I'm so scared - what would happen if Reid & Pelosi had control!

[LynneSin]

:scared:

I mean god forbid we fight our asses off to get more democrats than republicans elected and we have *gasp* Harry Reid running the senate and *shock* Nancy Pelosi running the house.

*EEP* It scares me to think that Patrick Leahy would be running the judiciary committee and we could actually OUTNUMBER the republicans. SOmeone hold me, I don't think I could live in a world like that :scared:

I'm frighten, someone hold me. I'm so fricking out of control I'm confessing that I, LynneSin, am voting for a DLCer Democrat in Nov2006 just so I could see what crazy thing those 2 nutjobs like Reid & Pelosi could actually do if given the power to control the flow of legislation.

:scared:

(btw, yes, Tom Carper is not only DLC but he's vice-chair for the SEnate DLCers. And hell yes I'm voting for him)

[LostinVA]

1. I agree, Lynee... it is scarey...

Especially since I'll vote for DLCers, too... just to see what scary stuff happens!!!

[400Years]

2. Presenting a false choice is not really addressing anything

I have never ever seen anybody say they would not vote for the democratic candidate if after the primaries that is the only choice available. However, until then there is no reason people should not work to get the most progressive and best candidates possible on the ballot.

[LynneSin]

3. Trust me, do the search

I respect that no one wants to vote for a DLC candidate in the primaries and might even help push their non-DLC candidates here on the board.

But when the primaries are overwith then it's time to get on board and fight for that majority.

To be honest, this is for about a dozen DLC whiners in here who think somehow the earth will stop rotating if they actually vote for someone in the DLC.

[Douglas Carpenter]

5. unfortunately there have been a number ( a small but loud minority)

who have said that they would not vote even in the general election for any Democrat who did not pass their test.

I totally agree that we should work to win primaries for the most progressive candidates. I am reminded of a story I heard about the late Sen. Al Gore Sr. Someone once said to him that he would vote for Satan himself if he was a Democrat. The old Senator smiled and said, "Yes, but not in the primaries".

p.s. I just had a strange thought. Should Satan be capitalized? I suppose it is only fair since God is.:freak:

[LynneSin]

9. You know something, I know I won't change those people's mind

but what I don't want happening is them getting free reign over the forum that somehow they are right with how to vote for our moderate democrats. They aren't.

I think most people can agree with these simple rules:

If you don't like a candidate get a beter candidate
Give of yourself as much as possible to help get that candidate a victory in the primaries
If they don't win then hold your nose and vote for the democrat. Realize that you're still doing it for the great good which is getting Reid & Pelosi the majority position (yes, I know she would be speaker, just quicker to type 'majority position').

If someone feels they can't do that then by all means leave the democratic party and go 3rd party. But don't think that the rest of us here are that lame of a democrat that we won't at least try and also consider the bigger picture!

[MrBenchley]

7. You've never seen that? Really?

I sure have....they're pretty common actually.

[400Years]

16. I'm talking other than your pretensions of persecution

I know, I know the evil liberals are trying to take your glorious war away from you.

[LynneSin]

17. I know MrBenchley, I"ve had beers with MrBenchley and I know this

he's no war supporter.

I'd go to my grave defending him.

It's simple math: When R>D then there will be no end to the war. When D>R then there will be debate about ending the war and hopefully all of us who are anti-war will help the democrats get the vote needed to end this war.

As long as there are more of them than us we can't end this war even if every democrat promised to vote for a deadline

[400Years]

18. There is a reason we are in the minority right now

and it's called republican lite, if someone wants a republican they are not gonna vote for a bad facsimile.

[LynneSin]

25. Oh you are so clueless

Ok, first take this out of the presidential race, which was lost because Kerry ran a bad race and Diebold helped Bush.

If Lieberman is 'republican-lite' then why will he win by 60%+ in 2006 when he runs for re-election?

Look at it this way - if the people voting were only those people who were registered and regular participated in an online community or blogsite then you probably have a valid point.

But since we make up such a small percentage of actual voters it brings a sigh of relief to know how absolutely wrong and dumb that statement is.

In reality, the person who is incumbent is probably going to win regardless of party unless there is some outside force greater than the state taking charge. (Diebold, adulterous affair with a staffer (That was in Arkansas) or enormous pouring of money into a state, like in South Dakota).

We assume that we are all powerful here online and yet our all-powerfulness couldn't even get a decent candidate selected in the primaries. We're getting stronger, but we all need to get a grip on reality and realize that we are the fringe. WE're that small group of people are extremely active through online political communties (regardless of party). The rest of the world makes their decisions based on what they see on the news, what they read in the paper and through those damn campaign ads.

In 2000, the democrats had a horrible candidate running against Santorum in the general election. Santorum wasn't popular in the state and should have gone down in flames, but 8 democrats ran in the primaries including multiple candidates in the Pittsburg and Philadelphia region. So with the votes getting split in these two regions a candidate that should have probably finished fifth at best got the nomination. And he had no war chest nor name recognition to run an effective campaign in the state. And then he made a stupid decision that he could win the state by spending no money in the Philadelphia region. Well, any idiot can tell you that democrats will win Philadelphia, but to win the state you need to get a large voter turnout and high enough vote count in the Philly region to counteract the votes against you in the more conservative area. Klink (the dem candidate) did win Philadelphia, but with a much narrower margin needed to help win the state. Sure, some say that Klink was a moderate democrat but in reality I lived in the Philly area and the only ads you saw were of Rick Santorum being all warm and fuzzy. Who knows why, but by November even I thought Rick was warm & fuzzy and Klink was the devil reincarnate (but I still voted for Klink).

Please, do yourself and DU a favor and stop making bad assumptions. I'll take a pro-war, pro-choice, pro-enviornment democrat any day of the week over a pro-war, anti-choice, anti-environment one. And btw, that's Joe Lieberman's voting record. But maybe the democrats will get a candidate to run against Joe in the primaries and a better choice will be offered. We shall see

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LynneSin]

29. Gee, I guess you were on Pluto during the 2004 primaries

I think Clark & Dean both came out and make forceful stands

But if you didn't hear - Kerry got the nomination

[jackbourassa]

30. Lynn I appreciate your post and agree generally with what you write

I understand that you have a lack of choice in the matter. However, if given the opportunity to replace a DLCer with a non-DLCer would you not take the chance?

Second, do you not agree that the DLC are an actively divisive force within the party?

So I agree generally with your statement that given a choice between a DLCer and a Republican, I would rather a DLCer. But given a choice between a DLCer and a non-DLCer, I'm always supporting the latter.

Primaries are beautiful things.

[LynneSin]

32. I have no problems with primaries however

that doesn't necessarily mean I'll jump on board with that particular race.

Example:

Delaware is a Safe-D seat in 2006 because Tom Carper, a DLCer, is very popular. Now say a non-DLC candidate challenges him in the primaries. Personally, I would not get involved because I think if Tom Carper was somehow removed during the primaries, it would make the seat very vulnerable in the general election. Delaware is pretty much split by the canal which divide the state into the Northern part (very liberal) and Southern Part (very conservative). Hell we're probably the only state with a Yankee mentality and a Dixie mentality with that split, which is about equal in population. So knowing that, I'm not about to hand our state over to the republicans. Anyhow, I'm 30 minutes away from Pennsylvania and there are at least 5 races within driving distance (4 house, 1 senate) that are more worthy of my time and money.

The reason for this post isn't to discourage primaries but to discourage this mentality that "I won't vote for a DLCer end of discusion". Hell most of us voted for a DLCer when we voted for John Kerry, a DLC member who isn't that active, in 2004 presidental race.

Fight as you must in the primaries but look at the big picture in the general election. My vote for DLC Tom Carper is to help get a democratic majority and to show my support for Harry Reid as Majority Leader.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

20. dupe

[Writer]

21. Where the @#$% does this come from?

This is just like a Republican saying a Democrat is a terrorist just for supporting the war.

Now a moderate supports the war just because he decides not to get bitchy-mouthed about it?

Putting words in other people's mouths is a very naughty thing to do.

[MrBenchley]

27. The beauty part of our "progressive purists" is

their relentless honesty (snicker)

[MrBenchley]

22. Dupe

[MrBenchley]

23. dupe

[Writer]

24. Where the @#$% does this come from?

This is just like a Republican saying a Democrat is a terrorist just for supporting the war.

Now a moderate supports the war just because he decides not to get bitchy-mouthed about it?

Putting words in other people's mouths is a very naughty thing to do.

[ruggerson]

31. You haven't????

then you haven't been paying attention.

[radio4progressives]

4. Pelosi will end up Speaker of the House in '06 and then President of the

U.S. of A., after impeachment and criminal proceedings of both Bush AND Cheney leading to their resignations - Pelosi then becomes President, but does that make Sen. Reid, Vice President?

I'm unclear how that works.

[LynneSin]

6. Hell as long as Bush & Cheney are gone - who cares

I'm not holding my breath on impeachment, hell I'm not even sure Reid & Pelosi could end the war even if they had the majority.

But I do know this, you can't end a war when the leadership won't even bring the vote to the floor. Frist (or whoever replaces him in 2007) and Hasert will not even contiplate a vote so all of this is mute.

At least if we can get the vote on the floor, then all of us here at DU and across the country can do our part to bring as much pressure feasible to help secure a deadline.

Murtha gave me hope. He showed that someone who was right there behind Bush supporting this war can suddenly see the light and say "I was wrong and they need to come home now". Who knows how many other 'Murthas' are out there. But we'll never know until we get some leadership that'll bring the vote to the floor!

[gratuitous]

8. If the DLCers survive their primaries

I'll donate to, work for, and vote for them, but I'd greatly prefer Democrats who are a little more in line with my way of thinking.

But if the Democrats snare a majority in the House, I anticipate with great relish the ascendancy of Chairman Waxman from California with the power of congressional subpoena.

[LynneSin]

11. oooo, I just got goosebumps on that statement

You make me realize I have to try even harder Chairman Waxman with the power of Congressional subpoena. I'm getting all tingling in my spinal regions!!

TO be honest, you don't even have to work & give money unless that's the only candidate in the area you can support.

Me? I'm fortunately enough here in Delaware that I can give DLCer TOm Carper my vote and then drive 30 minutes north to several hot Pennsylvania house races where my time & money could be of better use!!

[IChing]

39. I will do the same and support them.

California power-base politics are not East Coast politics and the DLC power-base is not here
( ie. advocated Proposition 77, whereas California Democratic party said no on 77) .
I really don't want to hear about california fringe politics either, since we are on the forefront
and leaders of progressive thought and legislation on so many issues.

Waxman wets my whistle also as a chairman with the power of congressional subpoena,
so if I support your Eastern power-base politics you need to support ours.
I may not agree with the DLC but if we get rid of the neo-con republicans and bring them to justice together
then more power to us both fighting this common enemy.

It took the socialist, communist and democratic people of western europe to ban together to oust Hitler and the Fascists.

[woodsprite]

10. Carper will have my vote too.

I like him, he's got alot of good ideas, and he's really a nice guy. I just wish her were a little bit more aggressive with those ideas and assertive.

[LynneSin]

12. You in New Castle - maybe you can come help out in Pennsylvania

DE is such a joke for campaigns - much better opportunites to make a difference right over the border in Pennsylvania!

[MrBenchley]

13. Great post...

If Reid and Pelosi became leaders of Congress, I'm sure they would continue to disappoint and disgust many of our "progressive purists"....

[LynneSin]

14. I know sometimes I'm a broken record with these threads but...

..i'm also not going to let them overrun our forum with their negativity. Fight for the primaries but join the team in the general election. Don't look at the little picture, hell I can't even vote for 99% of the people in DC anyways.

But damn, Chairman Waxman - I never even thought of that but the concept just blows me away!

[MrBenchley]

15. No, I agree....

It's noticeable to me that one never hears from our "purists" what the Progressive Cacus or the Progressive Democrats of America are up to....

[mmonk]

36. Why call us purists?

We prefer leftwing moonbat.

[mmonk]

38. Though I disagree occasionally with Reid and Pelosi,

neither one disgusts me. I really give kudos to Pelosi as of late and have liked Harry's shutdown of the Senate and his work concerning the judicial situation. Surprised? You really shouldn't be as I applaud their ability to fight politically. Still doesn't mean I will gloss over this war and its pretexts or current policy nor Patriot Act reauthorization. I'm happy the Senate was filibustered.

[sandnsea]

26. Recommended

Sometimes you have to look at the trees, sometimes the forest. Even the deadwood is necessary for a healthy forest.

[mmonk]

33. Good for you

Want a medal?

[LSK]

34. dont tell Mike Malloy this, all dems are evil you know!!!

:sarcasm:

[election_2004]

35. I'd love to see Reid and Pelosi running the show....

But it's not going to happen if Hillary Clinton ends up as the Democratic Party's standard-bearer in 2008.

[madinmaryland]

37. Does this mean that Lieberman will be running the Senate

Arms Committee?

:yoiks: