Blue America Breaks from More and Better Democrats

by: Matt Stoller

Wed May 21, 2008 at 16:41


Blue America PAC has traditionally helped progressive Democrats get elected, but today, they launched a serious campaign aimed at hurting a freshman conservative Blue Dog Democrat, Chris Carney.  It is a very significant development.

A major new ad campaign aimed at freshman Democratic Rep. Chris Carney of Pennsylvania will begin this week. The campaign -- funded by donations from readers of several blogs -- will swamp Carney's Northeastern Pennsylvania district with a coordinated series of ads on television stations and top-rated radio programs, full-page ads in six out of seven of the largest newspapers in Carney's district, and strategically placed billboards on major roads...

Carney is a so-called "Blue Dog" Democrat who continuously sides with the Bush administration and supports its most radical policies. In addition to his leading role in demanding warrantless eavesdropping and telecom amnesty, he has repeatedly voted against timetables to end the war in Iraq. He is a close associate of Douglas Feith, with whom he worked on pre-war "intelligence" at the Rumsfeld Pentagon, and Carney still claims that "there were links between Iraq and Al Qaeda." Unsurprisingly, then, Carney has spoken out against Congressional investigations into those responsible for pre-war intelligence "failures" (which would include himself and Feith), calling such investigations a "major distraction."

It is an extremely vicious and effective series of ads, accusing Carney of helping Bush and his campaign contributors to institute a Communist Russia and China-like warrantless wiretapping program.

Carney is a reprehensible politician and he will lose in 2010.  He voted against a hate crimes bill he had promised to support in his 2006 campaign, so he is a bad faith operator.  Eventually, his district is going to decide that they'd rather have the real thing, and put a Republican in his place.  The question here is whether an aggressive critique of a vulnerable freshman Democrat six months before an election, a campaign clearly designed to help Carney lose the seat this year or in 2010, is wise.  With FISA being debated and Pelosi pushing aggressively for a 'compromise' with the White House, pressed by Blue Dogs like Carney, there's an open question about how valuable these kinds of Democrats really are.

What do you think?  

Matt Stoller :: Blue America Breaks from More and Better Democrats

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Blue America Breaks from More and Better Democrats | 40 comments
I think that somebody that doesn't share my values is bad enough. (4.00 / 3)
but when it's somebody who got to where they are because of work I did... and totally rebuked everything they are supposed to stand for... then... it's personal.
I think this is terrible, (4.00 / 4)
just terrible. We should never attack Democrats when they're acting like Republicans. The (D) should immunize them against any criticism from the left, even as they promote policies that undermine our country.

Also, I'm gonna contribute. This is the link I found: http://www.actblue.com/entity/...

When you're in the minority, you fight for 'more'. When you're in the majority, you fight for better.

I can't think of a more effective way to put the Bush Dogs on notice.

Agreed (4.00 / 2)
My initial response was "Ouch", but I'm actually pretty fine with it.  We're in no danger of losing the majority and it's not like he was even voting with the Democrats on anything important anyway.  Put a Republican in there for a term, then you've got two years to find a solid, progressive challenger for 2010.

Sounds good to me.  I think we're finally going to get over the whole learned helplessness thing.

[ Parent ]
Yeah, nothing at all.... (0.00 / 0)
"and it's not like he was even voting with the Democrats on anything important anyway"

Like the employee free choice act, the minimum wage, government negotiating for prescription drugs, etc....

Nope, nothing important at all.

I'm all for putting pressure on these guys. But in some districts we need to be careful about how far we take this. Can we at least get some major progressive legislation passed with a Democratic president before we go throwing people out of office over telecom immunity?

 

[ Parent ]
Yeah, 'cause who needs the 4th amendment anyway? (4.00 / 5)
I mean, really.  We still got a few others.
[ Parent ]
I said I was for pressure (0.00 / 0)
Just not for cutting off our nose to spite our face. If the ad just wants to put7  pressure on Carney to vote the right way (by having people call him) then great, let's do it.

But throwing out Carney in this district in central PA? Sorry, not buying that line.

But hey, Ron Paul voted against the war and probably supports telecom immunity so I guess we should put him up as our candidate right? After all, social security, the minimum wage, the right to organize, and the endangered species act aren't in the constitution, therefore they're not worth a damn by that logic.

[ Parent ]
false choice (0.00 / 0)
I?m sorry.  Calling is useful to a point, but there has to be some threat of action behind it or otherwise it has no impact.  I?m well aware that central PA is not NYC or SF, but I just don?t buy that our choice is between either a Republican or a Democrat who accepts money from Blue America saying that he will do certain things and then turns around and does the opposite.

And those other things you list?  I would argue they?re in the Constitution too, but that?s a whole other, and much longer, discussion.

[ Parent ]
And so would I (0.00 / 0)
"And those other things you list?  I would argue they?re in the Constitution too, but that?s a whole other, and much longer, discussion."

So then what parts of the constitution do we throw away by defeating a Democrat in a conservative district and replacing him with a conservative republican?

[ Parent ]
Of course (4.00 / 2)
it is wise.

We are looking at picking up dozens of new seats and we do not need to worry about vulnerable seats for Democrats that vote for violating our rights with impunity.  

The object is to get Carney to vote correctly though, not to make him lose.  

But even if it does make him lose... (0.00 / 0)
...what's the message the conservative Dems take from it?  Will it be "we have to destroy the netroots," or "we better think long and hard before we piss these people off"?

And if he wins after remaining combative with the blogs, does that make Blue America look weak?

If he doesn't lose this cycle, he'll have weathered with criticism from the Left and Blue America may appear weakened in future campaigns.  If he does lose, Blue America PAC will have made an example of him that will be impossible for DCCC and the Blue Dog Caucus to ignore.  If that's a fight B.A. PAC is ready to have, then this is the right call.  If they think they aren't able to hold the high ground in a direct intra-party fight with a national committee and about fifty members of Congress, it might not be the best tactic.

I don't think they can temper this one or pull back from the attack: now that the fusillade has begun, I don't think it can be stopped until someone's lying in the smoldering wreckage of a sinking ship (I watched "Master and Commander" last night, and it's been killing my metaphors all day).  

Yeah I blog.

[ Parent ]
I think it's silly. (4.00 / 3)
Putting pressure on him to moderate his stances and to acknowledge the failings of his intelligence group? Good.

But putting him out of office? Highly stupid. The guy has a 100% labor rating, an 85% environment rating, and a 93% rating on health care. You think we'd get a republican anywhere near that?

Unless they have some REALLY long-term plan where they get Carney defeated in 2010 and then the redrawn PA map in 2011 (after losing one or 2 seats) makes a more democratic district (unlikely since all of central PA is pretty conservative) then  they are setting up a great circular firing squad.

I agree (4.00 / 1)
Spite is fun. Who doesn't enjoy spite? But bear in mind this is a zero-sum allocation of resources. Money being used to go after Carney is money that's not being used on behalf of the Darcy Burners of the world. If you want to let Carney twist in the wind, fine. Don't give him money, and he'll probably be gone soon enough anyway, like Matt says. But I don't see why targeting him should be a priority.
[ Parent ]
A show across the bow. (4.00 / 2)
This isn't about Carney.
[ Parent ]
Tend to Agree (4.00 / 1)
I don't know a lot about Carney but I don't like going after Dems unless they end up being like Lieberman (and I was initially resistant to that idea).  You can't be a majority, 50 state party and not allow diversity of views.  See where driving out moderate Repubs has gotten the GOP.  They are on the verge of being a regional, Southern party.  I am not particularly interested in repeating that mistake on the left.
[ Parent ]
I don't see this as a "break" at all... (4.00 / 1)
...from the "more and better democrats" strategy.  As you allude to in the last sentence, what good is he if he's consistently undercutting progressive efforts in the House?

Besides, I don't see an ad like this actually pushing him out of office, especially in a year when Democrats have such momentum.  If anything, I see it as a warning shot specifically directing Carney to reconsider his support of retroactive immunity.

This is a good, aggressive ad.  More, please.

ditto (4.00 / 2)
My thoughts exactly.

Democrats who vote with this admin need to be warned - and if that fails - ousted!

Lynn

[ Parent ]
It seems like (4.00 / 2)
You can't really call it "more and better Democrats" unless at some point you act on the "better Democrats" part of the equation, right?
[ Parent ]
"Better" (4.00 / 1)
I think the usual assumption is that "better" is achieved through primary challenges -- Donna Edwards, for example.
[ Parent ]
Not sure I agree (0.00 / 0)
If you want 'more and better' dems, you need 'more and better' voters.  Get more voters thinking like good dems and you will get better dems in office.  Just like most dems in conservative districts, they are going to vote conservatively on some issues, if not because they believe it, then because they have to to keep their seat.  I don't like the fact that the guy broke his word, but you better make sure there is someone better, who can win, before you try to toss him out.  
[ Parent ]
Carney (4.00 / 2)
deserves it.  He is in a class of himself in lying to progressives for our support, money and time.  If he wins, the lesson to others might be that you can win on lies to progressives and become immune.    
I'm of mixed mind (0.00 / 0)
If this was during the primary I'd be 100% for it.  As it is, I have very mixed feelings.  It's strange to put out a political ad that you ultimately hope doesn't work in terms of who wins.

