Many liberal groups and bloggers band together to continue change in the party.

[madfloridian]

This is an interesting group of progressives, some very prominent bloggers. In numbers there is more power than just one or two groups working alone.

'Accountability Now': Bloggers And Progressive Groups Plan To Challenge Elected Dems

Some of the most prominent names in progressive politics launched a major new organization on Thursday dedicated to pinpointing and aiding primary challenges against incumbent Democrats who are viewed as acting against their constituents' interests.

Accountability Now PAC will officially be based in Washington D.C., though its influence is designed to be felt in congressional districts across the country. The group will adopt an aggressive approach to pushing the Democratic Party in a progressive direction; it will actively target, raise funds, poll and campaign for primary challengers to members who are either ethically or politically out-of-touch with their voters. The goal, officials with the organization say, is to start with 25 potential races and dwindle it down to eight or 10; ultimately spending hundreds of thousands on elections that usually wouldn't be touched.

...."It is a concept bound -- indeed, designed -- to ruffle the feathers of powerful figures in Washington, in part because the names behind it are now institutions themselves. With $500,000 currently in the bank, Accountability Now will be aided, in varying forms, by groups such as MoveOn, SEIU, Color of Change, Democracy for America, 21st Century Democrats and BlogPAC. FireDogLake's Jane Hamsher and Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald will serve in advisory roles, while Markos Moulitsas of DailyKos will conduct polling, with analytical help from 538.com's Nate Silver.

"This will be very much interactive and localized," said Hamsher. "We are already going out to local state blogs to help us identify well-qualified candidates in their communities. Once those people are identified we will be able to bring the strength of our resources to help them mount primary challenges."

In a conversation with the Huffington Post, Hauser, Hamsher and Greenwald said that the process by which targeted incumbents were chosen would not constitute an ideological litmus test. The goal, they noted, was simply to follow the numbers: figure out which Members were casting votes that were out of tune, philosophically speaking, with their constituent's public opinion readings. And then bear the most basic form of political pressure: encourage a primary challenger to run and help him or her campaign. Fundraising will be done by galvanizing online support for specific races -- a practice now natural to Accountability Now's principals.

Here is the website.

Accountability Now Pac

I am glad to see Democracy for America taking part in this effort.

[madfloridian]

1. More on the launching from Jane Hamsher.

She makes it clear it is not about purging, just trying to neutralize corporate influence.

http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/27/accountability-now-democracy-headache/

"Markos is here in DC and we did the media rounds yesterday -- CNN, ABC, AP, US News, NBC, the New York Times, the Huffington Post -- talking about Accountability Now and our Primary Project. (No, we didn't do Drudge, but got the lucky link anyway.)

It was really hard to get people away from the idea that we're attempting some kind of party purge rather than trying to neutralize the influence of corporate lobbyist money and beltway "groupthink" on Washington DC, which really doesn't have an ideological identification.

It's insider vs. outsider, not left vs. right. And despite the fact that we've worked with Republicans on FISA and the initial Accountability Now money bomb, and told everyone we'd be willing to get involved in a GOP primary, we were consigned to a Democrat vs. Democrat story. We're working within the Democratic party right now because they're in power and that's where the money is flowing, but that doesn't mean the political landscape will remain static or that getting involved in Republican primaries won't make sense in the future.

But hey, you've got to start breaking that frame somewhere."

[leftstreet]

2. Oh, I like this quote

There’s a difference between Democrats from more conservative districts who, while not representing my political views, do manage to represent their constituents’ views, and Democrats who engage in “centrist” wankery despite representing liberal districts, or Democrats who use the conservative tilt of their district as an excuse to get on board with anything the Chamber of Commerce supports. -Atrios

[madfloridian]

3. It's a good goal and well-stated.

And a real powerhouse of bloggers and progressive groups.

We have stopped all donations politically for now, but we could get interested in this group.

[tavalon]

7. Yep, I'm going to be watching this one closely indeed.

[truedelphi]

4. I just watched "Mr Smith Goes to Washington" for the first time ever

And the Taylor guy made me think of all the control that Di Feinstein has and how awful it is that our party acquiesces to people like her.

Very glad to hear about this avenue of action and responsibility.

[madfloridian]

5. I have got to order that movie about Jeff Smith.

DFA worked with him, and Dean campaigned for him when he ran while he was still with DFA.

[truedelphi]

29. Are you saying that Jeff Smith was a real person?

Didn't know that at all.

Makes the movie profoundly more meaningful!

[Historic NY]

6. We have to keep them on the straight & narrow path..

away from all that influence peddling & meddling. Who else can call them out, the MSM, they just play along.

[bvar22]

8. I'm really, REALLY happy to see this !

WE have the numbers and the POWER.

Selectively targeting the WORST offenders is the way to USE this power to counterbalance the corrupting influence of Corporate Money (DLC) inside the Democratic Party.

The InterNet has given the Grass Roots a VOICE.

If you Work for a Living, do NOT contribute to the DCCC/DSCC.
Your money WILL be used AGAINST you.

Leading progressives are putting congressional Democrats on notice that they will recruit and support primary challenges to vulnerable incumbents who become “more responsive to corporate America than to their constituents. Accountability Now, which was co-founded by Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake.com, draws its inspiration from the way in which former Rep. Al Wynn, D-Md., was ousted from office in 2007 by current Rep. Donna Edwards, a more liberal Democrat, who portrayed Wynn as beholden to corporate interests.

