cool (0.00 / 1)

but primarying politicians who actually are voting their district is not worth it. It's good to get Dems to worry about their left flank too though.

---

by: odnarbssagib @ Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 04:11:30 AM UTC

Provide examples of "voting their district" (4.00 / 4)

You often talk in anti-progressive generalized abstractions quite a bit. I'd like to see some examples of where Democrats broke with their own districts in order to stay with their party.

About the only example I can think of is TARP. Otherwise, Democrats tend to pursue such popular, low-hanging legislation that it is supported by a majoirty in around 400 of 435 districts.

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 04:21:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Blue Dog districts (4.00 / 2)

Blue Dog voting and Blue Dog districts are hardly cohesive or tightly drawn.  Blue Dog voting ranges from Gene Taylor (Progressive Punch career score of 53.73) to Michael Arcuri (93.79).  The range od 40.06 points is nearly twice the range of the Republican Party (23.33 points).  If Walt Minnick joins, the spread becomes 50 points.

While Taylor fits his district like a glove, the agenda of the Blue Digs and individual voting records are terrible fits in many cases.  Here are PP career scores and the Obama % for their district for a number of Blue Dogs:

David Scott  GA-13   83.39   71%
Joe Baca CA-43   85.96   68%
Melissa Bean IL-8  79.62  57%  (big mouth, too)
Leonard Boswell  IA-3  74.71  54%
Jim Cooper  TN-5  76.33   56% (leader of the Dogs)
Jane Harman  CA-36  80.28   64%
Patrick Murphy  PA-8  88.58  54% (why a Dog?)
Adam Schiff  CA-29  89.13   68%  (why a Dog?)
Loretta Sanchez  CA-47   86.93  60%
Mike Thompson  CA-11  86.87  86.87   66%

---

by: David Kowalski @ Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 07:14:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for that great info. (0.00 / 0)

I think it just boils down to attention seeing like that prick Heath Schuler.  Like children, really.

For some reason, it seems that Obama has some pathological and deep-seated psychological need for Republicans to like him.  Seriously.  It's weird.

---

by: avenged savant @ Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 14:43:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Primaries work (0.00 / 0)

Lipinski has actually sponsored some good amendments this session. I haven't delved deeply enough into the nuts and bolts to see whether he's had a road to Damascus moment, but there's been progress at least.

I think we need several more primaries for 2010. Jim Cooper should be top of the list. I'd also include Bobby Bright (because we need to show that there are consequences for being a dickhead above and beyond the call of duty). Other applicants based on results from their districts and their behaviour over the next year or so.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

---

by: Englishlefty @ Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 14:53:01 PM UTC

Cooper is perhaps more dangerous from INSIDE (0.00 / 0)

the party than ANY single GOP member of the House.  He's a piece of shit of the first magnitude.

For some reason, it seems that Obama has some pathological and deep-seated psychological need for Republicans to like him.  Seriously.  It's weird.

---

by: avenged savant @ Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 17:41:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Has anyone done analysis? (0.00 / 0)

Guys, I'm too lazy to use Teh Google (plus, I'm supposed to be working right now, oops) -- has someone done an analysis of Blue Dogs in blue districts?  Are we getting organized in terms of primary challenges?  What's been done on this front?

Republicans can't fix our country; they're too busy saddlebacking.

---

by: Ms Bluezone @ Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 14:54:16 PM UTC