General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSoylent Brice
(8,308 posts)RKP5637
(67,032 posts)bike man
(620 posts)do.
At the end of that period, we reelect most of one entire group, and the larger part of one third of the other group.
And then for two years we complain about what they do or do not do.
They know that we (the voters) tend to vote for 'the name you know', so they don't really worry about job security. They have it, and they know it.
We keep most of them for an entire career, complaining about them during that entire career.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)The incumbents have used their positions to insulate themselves from challenges
and protect their Money Machine.
When the Democratic voters of Arkansas have had enough of DINO Blanche Lincoln's
obstruction in The Senate, guess who came charging in at the last minute to rescue her failing Democratic Primary campaign?
"The Arkansas primary fight illuminates some unpleasant though vital truths about the Democratic establishment "
Ordinarily, when Party leaders support horrible incumbents in primaries, they use the electability excuse: this is a conservative state, the incumbent has the best chance to win, and the progressive challenger is out-of-step with voters. That excuse is clearly unavailable here.[font size=3] As Public Policy Polling explained yesterday, Lincoln has virtually no chance of winning in November against GOP challenger John Boozman.[/font] And while it would have also been difficult for Halter to beat Boozman, polls consistently showed that he had a better chance than Lincoln did. Thats unsurprising, given how much better non-Washington candidates are doing in this incumbent-hating climate than long-term Washington insiders. And its rather difficult to claim that Halter is out-of-step with Arkansas given that they elected him their Lt. Governor. Whatever the reasons Washington Democrats had for supporting the deeply unpopular Lincoln, it had nothing whatsoever to do with electability.
What happened in this race also gives the lie to the insufferable excuse weve been hearing for the last 18 months from countless Obama defenders: namely, [font size=3]if the Senate doesnt have 60 votes to pass good legislation, its not Obamas fault because he has no leverage over these conservative Senators. It was always obvious what an absurd joke that claim was; the very idea of The Impotent, Helpless President, presiding over a vast government and party apparatus, was laughable. But now, in light of Arkansas, nobody should ever be willing to utter that again with a straight face. [/font] Back when Lincoln was threatening to filibuster health care if it included a public option, the White House could obviously have said to her: if you dont support a public option, not only will we not support your re-election bid, but well support a primary challenger against you. Obamas support for Lincoln did not merely help; it was arguably decisive, as The Washington Post documented today:"
<much more>
http://www.salon.com/2010/06/10/lincoln_6/
"Its a BIG CLUB,
and you ain't in it!" --George Carlin
bike man
(620 posts)some of the state legislatures.
Such a program is in place, and is celebrated every two years. Incumbents have a retention success rate (of those who seek reelection) of about 90%, or so I've read. And that is ENTIRELY due to the number of votes they receive. So, yes, the voters should get the blame.
When an individual or small group of legislators are being talked about as being under-performers, one can hear/read cries of "Well, MINE is one of the good ones."
Well, it just isn't so. They are all weasels. If they are not weasels when elected to fill the small number of vacancies, they are soon infected with weaselry.
"We the people" historically vote for 'the name you know', just because it is familiar. "The Distinguished Gentleman", a movie w/ Eddie Murphy, shows this nicely.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)What I AM pointing out is that the mechanics of removing a "weasel" is more difficult than you know.
Have YOU ever tried to remove a "weasel"?
We tried in the Arkansas Democratic Primary, 2010.
(I can cite other Primary races where the challengers were Bitch Slapped by the Democratic Party, but Arkansas 2010 is the most transparent).
Go back and READ my post above.
All politics is local?
Not when you have to fight the White House, the DNC, the DSCC, and all the other national incumbent protection organizations that show up in your district to Protect their Scam.