Do you miss the Blue Dogs/New Democrats who lost in November?

[ProSense]

Poll question: Do you miss the Blue Dogs/New Democrats who lost in November?

Would keeping the House have been worth keeping the Blue Dogs in Congress?

[closeupready]

1. Since the Blue Dogs lost disproportionate to their share of Congress, I have to say that

while it's too bad Democrats lost control of the House, there is something deeply satisfying witnessing the populist end of the Blue Dog era.

[karynnj]

5. That's silly analysis

The blue dogs represented places that were harder to hold than Barney Frank's or Barbara Lee's district. (I very much like Barbara Lee and Barney Frank but I doubt they could win in most of Virginia or Indiana.

The reason we had the huge majority we had was that we won a lot of districts that were more conservative than the middle of the Democratic party. Now the Republicans have many of those districts. The good news may be that they now have the harder to hold districts. (What hurts more is losing a seat that should be ours because of a mediocre candidate.)

[closeupready]

9. When you are for sale to the highest bidder, it hardly matters what letter is behind your name.

n/t

[karynnj]

15. Unless you have proof of quid por quo it is not reasonable to accuse

politicians of being bought. There are people who genuinely are conservative Democrats.

[closeupready]

16. I'll concede that I'm painting with too broad a brush, yes, so I apologize for that. There are inde

indeed real conservative, conscientious Democrats, but there are also those for whom "appearance of impropriety" is seemingly a laughable anachronism, kind of like how doctors today laugh about the Hippocratic Oath when they mostly know it's about where they can practice medicine for the most money.

Do you disagree with that?

[karynnj]

17. I'll agree there are both

[doc03]

12. +100 n/t

[provis99]

13. no, your analysis is silly.

Elections in this country are not won or lost based on a candidate's ideology or policy positions. Policy voters amount to less that 20% of the voters. Voters vote based on more mundane things like whether a candidate has an attractive name, whether they saw a candidate's tv ad, or whether the candidate posed for a picture with his family.

The fact that there are outright liberals who win in states like Texas and Mississippi puts the lie to your argument.

[karynnj]

14. Actually it is pretty rare for a liberal to win in a red state

When they do, they are usually in areas with a concentration of liberal voters. There are more than 20% of the voters who are party voters - voting only Democratic or Republican.

Not to mention, you can't argue that they lose disproportionately because they were bluedogs - then argue that ideology doesn't count.

[tabbycat31]

23. +1

A flaming liberal will not win everywhere. In my own district that is the case (it's the most gerrymandered district in the state and it's gerrymandered for a Democrat) but not everywhere.

I recently worked for a coordinated campaign with a blue dog 2nd on the ticket (we knew 3 weeks out we would lose the senate race so then I started focusing on the race we could win). Did I agree with him on everything? Of course not, but I understood that outside of one county, his district was rural and conservative and he was as liberal as they get in the district. And I'd rather a blue dog than a teabagger.

[emulatorloo]

2. Hmm. don't miss the blue dogs. OTOH Joe Barton as Energy Chair? Issa in charge of investigations?

Not very thrilling.

[T Wolf]

3. There was NEVER going to be any PROGRESS as long as those traitors were there. It is

no guarantee that removing them will bring positive things, at least, not right away.

But they were always going to be a problem that has now gone away.

But do not count them out. Scum tends to be very hard to permanently eliminate.

[karynnj]

6. There was progress in 2009 and 2010 - just not as much as you wanted

We are not better off now with a higher % progressive, but a lower number of Democrats. Where we needed to get the blue dogs - we now need some Republicans.

[harun]

8. Some of the Blue Dogs were good on policy, most were traitors.

Mine was real good, he pushed hard for a Public Option, so I can't blame him. He was voted out now though.

[treestar]

4. If their replacements are Republicans, I do

Again the "better Democrat" who can win is hard to find in those districts or states. That reality seems difficult to face.

[Warren Stupidity]

7. Less than useless.

[saras]

10. Don't miss them, can't tell the difference

If they consistently vote right-wing, speak right-wing, write right-wing, it simply doesn't matter what label they put on themselves - calling themselves Democrats is no more important than wearing a Jerry Garcia tie.

If you can't tell someone from a Republican by their actions, they're a republican. If they say otherwise, they're liars as well.

[ProSense]

11. Well, here's a difference in really simple terms:

Boehner controls the House, not Pelosi, and Dems don't have the votes to pass anything in the House.





Edited missing words

[Autumn]

22. I agree with you on that

100%. Voting for the guy with the magic "D" after their name when they act like a republican is our biggest problem. I won't do it again.

[craigmatic]

18. I do there was a whole patch of blue districts around mine now where I live is

like an island of blue in an ocean of red.

[cottonseed]

19. That Howard Dean and his 50 state strategy got us nothing by Blue Dogs.

[frazzled]

20. Well, when you see what Boehner and his majority Republicans

are going to do in the House, you'll sure miss them. If nothing else they served one purpose: to make Nancy Pelosi the Speaker of the House and to let her set the Congressional agenda. Do you think we'd be seeing Darryl Issa holding hearings on batshit insane "corruption" issues or see the House about to "repeal" healthcare if they were still there, pushing our numbers into the majority?

The answer is a big fat NO. So, yeah -- even though I didn't like their politics, I'll sure as HELL miss them.

[Arkana]

21. I miss having their seats in Congress

but not them personally.

[Marr]

24. Do you regret backing them? They cost the Democrats control of the House.

All of that Republican-lite nonsense cost the party as a whole, not just the corporate shill Blue Dogs. I assume you regret supporting them and suggesting the party as whole be more accommodating to their agenda.