Once again, Dems who take a strong stand for our values outperform the squishy "moderates."

[ClassWarrior]

Via email from Progressive Democrats of America (http://pdamerica.org):

The Democratic Party may have taken a huge hit on Tuesday, but progressives fared well, with the exception of Russ Feingold. The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) lost two of its less progressive members, while the Blue Dog Caucus lost nearly half of its membership along with two of its co-chairs. From our perspective, the enemy without is better than the enemy within...

Over all, our work paid off! In the states where PDA put in the most effort, we met with success on a number of fronts:

In Arizona, Raul Grijalva will remain in office! Your contributions and volunteer efforts made the difference in this race where the CPC co-chair faced a Tea Party candidate with serious money, who challenged him on his principled stand on Arizona’s SB 1070 anti-immigrant law.

In California, Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer led the Democrats to an electoral sweep. PDA volunteers turned out in spades for Bill Hedrick helping to make 108,000 calls over the weekend. While Bill was denied victory in this conservative district, he ranked third among congressional challengers in total votes. Congratulations Bill, and kudos to PDA CA for contributing to the victory.

Democrats swept Massachusetts as well! With PDA’s help, Jim McGovern will return to Congress . Massachusetts’s voters delivered good news for single payer, too. In 14 districts where a single-payer question appeared on the ballot, the voters overwhelmingly voted in support. PDA chapters have been working with Mass-Care to keep building support and it’s paying off. (PDA will be at the upcoming Leadership Conference for Guaranteed Healthcare meeting and the Healthcare-NOW! conference.)

In Illinois and Virginia, our PDA candidates David Gill and Rick Waugh faced headwinds too strong to overcome. Both candidates ran terrific progressive campaigns and represented our values well. We hope we have the chance to support them again.

While our victories should be celebrated, we can’t forget how the horrible Citizens United decision opened the floodgates of secret corporate money to pervert our elections . Until the issue of corporate personhood is addressed, we can expect this tidal wave of corporate influence to continue, making it harder and harder to pass good policy for real flesh and blood citizens. As Joe Hill once said, “Don’t mourn, Organize!” See Norman Solomon’s article on getting back to the basics.

Organizing is what PDA does best and we’re ready for the challenge; we expect to make an even bigger difference in the next election. Between now and then, we’ll continue to organize locally, advocate for our positions, and prepare to defeat corporate millions neighbor to neighbor, block by block!...

Once again, Dems who take a strong stand for our values outperform the squishy, cowardly middle.

NGU.

[alcibiades_mystery]

1. Poor Patrick Murphy

Guy takes on the lead sponsor role for DADT Repeal, and doesn't even rate as a "progressive" candidate for the purpose of this analysis.

Kinda shitty for him, I guess.

[ClassWarrior]

3. Encourage him to join PDA.

NGU.

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. The fact that he's left out of the analysis is point enough

It demonstrates the way they stretch the data to make a point. Patrick Murphy won a tough conservative district in 2008, and then came in and put forward one of the most courageous and progressive pieces of legislation of the last session. But because he doesn't have an organizational nametag, he gets left off the victory lap. Why? Because he lost, and it doesn't contribute to their (or your) point.

[ClassWarrior]

8. That's an awful lot of contortion to make such a simple point.

:eyes:

NGU.

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. Not really

Murphy sponsored DADT repeal. PDA deftly ignores him to tout their victories.

It's pretty simple. They cherry pick to make a point. As do you. It's dishonest.

[ClassWarrior]

15. ROFLMAO

Whatever.



NGU.

[alcibiades_mystery]

17. Like I said, shitty

Patrick Murphy sponsors probably the most progressive piece of legislation of the last session, then our "brave" progressive pretend they don't know the guy because he lost, and it doesn't fit their little narrative.

Way to turn your back on a guy. While you're laughing and posting fatuous pictures, you might take a look at your own "progressive" values, as they seem lacking.

[ClassWarrior]

19. You seem to be working awfully hard against standing strong for progressive values.

Curious...

NGU.

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. Really? How so?

By pointing out your back-turning on Patrick Murphy?

:shrug:

[ClassWarrior]

23. By your pretzel logic, Patrick Murphy turned his back on PDA first.

:eyes:

NGU.

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. You're obsessed with PDA rather than actual policy

Typical "team" mentality rather than actual politics.

I want to know how it is that you DON'T see DADT repeal as a progressive piece of legislation. That's really the point here. Guy went out on a limb for progressive policy, and now you shit all over him because he doesn't hold a little card in his hand? It's really a sad statement of what you consider "politics" that you would not count him. He also campaigned on that, and never backed away from it, even when down. The guy deserves a PDA Profiles in Courage Award. Instead, he gets the silent treatment from so-called progressives because his loss doesn't fit the point you're trying to make. It's not only pathetic. It's nasty.

Here's a brave Congressman who you feel doesn't rate as progressive because he doesn't have a PDA card:

********
LGBT advocates have suffered a wrenching loss now that Patrick Murphy, a former Army paratrooper who championed “don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal in the House, has lost his Pennsylvania seat.

Murphy, who rode into office on a Democratic wave in 2006, was summarily ushered back out in Tuesday night’s GOP sweep, restoring Michael Fitzpatrick to the seat he had held before being ousted by Murphy.

LGBT progressives made a last-ditch effort to save Murphy with varied advocates collaborating on a Web-based video that trumpeted support for him and encouraged donations to his campaign.

Murphy was recently asked whether he regretted taking on the fight to repeal DADT. "Absolutely not," he responded.

"I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution as an Army officer and as a congressman," he told The Huffington Post. "I take that oath to heart, and I'm going to fight for the values that are in our Constitution. I'm going to fight to make sure that our military has the best personnel policy that it can, and that means repealing the outdated and the dangerous 'don't ask, don't tell' policy."

*********

http://www.shewired.com/Article.cfm?ID=26049

[ClassWarrior]

32. And you're obsessed with Patrick Murphy rather than progressive values.

Typical "star-struck" mentality rather than actual politics.

:eyes:

NGU.

[alcibiades_mystery]

33. Wrong

Patrick Murphy is an example of your dishonest argument, and that's all he is. That he's a particularly obvious example only speaks to the weakness of your claims. The fact that you still can't admit that his loss throws a little wrench in your argument shows that you don't give a good goddamn about progressive legislation, and that you seem to care more about your precious little narrative than in helping people through policy.

[ClassWarrior]

36. I'm talking electoral strategy, not policy.

Perhaps you need a break from politics. You've been nothing but bitter and accusatory from the outset of this discussion, and apparently this is blinding your ability to discern the difference.

NGU.

[alcibiades_mystery]

37. Laughable

Standing firm behind the most progressive legislation in the last session WAS Mr. Murphy's strategy. And he lost. Perhaps your adherence to a narrative is blinding you to that fact. Maybe you should take a break.

[ClassWarrior]

39. Okay, let me explain it to you like you're a four-year-old, to paraphrase...

...Denzel Washington in "Philadelphia."

1. Yes, Murphy backed a piece of very progressive legislation.

2. Beyond that, I know very little about Murphy's record.

3. In absence of any other information, the fact that he's not a member of PDA (nor a member of the Progressive Democratic Caucus, as someone else on this thread pointed out) indcates to me that Murphy's not progressive across the board.

4. Therefore, PDA's formulation holds true. For the most part, across-the-board progressives won.

:shrug:

NGU.

[ncdemocrat1976]

It's all political. n/t

[hfojvt]

27. but is he offically part of the congressional progressive caucus?

I think the whole article is stupid. Blue dogs are running in conservative districts. If they ran as fiery liberals they would just get smoked even in a good year. That the people of Madison re-elected Tammy Baldwin is not surprising, but if Ike Skelton was more like Tammy Baldwin he would not have won in that Missouri district. Do these people really think that the people who voted for Vicki Hartzler really wanted Tammy Baldwin and that is why they rejected Ike?

[xchrom]

2. recommend

[LoZoccolo]

4. There's no comparison here because they were running in different regions. n/t

[GoCubsGo]

5. Only in areas where there are lots of progressives.

Not many of them in these parts. The moderate Democrat in my district got 32% A more liberal one would have gotten much less than that.

[ClassWarrior]

7. And you have what evidence to support that last statement?

:shrug:

NGU.

[GoCubsGo]

9. I lived here for 25 years

I'm in one of the reddest of red parts of South Carolina. Here, they do battle to prove who is more CONSERVATIVE. I'm not exaggerating, either. Another district in my state elected a goddamn tea bagger over a slightly moderate REPUBLICAN during the primary. The teabagger won the general election. John Barrow's district is next door to mine. Two years ago, he had a progressive run against him in a primary. She got stomped. I don't recall that she got more than 25% of the vote. To the northeast of me, the batshit-crazy Paul Broun ran against a progressive. This is the district that contains the supposedly "more liberal" Athens. The progressive got stomped. That enough evidence for you?

On edit: I see you live in Wisconsin. As an Illinois native, I assure you, things are much, much different in the South when it comes to progressive politics.

[ClassWarrior]

10. Real progressives? Or only progressive relative their opponents?

NGU.

[GoCubsGo]

11. Both. n/t

[ClassWarrior]

13. Ok, please go find their percentages and post them here. I'm guessing that...

...the real progressives earned bigger numbers than the "relative" progressives.

NGU.

[GoCubsGo]

12. Both. n/t

[treestar]

22. Yes, why is it hard for people to understand that?

It is the District that matters - to have any real power there have to be a large number of progressive districts. Blue Dog districts are conservative. Thus a blue dog is the best we can get.

This meme is mathematically deceiving. The blue states and districts can get bluer, but that doesn't help representation on Congress.

It's the same as arguing that some high percentage want single payer. If they are concentrated in blue states, then it doesn't help with getting Senate votes.

[ClassWarrior]

34. You bring up math. Okay, please show me the numbers.

I'm guessing that, in head-to-head matches, true progressives poll better blue dogs. And that blue dogs only win when they do because true progressives don't run.

NGU.

[TheKentuckian]

16. My Congressman ran on Health Care Reform (except it should have gone further),

repealing DADT, the stimulus (except it should have been larger and better targeted), did not run from climate change (though does credit himself for watering it down some...hey we're a coal state), transforming student loans, and for financial regulation (that he says needed to be stronger) and he is returning to Washington to represent Kentucky's fighting 3rd.

Not everyone that lost but most of them ended up standing for nothing but a pale imitation of their opposition's platforms and got their grills kicked in.

Having some spine and principles that stand regardless of the polls means something to people of any fiber.

[alcibiades_mystery]

20. Yarmuth's a great guy

Nothing gave me more delight on Tuesday than seeing that he pulled it out against that teabagger fuckwit of a real estate scammer.

[treestar]

24. That district encompasses the city of Louisville

Cities tend to be blue, even in red states. Having the "spine" to represent all of that in some other district in KY leads to defeat.

This is disingenuous argument. Anyone running in a city can be very progressive. It's not a matter of "spine", it is knowing the voters. Anyone with the "spine" to run as a progressive in a red district loses.

[TheKentuckian]

28. Why did we have Bushbot Northup for eight fucking years then?

[TheKentuckian]

29. Where do you think McChinless hails from? Hint, it ain't Hazzard County.

Multi-term judge executive right in Jefferson County.

[highplainsdem]

18. Exactly. Dems have to be clear on their values and goals AND communicate

those values and goals to voters:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9474442

[67 Mercury]

26. This was a wake up call for the people

Before getting to the meat of this, let me pause for a moment, to offer a word in defense of righteous anger. There is a certain legitimacy to raw anger. Anger is a correct & reasonable first response to injustice. By itself, it is an inadequate response to injustice. But it is an excellent foundation on which more constructive responses can be built.

And, on the other hand, the most paralyzing & crippling response towards great injustice, is docile acceptance. THAT is what the American political system & their apologists are all about — getting you to somehow resign yourself to corporatists & warmongering imperialists, who however (like Obama) are skilled in the use of ‘uplifting’ language.]

OK, now the meat. We are at a time in our nation’s history where the political system is breaking down. It is no ordinary time. Mechanisms that have sufficed since the 1930’s are now failing.

There is zero chance that our system can be fixed through the officially-approved mechanisms. Whether overtly recognized or not, there’s a war going on — the US ruling class against all the rest of us. It’s essentially a class war. The rulers want you to remain a Democrat, because the D’s are a ruling-class institution, whose job is guiding the Dem half of the populace in paths that are safe for the rulers. To remain a Dem voter, and to swallow whatever slop the party dishes up, is to passively assent to this arrangement.

Therefore, your primary focus should be on resisting & criticizing the system, not on adapting yourself to it. You should be talking with your friends & family about the very real things that are wrong. You should be trying to make whatever contribution you can to elevating political consciousness. Accepting the slop of the Dem Party is the opposite of all that: it deadens political consciousness, & only makes your enemies stronger.

Voting for candidates only works when there are decent candidates — but that’s not our situation. We betray ourselves if we fail to recognize that.

Well, looking at it historically, the “solution” has to be a break from the officially-approved mechanisms. It must have the form of a broad movement based on the interests of the bottom 80-90% of the population, rather than on the interests of the top 1%. It has to be what they call “radical” politics — something that big business and the media are definitely not going to like, any more than they like Kucinich or antiwar protestors.

The 2 parties are really just a mechanism of social control. They’re not a way for “the people” to express their will; they’re a way for rulers to control the people — partly by making them believe that they (the peeps) have some say (which they don’t). Building a movement to oppose this takes time. But its sine qua non is political consciousness — the type that socialists understand & try to cultivate; and that the big-business parties & media try to suppress & eradicate.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. The Centrists scored a giant "No Sale". Their solution...move to the right. .

And, they talk about being "practical" and "realists".

[Rex]

31. You know, that little factoid is driving those in the center crazy!

I guess no one likes being called the loser of losers.

[jgraz]

38. Yet they never seem to learn

How many crushing defeats must the center inflict on us before they get a clue?

[EFerrari]

35. K&R

:kick: