY. i wouldn't even know they were democrats if not for the 'D' next to their name. hillary clinton isn't that great either but shes better than the alternative.

[B Calm]

77. I agree, get rid of Evan Bayh! Why he don't run as a republican

is beyond me!

[Zodiak]

83. he is the eleventh worst one, according to his votes n/t

[nvliberal]

78. NONE.

The day we Democrats can gain control of the Senate is the day we can afford to replace those Democrats who are a bit too conservative.

But it's not going to happen anytime soon; in fact, it's far more likely we will have a filibuster-proof Republican Senate than we will regain control.

Let's focus on the real enemy here, which is Bush and his fascistic ilk in the Republican Party.

[RallyInDC]

80. totally disagree. replace them no matter what in the primaries.

it's a hell of a lot better than keeping the bullshit lie......and putting more R's in.

[PassingFair]

79. Bye Bye Biden, Bye Byeeeeee! n/t

[Zodiak]

82. Here are the worst ten by votes in 2005

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2081063&mesg_id=2084999

Here is another post in which I scored all of the Democratic Senators according to how often they voted with the Bush agenda. Here are the bottom ten...start with these.

Conrad (ND) 35 - DLC
Feinstein (CA) 35
Carper (DE) 30 - DLC
Leiberman (CT) 30 - DLC
Landrieu (LA) 20 - DLC
Lincoln(ARK) 20 - DLC
Nelson (FL) 20 - DLC
Salazar (CO) 20 - DLC
Pryor (ARK) 15 - DLC
Nelson (NE) 0 - DLC

Their numbers are a rough percentage of how often they take the positions that are popular among DU-types (like voting rights issues).

[Frances]

106. You don't get it

Conrad is from North Dakota, which is a red, red state. I just saw a poll that matched him with a Repub opponent and the Repub was ahead by a significant amount. NO Dem is going to win in North Dakota who votes the way you want him/her to all the time.

The same is true of many of the others on your top 10 list.

Have you ever worked on a campaign in a red district or state?

I think you should have that experience before you begin attacking Dems from red parts of the country. That is, if you really care about our country.

And can you please explain to me why freepers are banned from DU but other anti-Dems are not.

[mike_c]

111. we exist just to piss you off, 'bro....

Use your ignore function if you can't take some criticism.

[U4ikLefty]

113. Feinstein is in a RED STATE??? California?!?

...and please stop "attacking Dems" your own damn self!!!

[Zodiak]

120. I'm from North Teaxs

so don't presume to tell me about red states. Talk about a strawman argument. Use the information you have rather than make up stuff about me.

And if this debate was about which Dems stray from the party line every now and again, then you would have a point.

But this is about the Democrats who consistently betray the party and the American people. The numbers do not lie.

Also, you presume that Conrad is losing because he isn't right-wing enough. I challenge that idea. My contention is that if Conrad was a real Democrat instead of a turncoat Bush supporter, he would enjoy greater support from real Democrats. Who is going to waste their time voting for a democrat who doesn;t vote like one? In the mind of the average voter, it is better to vote for a Republican.

And do you want me banned because I scored the Democrat's votes with no accompanying opinions? Nice to know that some on this board fear the truth as much as Republicans.

[dooner]

87. Lieberman is #1 and Feinstein is #2, definitely the biggest traitors

[Langis]

91. Feinstein and Biden are my picks

[Crazy Guggenheim]

93. Also when they get put on notice that their careers are on the line

they'll buck up!!

[HuskerDU]

94. I agree with the 'get dem majority- then purge the enablers'

folks. A dem congress could've gone a long way in curbing *'s destruction, specificly the Iraq War.

I would rather have a Feinstein or a Joementum than pretty much any R that I can think of. We need to go after the Snowes and Chaffees of the world- Reds in Blues states.

[Douglas Carpenter]

98. if you mean running someone in the primaries against them -- I agree

I would suggest taking a look at post # 86 by Zodiak Ironfist
of this thread and focusing on those with scores under 50.

But I do not share the view that we should welcome the defeat of DINO's to the hand of right-wing Republicans. There may only be a dimes worth of difference -- but that dime could save our democracy and perhaps countless lives.

[MisterP]

109. but not Iraqi lives, I guess

[nadinbrzezinski]

99. DiFi

and yes Jomentum

[laylah]

102. Any that voted for

the Bankruptcy bill or votes to confirm Roberts to the SCOTUS.

Jenn

[DemGirl7]

108. Hillary in my mind needs to go

I used to be a fan or hers, but she is too DLC for my taste nowadays, I would like it better if someone more progressive were to represent NY as U.S. Senator in her spot.

[Jose Diablo]

114. I think this list from another DUer shows the foxes in the henhouse

Paste:

Byrd (WV) 50
Inouye (Hawaii) 50
Murray (WA) 50
Reid (NV) 50
Rockefeller (WV) 50
Baucus (MN) 45 - DLC
Bingaman (NM) 40
Cantwell (WA) 40 - DLC
Johnson (SD) 40 - DLC
Kohl (WI) 40 - DLC
Conrad (ND) 35 - DLC
Feinstein (CA) 35
Carper (DE) 30 - DLC
Leiberman (CT) 30 - DLC
Landrieu (LA) 20 - DLC
Lincoln(ARK) 20 - DLC
Nelson (FL) 20 - DLC
Salazar (CO) 20 - DLC
Pryor (ARK) 15 - DLC
Nelson (NE) 0 - DLC

From this thread:

Joe Conason: DLC has no constituency

About 3/4ths the way down gives the methodology of why these people really should be called republicans, not democrates.

My apologies if this list is already posted above, there are 114 posts and I don't feel like wading through the whole thread.

[BeachBuckeye]

115. Nelson of Florida, Lieberman, Biden

The first two for being more Republican than Democrat and Biden for being a complete self-serving asshole.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

119. This is the nonsense that separates the Truth Party from the Power Party

This is the kind nonsense that separates the Truth Party (Democrats) from the Power Party (Republicans). Truth is important, but you don't get power from circular firing squads. Knock it off unless you want to give up your fantasies of impeachment or regaining Congress in 2006.

[Tesha]

123. Just about every stinking one of them.

But I'd settle for all of those who are about to vote "Yes" on
Roberts after bloviating at length about how hard their decision
was.

Tesha