We are watching, ....AND taking names!


I will support Accountability NOW, and continue my support of MoveON, and Progressive Democrats of America (PDA).

http://www.pdamerica.org/



The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[madfloridian]

10. I just heard my very mild, soft-spoken hubby have a phone tantrum.

I asked who he was talking to, but it took him a minute. He finally said he had been talking to a caller wanting donations for the DNC.

He ranted to them about the treatment of Dean, the fact that the new chairman was anti-choice and anti-civil unions, and about Rahm's foul mouth.

He just never gets mad, but he was then. He said how dare they call me for money.

We will be keeping an eye on this group.

[LWolf]

9. K & R nt

[crickets]

11. Good! K&R -nt

[chill_wind]

12. Bookmarked, K & R. n/t

[BlooInBloo]

13. Very nice. More and better Democrats...

We've got the "more" part under control. And they're helping out with the "better" part.

[JamesA1102]

14. Really bad idea.

From U.S. News:

"When Republicans were ascendant, groups like Club for Growth aimed to start weeding out insufficiently conservative lawmakers, targeting them in primary races. The strategy worked in a sense: There are certainly few moderate Republicans left standing."

All this may do is help the GOP gain seats in the House by targeting moderate Dems in swing districts. I'd rather have a Dem who votes with us 60-70% of the time than a Republican who will vote with us 0% of the time. Let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good.

[madfloridian]

15. Oh yeh, let's leave the party to them....butt out.

Let the ones who vote and so much as caucus with Republicans continue to rule.

Then we can say we did not make waves.

[JamesA1102]

17. Butt out??? Advocating censorship?

That sounds like a Republican response to me. Just as targeting anyone who is not in ideological lockstep. We are Democrats and liberals, aren't the ones who are supposed to be tolerant of different views and opinions.

All I'm saying is that there is a danger in this. I remember the election of '94. That set the country back for years. We don't need that to happen again. Right now the goal should be to target Republicans in vunerable districts. Make their numbers in the Congress even smaller than they are now. That alone would be more persuasive to centerist Dems than anything else.

[madfloridian]

20. It is not a good idea to accept anything and everything from any party.

The GOP did that...were little sheep. Marched in lockstep. Destroyed the country.

Democrats should act like Democrats and not think the Republicans are more important than we are.

No, sorry to disappoint you, but I am not a Republican.

I have been called a lot of things, but never that.

:eyes:

[JamesA1102]

23. But you're acting like one.

Advocating censorship.

And I agree that one of the problems with the GOP is their insistance that everyone walk in lockstep. But isn't exactly what Accountability Now is advocating by targating anyone who doesn't march in lockstep with their ideology.

As I said earlier we shouldn't make the perfect the enemy of the good. Isn't better to have a few centerist Dems who vote the way we like most of the time than risk losing the seat to a Republican who will vote against what we beleive in everytime?

[madfloridian]

24. You are either not reading my post, or else you do not detect sarcasm

when it is so obvious it doesn't even need a tag.

I don't appreciate being called a Republican when I am advocating liberal policies.

[JamesA1102]

26. When you're advocating censorship

and that every Dem be in lockstep with your ideology, then you are acting like a Republican.

[madfloridian]

27. Bull hockey. Updating list.

Bye.

[EraOfResponsibility]

31. LOL whenever madflo gets called out on her bullshit she whines

"i'm adding you to my ignore list BYE" :rofl:

[BlooInBloo]

16. (facepalm)

[JamesA1102]

18. What's dumb is thinking that...

it is a better idea to target Dems than Republicans in swing districts. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

[BlooInBloo]

19. A stitch in time saves 9! squawk!

A rolling stone gathers no moss! Squawk!

[eomer]

28. They are not targeting swing districts.

On the contrary, they say they will target districts where the incumbent Democrat is out of tune with constituents. In other words, districts where the voters are to the left of their representatives. A swing district would more likely be one where the voters tend to the right of a Democratic incumbent.

Here are the parts of the article that led me to that conclusion:

The goal, they noted, was simply to follow the numbers: figure out which Members were casting votes that were out of tune, philosophically speaking, with their constituent's public opinion readings.

But in private, some Democrats expressed worry about pushing for progressive change from the outside rather than from within. Would running an election opponent be the best measure of political persuasion? What if, hypothetically, a primary challenger won the nomination only to lose in the general?

These are concerns that Accountability Now does not take lightly. They insist that they will "take district realities into account," which means that Democrats who represent moderate districts will be forgiven for their moderate votes. But beyond that, they argue, it is the candidate's responsibility, not theirs, to ensure reelection.

[Tatiana]

21. Me likey. Some of these Blue Dogs representing liberal districts need to be primaried. n/t

[unkachuck]

22. "...pushing the Democratic Party in a progressive direction..."

....excellent!!

....we need to serve and service only the Progressive Agenda and not allow ourselves to be diluted in the broth of our Big-Tent soup....to focus on our agenda and to do the things necessary to achieve our goals is to me the height of political sophistication and responsibility....

....for far too long we've suffered at the hands of our fellow Democrats, those days must end.

....thanks MF, and a big lavish kick to your thread....

[madfloridian]

25. Why thank you so much.

Yes, we have to do it.

:hi:

[slinkerwink]

30. thank you for this!