But I love the fact there are consequences for his actions.

I was about to say I'm against this, but then looked at the ad again.  It doesn't tell anyone to vote against Carney, only to call him to vote a certain way.

I'll go ahead and say this is a good thing, but reserve the right to change my mind based on results of multiple cases like this.

The Newspaper Ads Are Pretty Damn Good, Too: (4.00 / 5)
JPEG here.

This isn't just about Carney.  It's obviously a warning shot aimed at dozens of others of like mind.  And I think it's well-timed for pushing back against the Telco amnesty effort.  It says, "We don't even need to have a candidate running to shine a spotlight on you. You take the job, you're accountable for job."

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

Justice by example (4.00 / 3)
I think it is a great idea. It tells Pelosi that she can't play passive-aggressive with netroots.

This is about the constitution.

Exactly what we need - one less, rest better (4.00 / 3)
It's perfect use of our resources.

Target one bad actor inside the ranks.  Let the others know that they need to shape up or we might target them next.

Highly effective strategy.  If losing this one seat splits four others out of the Bush Dog voting bloc, it's a complete victory.

The senate is a little trickier.  Unfortunately Lieberman won as independent, but if CT had a sore-lieberman law it would have been very effective challenge.

This isn't any more about Carney (4.00 / 2)
Then Donna was about defeating Wynn.

It's about emphasizing the BETTER and winning the FISA fight. I think it is a fantastic campaign that they are doing.

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power

"communist china"--right frame for FISA argument? (4.00 / 1)
I like the idea of a campaign like these insofar as it can sway these Democrats to vote more with the democrats, not parrot republican talking points, create accountability, etc. And I completely agree that the real message of this ad is not specific to Carney but rather to all right-wing democrats who have been triangulating their way in the opposite direction from the activist base who helps them get and stay elected.

That said, I wonder if anyone else had reservations about the way the ad attacks FISA specifically for taking our freedoms away "like russia and communist china" (cue scary Red asiatic imagery--even the monopoly card is repainted red). I imagine this may be an effective line of argument but I wonder whether it's the best frame long term, I mean for standing against the law-breaking and civil-liberty shattering.

The left versus "commie" rightwingers is surely better than the right versus "commie" leftwingers but I worry that perpetuating the smear framing by stirring the anti-communist pot may do as much harm as good as we try to craft a progressive, foreign policy in the future.

I'm not defending Russia's or China's policies past or present by any stretch but I just wondered if anyone else had similar reaction to the particular wording in the ad...

Actually, I like that part (4.00 / 2)
There are huge problems with Russia and China.  I think the side effect of this ad can be the opposite you site; it gives liberal reasons to take issue with these countries.  If we can frame the problem with much of the world is they are turning away from our liberal freedoms, so much the better.

I'd like to see a strong push against Islamic fundamentalists as well, which leaves the implication that our own fundamentalists may be taking us in the same direction.

[ Parent ]
Carrot *and* Stick (0.00 / 0)
If you want real power inside the Democratic party, you can't just help get people elected, you have to be able to get them unelected as well.  That's how the GOP enforces such tight party discipline and forces the Democrats to capitulate (because the Dems will break ranks, and the GOP won't, so it's the GOP agenda that controls).  If they only need you when they run the first time, they have no reason to listen to you once they are in office.

So if you want to push a progressive agenda, you've got to get "progressive" office-holders in place from any districts they can be elected from.  If a candidate is nominally in your party, but votes against your goals, and is in a district where you can expect to get someone better through the general, then clear the path.  Consider it a dry run for 2010.

You have to accept Blue Dogs from MS or LA, where a progressive could never win.  But where they can be dumped without giving the seat to the GOP, they should be.

Right (0.00 / 0)
"You have to accept Blue Dogs from MS or LA, where a progressive could never win.  But where they can be dumped without giving the seat to the GOP, they should be."

Right. And Lewisburg, PA is a hell of a lot closer to LA or MS than it is to Montgomery Co., Md sad to say. So we should put pressure on Carney and get his constituents to call him up and tell him to vote the right way. But let's cut out the "kick the bums out" talk in areas that we aren't likely to get something better and will be highly likely to get something much much worse.

[ Parent ]
Interesting (0.00 / 0)
Then it may be just an excercise in demonstrating power, trying to put a little fear in the Blue Dogs.
[ Parent ]
Smart Guy (0.00 / 0)
Watch what happens next
[ Parent ]
Blue Dog vs. Bush Dog (4.00 / 2)
Even a blue dog shouldn't be voting agaist the freedoms that our troops are supposedly dying to protect.

It should be pretty darned easy to explain, even to folks in Mississippi.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
You Say Blue Dog, I say DINO (4.00 / 1)
Down here in the Sunshine State of Florida we are shackled with two Blue Dogs:  Allen Boyd (D-FL,Dist. #2) and Tim Mahoney (D-FL, Dist. #16) (Mark Foley's old seat). Allen is particularly odious as he voted for the 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention And Consumer Protection Act Of 2005.  Matt asks what do we think?  Here's the deal with Blue Dogs that goes further than having them contribute to the working majority for the Democrats.   For example, both Mahoney and Boyd, led by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) are headed for Afghanistan to check on the progress eradicating poppy crops.  The disconnect here is stunning.  I find it hard to believe these two idiots, in all probability, fail to see the absurdity of their "fact finding" tour.  With rational thinking inversely proportional to their testosterone quotient validated by the continued votes to fund the war in Iraq they can't seem to connect the fact those damned poppy fields wouldn't be there in the first place as a major funding source for regional warlords had we taken the full brunt of our military to Afghanistan to bring Bin Laden to justince and eradicate the enablers of Al Queda - the Taliban.  Instead, we've got two bozo's headed over the personally "assess" the situation on the ground that even a 10th grade geography student would be able to figure out once presented with the facts.

Thier continued votes enabling an insurgency to continue destablizaiton of the region at the expense of American security, American and Iraqi civilian blood, and the depletion of our treasury here at home at the expense of critical government services that include homeland security make thier designation as "Democrats" unpalatable on any level.  This faustian pact liberal/progessives make with these blowholes come at the expense of our values representing who we are and the American people we want to represent.

There Matt, that's what I think.  What we need is an effective dog catcher in the guise of credible liberal/progresive candidates to round them up and euthanize their presence, via the primary system, from the Democratic party body politic.  And not soon enough.

TrumanDem

Truman's Conscience

[ Parent ]
I'm All For It, But... (0.00 / 0)
First crawl. Then walk. Then fly.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
[ Parent ]
Good Idea (4.00 / 1)
If you want to get rid of bad Democrats, you wound them to make them vulnerable and encourage challenges.  You don't sit back and promise money if anyone will just rise up and run against him.  This is the progressive equivalent of the Club for Growth.

Timing-wise, this might be better off being run either 12 months ago or 12 months from now.

Target-wise, I would like to see this type of expenditure run against someone with more seniority.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

Is Anybody Running Against Carney? (0.00 / 0)
Democrat or Republican?  I hope the Republican isn't too far off the wingnut deep end.

An ad like this will sure get noticed and get talked about amongst congressionals and thier staffers.  That is good.  It would be nice if the district was a bit more progressive.  Carney does deserve some credit, he has not strangled anybody in recent months.  I'd probably put a higher priority on helping Leslie Byrne in Virginia -- that primary is soon -- but I guess TV is a lot cheaper in Scranton than in DC.

He has a Republican opponent (0.00 / 0)
Chris Hackett.  I don't know anything about him.  Carney ran unopposed in the primary but is supposed to have a tough re-election campaign ahead of him in which SEUI plans on tossing around a decent amount of money.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both
[ Parent ]
WHOO-HOO!! (0.00 / 0)
Waffling on FISA is not just a "minor issue". Its representative of the whole twisted, Bush-enabling shebang. It's time for these suckers to enter a period of consequences. Ready the guns!!!
Cheryl Crist will be a primary opponent (4.00 / 2)
for Brian Baird in WA C.D. 03.  So - for the third time this week, I say that y'all should support her, both in blogs and financially.  At least go look at her web site.

If you can help to run ads against Carney, post-primary; then you should be able to help Cheryl pre-primary.

By the way - did I mention that I'm running for president?

Carney weakens the brand (0.00 / 0)
Dems like Chris Carney retard re-alignment - in their desire to be slightly less reprehensible Republicans, they drive away the voters we need to bring into the system, they make us look weak and they screw with the Overton window.

Voting for the minimum wage is good, but it's not enough and frankly we can get Republicans who will vote for things like that. Voting against the Constitution and for telecoms isn't popular anywhere.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

Blue America Breaks from More and Better Democrats | 40 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox