Blue Dog Democrats. Here's a List.

[MzNov]

I find it mind boggling that these DINO's would not support the end of the illegal invasion of Iraq. Just in case you'd like to let them know that perhaps they won't be re-elected, here's the list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Democrats

[jody]

1. Perhaps in their districts, they might be re-elected. IMO congresspersons are the best indicator of

constituent political expectations and voter wishes vary widely from downtown Boston to Pocatello.

[tnlefty]

2. Thanks! I was watching them on c-span introducing the "pups", the

newly elected, and I was laughing. I found it bizarre that adults would willingly allow themselves to be publicly referred to as pups. To each his own I guess.

I read in yesterday's paper that FrankenFrist, former Sen. from TN, and Zach Wamp (R:puke:), my current congresscritter were thinking about running for governor. The only democrat mentioned as being interested was Lincoln Davis. My spouse stated, "Jeeeze, just shoot me now, so far the choices are 2 insane republicans and one moderate." :hi:

[rinsd]

3. Uhhh without these "DINOs" we have no majority and no power.

The New Democrats + the Blue Dogs > Progressive Caucus.

[AtomicKitten]

5. you've done the math

and it's crystal clear

[madfloridian]

6. Many are dupes in both groups....will need to count.

Many of the new ones are in both groups, so are many of the old ones. Yet they are being counted as separate to pump up the numbers.

[rinsd]

7. I get 86 Blue+New while subtracting the 22 having membership in both.

I have the Progressive Caucus around 62-63.

Correct me if I am wrong.

[madfloridian]

16. Well, I checked my figures and came up with 76 total of both.

Older New Dems 44
Newer New Dems not counted in Blue Dogs 11

Older Blue Dogs, subtracting the ones I know of who lost...Davis, Case, and Ford....subtracting the ones who were dual...I get 18.
Newer Blue Dogs...not counted in New Dems...3.

I get 76 total, but I could easily have counted wrong.

Here is where I got my totals.

Older members of both.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/738

New members of both:
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/701

Now, last I heard, the progressive caucus was over 70, but in a post I saw in January at Huff Post, they have not finished recruitment. They are also working together in several ways, and I think I saw the words Progressive Promise. I can't find a website yet.

Did you see the new group formed today to hold the conservative Democrats accountable? For getting them to act like Democrats?

It's called They Work for Us, and is a two-fold group with a PAC. It was formed to keep our Democrats like the Blue Dogs and New Dems from selling us out on things like the bankruptcy bill....
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/974

[rinsd]

17. I used each of the groups' websites.

I cut and paste the names to excel from their members page and started to remove dupes and a couple of people I know who lost but I could have easily missed something.

So for the sake of arguments until the final numbers are in I am willing to stipulate that

Blue Dogs + New Democrats = Progressive Caucus

;-)

I think that PAC could be a force to be reckoned with. With the unions & MoveOn you have a huge membership and the cash to support whoever they ended up choosing.

[MzNov]

12. time will tell

[rinsd]

14. Um what does that mean?

That progressives are gaining power? That is obvious.

Or did you mean that these "DINOs" can eventually be dumped?

Because that is doubtful.

[MzNov]

15. ummmm someone said "without these "DINO's" we have no majority and no power"

I say we don't know how they will vote yet, and time will tell if they tend to hold Bush's hand...

here's another written article from Kos if you're interested:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/1/22/17490/0590

[madfloridian]

4. Here's a new group formed to day to make them act like Democrats.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3178258

The first ones to get primary opponents are Tauscher, Wynn, Cuellar.

They will get well-funded primary opponents if they keep voting against the interests of the people....like the bankruptcy bill.

[k_jerome]

8. please let us know YOUR criteria for being a Democrat...

i would like to know everyone you would exclude from the party.

[Crunchy Frog]

9. Probably alot fewer than the number you would exclude.

based on your posting record. :eyes:

[k_jerome]

10. c'mon, just Clark. nt.

[MzNov]

13. I am totally against the "war" in Iraq. That means everything concerning the "war" in Iraq.

Surge, escalation, funding, not willing to bring the troops home. I don't trust anyone who calls him/herself a Democrat who doesn't support that. I understand that's my preference. IMHO. I am a progressive anti-war Democrat. It's THE issue, and how someone votes or doesn't vote on THE issue says quite alot about that person. It's my criteria, and I believe it's the majority Democratic position.

[msongs]

11. isnt harold ford jr out of congress now? that's good if true nt