Blue Dog says Dem losses would strengthen centrists' position

[kpete]

Source: The Hill


Blue Dog says Dem losses would strengthen centrists' position
By Michael O'Brien - 11/03/09 08:40 AM ET

Centrist Blue Dog Democrats might see their position strengthened if Democrats suffer broader losses Tuesday, one Blue Dog member suggested.

Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) argued that an election night rebuke for Democratic candidates across the nation could lead some in the party to rethink their plans on healthcare reform and other issues.

"It looks as though the anger that has been boiling up the last couple of months is going to lead to a pretty high turnout from Republicans and from people who are concerned about increased spending," Altmire said Monday evening during an appearance on Fox Business Network.

"And I do think that if the results show Republicans have a pretty good night, that probably is going to lead some Democrats to think that, going into next year, we need to take a second look at the way that we've done a lot of bills we've addressed up to this point," the Pennsylvania congressman added.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/66041-blue-dog-says-dem-losses-would-strengthen-centrists-position

[fascisthunter]

1. lol... ok

[appal_jack]

29. +1 - Blue Dog is Wrong.

I know it may come as a shock to all the Blue Dogs out there, but running as milque-toast-repubs will not endear you to anyone. Dems will hate you because you are not a true Democrat. Repubs will hate you because a real Repub with an (R) is what they want.

So, I heartily second your lol, fascisthunter.

-app

[New Dawn]

34. "Blue Dogs" and the DLC = GOP

[AlphaCentauri]

38. divided by 2 equals 1 party n/t

[bluestateguy]

2. If Democrats take a bath next year, it will be Blue Dogs like him who go

Liberals like Maxine Waters, Dennis Kucinich and Raúl Grijalva are in nice cozy safe districts. They aren't going anywhere.

[cyclezealot]

9. Likely it will be the blue dogs that are on the chopping bloc.

So how does that figure. AH. tHEY are not much better than Goopers anyway.

[AlinPA]

20. There is a lot of talk about Beth Buchanan (R), a popular judge running against him; she will

beat him easly, IMO.

[MARALE]

3. I have never seen spending controlled under Repubs

I get so mad when people say they are voting for a repub because of all the spending that the Dems do. the Repubs spend more than the Dems, only they spend on their firends on the corporate world and on the defense. Spending control in the Repub party is a myth.

[paparush]

18. Here's a handy graphic -

Oh, and you can always remind them that Bush didn't include the cost of his wars in his budgets.

[No Elephants]

19. Yes, but, as they spend, they lower taxes, especially taxes on the rich.

So, to the person who does not spend a lot of time thinking about it, it seems as though Republicans manage money well. They don't realize their children and grandchildren will suffer.

Now, with the bailout, people are already forgetting that the bailout was Bush's baby. They get help from Republicans who tend to "slip up" and call it the Democratic Congress's bailout, or even Obama's bailout.

And, even if folks ecall that it was Bush's bailout, they know that Obama spent a ton of money, too. So, Republicans immediately started saying our kids and grandkids are screwn because of Obama.

And, Democrats will have to raise taxes sooner or later.

Bush could not have planned it better if he tried--and maybe he did try.

[joeycola]

4. Analysis: Anger, frustration fuel Election Day 2009-cnn- Another Anger story.....

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/03/voter.anger/index.html


Analysis: Anger, frustration fuel Election Day 2009

By Paul Steinhauser, CNN Deputy Political Director
November 3, 2009 8:00 a.m. EST
Unrest among voters is a factor in Tuesday, but will that mood continue in 2010 for midterm elections?
Unrest among voters is a factor in Tuesday, but will that mood continue in 2010 for midterm elections?
STORY HIGHLIGHTS

* "We're in the middle ... of a political rebellion going on," House minority leader says
* Conservative revolt led moderate Republican to drop out of U.S. House race in New York
* Ex-candidate then endorsed a Democrat, who is facing a conservative third-party candidate
* Republicans may win back governor offices in Virginia, New Jersey

Washington (CNN) -- As voters across the country head to the polls Tuesday, one thing appears certain: Many of them are angry.

And that anger could shape the results of three of the most high-profile elections this year -- gubernatorial battles in New Jersey and Virginia and the fight for an open seat in New York's 23rd Congressional District.

National polls indicate that many voters are in a foul mood. The big question is whether that mood will continue into 2010, when the entire House of Representatives, more than a third of the Senate and more than a third of the governorships are up for grabs.

"We're in the middle, I think, of a political rebellion going on in America," House Minority Leader John Boehner said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." "And this rebellion is by people who really have not been actively involved in the political process and they don't really care if you're a Democrat or a Republican. They want to see people who are going to stand up and protect the future for our kids and grandkids."


The victory by the grassroots on the right over the moderates and the Republican Party structure in New York 23 could foreshadow more fights ahead for the GOP, as the party tries to rebuild following election defeats in 2006 and 2008. But the energy currently on the right is powerful, and that could come in very handy in next year's crucial elections.

[Craftsman]

5. For every one of the elections that do not go the dems way the blue dogs will dig their heels in mor

If all 4 (NY, VA, NJ, and Maine Marriage) got the rethugs way you can kiss a public option bye.

[kenny blankenship]

6. Loathsomely Predictable and Completely False. PEOPLE PUNISH FAILURE

When a party cannot or will not implement its ideas, but instead muddles around in the middle, splitting the difference with its opposition, then those ideas become unclear to the voters, and they cannot work since they have been polluted by measures desired by those WHO IN FACT WISH THEM TO FAIL. It's bad enough having Republicans around who all wish the Democrats' policies to fail. But we are also afflicted with Republicans inside our party called blue dogs. They agree with the socially repressive, economically rapacious, imperially militarist, so-called "traditional" principles of the Republicans. Republicans oppose us from without, Blue Dogs undermine us from within. What the Republicans can't stop, the Blue Dogs try to poison.

Appeasing the Blue Dog=Failure.

[scot]

36. Voters don't punish failure when they didn't want the goal to

begin with. Like it or not, this is going to make many swing-district dems think twice about voting for health reform or climate legislation. They would rather face re-election saying they voted against something unpopular in their districts than go down swinging. Re-election first, principles second.

[Jackpine Radical]

7. If Dems lose, Republicans win. Duh.

Sounds like the Blue Dorks admit that they're Republicans with this statement.

[IndianaGreen]

8. Time to borrow a page from Sarah Palin

and bolt from a party of appeasers. The two party system has failed the American people!

[sinkingfeeling]

10. Where was the anger over the recently passed $640+ billion defense bill for 2010?

Why does no one express displeasure about constant war and the expense of Empire?

[villager]

13. Oh, that's "radical" anger. Only reactionary/rightwing "anger" is allowed to be dicussed

and accommodated....

[truthisfreedom]

11. And lucky for us this will never happen.

Blue dogs are finished. Period. Had their dog day. It's over now.

[ck4829]

12. This is the Blue Dogs excuse to ally even further with Republicans

[saigon68]

25. Why does FUCK FACE Joementum Limpmann be allowed to

Be a committee chair?

And spout his bullshit with McLame and Racist lindsay graham?

[OHdem10]

14. I disagree and someday I hope to be proven correct.

The real reason is the Democrats on the Hill permitted the
GOP to smear Stimulus. Smear the HIR and let the GOP define
HIR.

The only message out of the Hill was a negative one.
Democrats fighting each other.

If the Democrats had been on the ball and had come out
fighting back, they would have been seen as strong and
knowing what they are talking about.

Instead, they left everything for Obama to explain and
he did not want to take a stand.

This is the reason the GOP will win --if they win.

[bemildred]

15. It's all about who runs the party, governing is only a secondary consideration. nt

[No Elephants]

21. Governing? We don't need no stinkin' governing!

Republicans always claim that the Constitution was set up to prevent the federal government from getting much done--and that is a good thing.

If that is true, I'd like to know why we are paying so many legislators and their staffs and their office expenses, etc.

[No Elephants]

16. Riiiight. It will have nothing to do with a disaffected base, the debacle to date

Congress has been making of health care, thanks in no small part to the Blue Dogs, etc. None of that will be the issue. The REAL issue is we need more Purple Snakes.

Geebus! Run as a Republican, then, asshat.

On edit: And take Lieberman, Specter and the horse you all rode in with you. And your little dog, too.

[Roland99]

17. Only a very long-term series of psychiatric sessions can dent denial that deep!!

[DebbieCDC]

22. This is about the biggest load of crap I've ever heard

Why should I be surprised, coming from the mouth of a Blue Dog

[primavera]

23. Sounds like a motive to me

No wonder they're doing their best to sabotage their party and the American people.

[Vehl]

24. i just cant believe this!!

:grr:

[Doctor_J]

26. Sounds like he's hoping for a FAIL

no wonder they let him on Fox "News"

[Cha]

27. Not if the dems were blue dogs..more

stupid shit rhetoric from the very clueless bd.

[dflprincess]

28. Wrong

To begin with, elections in odd numbered years usually aren't a good indication of anything. They tend to have much lower turnout (for both parties) - even when a statewide race is involved.

Secondly, if the Democrats lose this year or, more to the point, in 2010 it would be a good idea to examine who voted. It would be my guess that major losses will mean progressives stayed home or voted third party - not that a huge number of voters suddenly swung to the Republicans. And if that happens it will be because of the damn centrists.

[depakid]

30. In reality what it means is that the Republicrats in districts with the smallest swings will lose

their seats- particularly if they continue to behave as they have been- by obstructing and watering down popular legislation that might help ordinary Americans and weakening their own party and positions in the process.

In that sense- good riddance.

[mr_liberal]

31. Agreed.

Democrats lost independents tonight because democrats in Washington DC went too far to the left, specifically because of spending (the stimulus) and health care.

Its not entirely Obamas fault, its that Democrats in the Congress are pushing him further left than he'd like. For instance, he wants a trigger while the Dem Congress wants an opt out.

Ironically, this is good news for the Dem party. Blue dogs and Obama can convince the party now to tact back to the center. They can pass a modest health bill (without a public option) and then do ok in 2010 and set themselves up to win again in 2012.

Good news tonight, ironically.

[beltanefauve]

33. Are you sure you're

posting in the right forum?

[mr_liberal]

35. No, I'm not sure.

Because you can try to talk sense to people here to till you're blue in the face and it doesn't help lol. I keep trying though.

[w4rma]

43. Are you capable of accepting "sense", too? I realize you really want to give it out. (nt)

[Zhade]

39. Your username is a lie.

NT!

[Jax]

40. You are not liberal

at all. Read your posts.....

[dflprincess]

41. Wrong.

Democrats lost because progressives stayed home. This appears to be especially true in Virginia where I understand the Democratic candidate ran spouting Republican values. Proving Harry Truman's theory that votes will always pick the real Republican over a Democratic who sounds like one.

Poll after poll shows that most Americans want a public option and a good percentage of that group wanst single payer. If Democrats don't move to the left and produce some real reform in health care and financial regulation more people will stay home in 2010 because there just is no point in continuing to vote for the lesser evil when the lesser evil is just as willing to sell you out.

[Hansel]

44. No, they lost because the left is not motivated because Obama...

has not exactly danced with the ones who brought him. The left is sick and tired of being taken for granted. Obama has turned his back on them thinking they are in the bag. He shows little respect or regard for them or way they elected him.

If the Democrats fall for the "tack to the center right" crap that they do every time, they will cede their power to the Republicans who will in turn spend us into a collapse which has been their objective all the time. They want to get rid of entitlement programs and have telegraphed that for 40 years now.

Obama is already over the center line to the right and needs to pull back to the center left. We are in a crisis. There's no room for the mealy mouthed crap about "we can't spend any money" garbage. If we can't, then all of the people saying so need to explain in a VERY LOUD voice why we can afford to keep paying for two jackass wars and excessive amounts no bid contractors.

If Obama did anything that really made the base of his party feel he's fighting for them, the enthusiasm from the 2008 election would still be going. But he has gone along with the idea that being hit from the left made him look more centrist. Well, it also makes those people stay home when you are using them for the purpose of saying "look, at least I'm not a crazy Liberal like them" in order to gain support from the right. Slapping your supporters in the face is not a good strategy.

It's not the spending, it's the tacit rejection of the base of the party by allowing Rahm Emanuel to leak out messages to the left that they do not matter. That they should shut up. That they don't warrant representation (the same message they get from the right and MSM). That they are a hindrance to working with the right. That they would rather cater to Joe Lieberman who campaigned against him, than to give a sh*t about the people who worked their asses off and gave all their money to get him elected.

The enthusiasm has waned because he didn't overturn all of Bush's executive orders, he's not getting out of Iraq at the speed he said he would, he's stalling on DADT, he has been protecting the previous administration from very well deserved prosecution, he is not pushing the Democrats in Congress to get things done, he allows Lieberman to run all over him, he looks like he can't make a decision or lead his party. He didn't fire McCrystle for his very public insubordination of his Commander in Chief. He's allowing some Repuke DA in California go after medical marijuana even after Eric Holder said to stop doing it.

He claims to want input from everyone, but ignores those on the left while kissing the asses of those on the right even though he knows full well they are not going to vote on his side. He doesn't learn the Republicans have taught him about what they think of him holding his hand out to them. The lesson he missed: They will spit on it and walk away.

He needs to start fighting back. I am one of the last holdouts, but the man needs to quit pretending everyone is like him. They are not. Sometimes people need to be smacked in the face before they wake up. It's time for Obama to do some smacking of all Republicans and Blue Dogs while he's still fairly popular. He needs to yank the rug out from under Lieberman and strip him of his chairmanship. He's made Obama look like a fool over and over again. Lieberman has no respect for him and Lieberman is one of the most hated persons on the left. Yet Lieberman gets more regard from him. It's really appalling.

He was too timid on spending money to keep this country from collapsing because he let the Republicans crap all over the bill before it was passed without any of them voting for it. It should have been much larger and far less on the tax reduction side. Their input was for the purpose of making it too weak to work and everyone knew that except him and the Blue Dogs.

He should have come down MUCH HARDER on the banks and made reinstating regulations a priority. He should have redirected the TARP money to home owners who were losing their homes instead of giving it to the banks. He should have directed the money to healthier and/or smaller banks with strings attached to get the money to small businesses and the people who will spend it.

He also needs to give the speech to the Teabaggers that if they don't want their kids paying for the deficit, which was caused by Bush's tax cuts and an illegal war, then they need to get their pocket books out and pay a little more now so their kids don't have to pay a hell of a lot more later. Tell them to "stop whining and get a mop". Afterall, they helped to create this mess by electing Bush for a 2nd term because they were too busy on their knees peeing their panks over the terrorists to realize that Bush was destroying this country. They helped to make the mess so they should help clean it up.

He needs to get stronger, louder, and tougher and do it fast. And the last thing he needs to do is tack to the right.

[Arkana]

47. Free Republic == thataway.

Everything in your post is hilariously wrong and you should hit the poli sci books a bit harder.

[iamthebandfanman]

32. who needs the republican spin machine

when we have our own right here in the party!

[harun]

37. Pathetic. By that logic they should be more Progressive, seeing how the electorate

destroyed the Republicans in 2008. But the BD's are still thinking they need to play Conservative.

[Jax]

42. "centrist" democrats ARE oxymorans

Corporate sell out right wing Dumbasses for the Leisure Class.

[Hansel]

45. Why do these morons always learn the wrong lesson?

They must hate being in a majority party.

[bemildred]

48. They get paid to learn the wrong lesson. nt

[Arkana]

46. Altmire's a moron.

[unkachuck]

49. "...Blue Dog Democrats might see their position strengthened..."

....you think so? It was the young and ethnics that didn't vote....why?....they were waiting for change to arrive; change the Blue Dogs have been lifting their collective legs and pissing on....

....if we don't move further too the Left quickly, we're going to have major losses in 2010, maybe even Congress....that's the lesson the needs to learned....does losing in 2010 really matter to corporate Dems? I wonder....

....and history has shown, when an average voter is given a choice between a republican-lite Dem and a real republican they'll choose the real republican every time....are you listening Harry? Nancy?

....move Right, and say goodbye....but that's ok, I'm tough, I can take it, I did 8 years under bush....