New Liberal PAC Targets Democrats for Primaries

[brooklynite]

Last edited Thu Mar 2, 2017, 11:48 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: NBC News

A new progressive Political Action Committee plans to recruit and fund primary opponents to Democratic members of Congress that it feels are not aggressive enough in fighting President Donald Trump.

[link:http://wewillreplaceyou.org/WeWillReplaceYou.org] was formed by a group of progressive activists with backgrounds in the Bernie Sanders campaign, the environmental movement, the Black Lives Matter movement, and the DREAMer movement of young undocumented immigrants.

It's a project of #AllofUs, a new millennial progressive organization that has protested Democratic members of the Senate, urging them to draw a harder line against Trump's cabinet nominees and policy agenda.

While many liberals, including filmmaker Michael Moore, have issued nominal threats of left-wing challenges to Democratic lawmakers, WeWillReplaceYou.org appears to be the first organized effort to explicitly turn those threats into a reality. That will likely put it on a collision course with Democratic efforts to protect incumbents.

Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/new-liberal-pac-targets-democrats-primaries-n721311

[Stallion]

1. I Believe It-They Already Replaced a Democrat with a Republican in the White house

nm

[OKNancy]

7. +1000

[otohara]

14. Word n/t

[yurbud]

16. and who do you blame for loss of control of the Senate, House, most governorships and

most statehouses?

[emulatorloo]

33. Binary-thinking ideologues who refuse to vote strategically because 'my purity'

Gerrymandering too.

[yurbud]

105. isn't the binary thinking on the side of those who think voters only have two choices and have to

grade on a curve and vote between the two major even when they are both wrong on big issues?

[treestar]

110. Face reality

of politics in this country. If you don't vote for the ones closer to you, you get the worst of the choices.

[yurbud]

114. that is why someone like Bernie has to come into the Democratic Party to have a chance of winning

the general election.

Unfortunately, the business wing of the party tries to rig the process to favor their sort of Democrat rather than let the voters decide.

[treestar]

120. the process was not "rigged"

and naturally most of the party preferred a party member than a member come lately just to run for President. O'Malley didn't complain about "rigging."

[emulatorloo]

124. Delusional conspiracy theory. The primary wasn't "rigged."

Most primary voters wanted HRC, who has a lifetime record of public service and helping out folks the rich have tried to put down and ignore.

My candidate Bernie Sanders lost fair and square, as he fully acknowledges. Maybe it's time you do the same.

[Demsrule86]

137. This will only help Trump...

They asked for money...I would see them in hell before I give them one dime...with Trump in office the ACA hanging from a thread...immigration horror...they think now is the time go after Democrats...trashing them weakening them in a primary...weakening the party by criticizing it...fuck them.

[Demsrule86]

58. Those who ragged on President Obama in 08...green types...

They never accomplish anything.

[yurbud]

68. you can't control other people's behavior, only your own. the Democratic Party has to ask

why those people choose to "throw away their vote" and figure out what they can do to earn it back.

And ragging on people and browbeating them doesn't make them vote for you.

[Demsrule86]

70. They can go away...they are unreliable and will never be Democrats.

One would think they were in league with the Republicans based on the results...United came after the Greens helped elect Bush II...they certainly help us lose the house in 10 ...all that whining about a public option and single payer...blaming the president and Democrats instead of Republicans as usual...and now they have outdone themselves ...helping to elect Trump...the evil that may ensue is horrifying...so I say screw them.

[treestar]

111. why don't they vote in their own self interest?

Instead of demanding to be courted and have their vote "earned?" Makes no sense whatsoever to not vote in your best interest and to avoid the worst that can happen.

[yurbud]

115. this sounds like the Bush defense of torture--"At least we don't behead nobody like Saddam did!"

Being better graded on a curve doesn't necessarily generate excitement in voters, especially those who that on many policies, there isn't much daylight between you and the Republicans.

[treestar]

119. There is a lot of difference between the two parties

If anyone spends any time looking at things. Your analogy is bad. But I guess yeah if the choices were Bush and Saddam I'd go for Bush. Fortunately we do not live in that dark a world. We will be letting things swing as far right as that if we continue to insist on being "excited" to vote.

[yurbud]

122. there needs to be more difference on economic & foreign policy too

It's not enough to pat yourself on the back for not being a misogynist, racist, homophobe.

You have to stop Wall Street from screwing all of us and people in the rest of the world too.

[emulatorloo]

129. Bullshit. Whose responsible for Dodd-Frank? Republicans?

[delisen]

130. Clinton did just that by opposing Dictator Putin and thus earned the wrath of oil billionaires

and a bunch of self-styled progressives who actually do nothing meaningful attacked her.

A large part of the progressivism isn't part of the Democratic Party but is instead an academic and quasi-religious exercise punctuated by occasional demonstrations wedded to sloganeering and a policy of telling everyone else what's wrong with them.

I suggest they go ahead and do what they want and stop trying to reform everyone else.


Such free-floating progressivism has become the political version of Saturday morning visits from Jehovah's Witnesses except that the Witnesses don't waste time time telling us how a religion we might currently be affiliated with is evil. They just tell us why they are the Way.

I don't insist people believe what I believe or do what I do politically.

No difference between the two parties is a message too absurd to be entertained and people are more than economic units.

[yurbud]

123. it's swinging for right because of Democrats competing to carry corporate water

[emulatorloo]

126. Dude, I read Marx too. I think you're full of it.

The parties are not "just the same"

You are a good person, I think you just buy into divisive Republican propaganda more than you should.

Fake "progressive" GOP folk push this shit so you'll sit home or vote hopeless third party so Republicans win.

I used to buy this "all the same" garbage too. Then Reagan got his second term and I woke the fuck up. Oh my fucking 'purity'; I stopped being a useful tool for helping Republicans get into power.

[delisen]

127. Carrying corporate water-sloganeering. It's like saying "Make America Great Again"

[Progressive dog]

78. They never accomplsh anything

worthwhile.

[Demsrule86]

80. They don't...and if we let them they will reform the Democratic party into

a losing party...for 18 and maybe 20.

[adigal]

95. Politicians who dont know how to talk to real people

Bith Dems and Republicans .
Term limits might help with this.

[yurbud]

103. term limits give more power to staffers and lobbyists since they'll be the only ones

who know what's going on.

[adigal]

104. Good point nt

[RKP5637]

51. Yep, exactly!!! n/t

[Demsrule86]

57. They sure did.

God can these people attack the GOP for one hour?

[Progressive dog]

77. They sure did,

and not just any Republican. Makes me wonder which side they're really on.

[JCanete]

88. no. but funny still. nt

[still_one]

101. Wow, you nailed that one

[treestar]

109. Yes.

They just don't get that they are a minority.

[nikibatts]

117. No!! Get Dems elected in 2018 and then hold them accountable in 2020.

[ismnotwasm]

125. Plus infinity

[NurseJackie]

2. This sounds like the beginnings of a trainwreck... that will have many unintended consequences.

[nikibatts]

69. Didn't we learn anything from the last election? i guess not.

We should be looking to shore up Democrats where we can and improve on our message to a wider range of voters. Environmental issues must be connected to disaster relief, and preservation of clean and free water. The more our streams and rivers become polluted costs for, what most people deem as free, water will escalate and soon be higher the gasoline.

I am hearing now more and more about how coal is not competitive with natural gas and will not be coming back as the coal belt is hoping. This is something that Hillary tried to warn about but the media and the GOP with 45's help drowned out the real truth.

Splitting ourselves into progressives vs establishment does not help us. We need focused, truthful, and simple messages on all key economic and social issues.

[DeminPennswoods]

3. The good is again the enemy of the perfect

In Pennsylvania if either Sestak or Fetterman had dropped out and endorsed the other, McGinty would never have won the primary and Pat Toomey very likely would not have been re-elected.

[yurbud]

18. then tell the corporate tool to drop out. Their day is over.

[DeminPennswoods]

23. Turned out it wasn't

nt

[JCanete]

91. That's fair, and it never will be if we don't have a unified party, consistently and loudly

fighting the influence of money on politics.


That said, the tone of this group is problematic, even if I appreciate the sentiment. I'm all for primaries though...the point is kind of that we have a say in who we elect to office. We only have that if we have a choice. Incumbency shouldn't preclude the opportunity for that choice.

[Demsrule86]

59. It seems more likely the progressive era will end with these folks.

[yurbud]

67. if the corporate wing doesn't change their stripes or get out of the way, the GOP will continue to

live and be a threat to our democracy.

How hard is it to admit and act on the fact that you can't give your big donors things that hurt the people who actually vote for you?

[Demsrule86]

71. See I find that insulting...just because you don't

support a certain person or an agenda does not make you corporate...and that was a charge used against Hillary unfairly. You can't get elected without money in the age of United. And quit with the insults please...I never supported Bernie and never will...but I am not corporate. I don't need purity tests...I need Democratic victories...and those who won't join the party and won't help should get out of our way.

[yurbud]

72. victory to do WHAT? The problem with DLC/New Democrat way is winning became an end in itself

and ultimately, chasing big money led to serving big money even when it undermined core democratic values on economics and taking care of the weakest among us.

[Demsrule86]

75. No it didn't...the DNC supported one of its own

against an independent who became a Democrat merely to run in a primary. That is what they did...and said independent spent a year bashing the party and the only candidate who could stop Trump...the party kindly allowed him to join and be a part of the primary and it was a big mistake...there is nothing wrong with the Democratic Party; they are the only ones who can stop Trump ...so how about setting your sights on the GOP, and let the Democrats get ready for the fight of our lives for our lives. We do not have time for this.

[yurbud]

79. Dems are doing a much better job fighting right now than they did during Bush

when most of them rolled over for the first four years.

Part of defeating Trump is letting people know what you will do better and differently. Clearly at the state level and everywhere except the presidency, your approach is an epic failure.

The only thing you could rightly point to other than not vigorously pursuing progressive policies is voter suppression like the interstate cross check voter purges, but again, progressives have been the ones with their hair on fire about this, not Democrats in Congress.

[Demsrule86]

81. See this is what I object to...how exactly are Democrats doing a better job fighting?

With words? BFD...they have no power and will lose most votes...that is not success; it is a desperate loss with much major progressive policy on the chopping block...policy gained with difficulty for almost 100 years may be lost and of course the courts...that is not victory. There is no silver lining to a Trump victory...only hell unleashed on this country. And those who continue to attack the Democratic Party using faux reform tactics while ignoring the elephant in the room... will only prolong the time the GOP has to destroy the progressive movement and this country.

[yurbud]

82. We probably agree on this. Sometimes incrementalism looks a lot like rolling back those gains though

[Demsrule86]

90. Really...becaue where I sit...kasich just felt

emboldened to cut public education again...and will spend more money on charter schools this year...we are looking at losing all our gains ...nothing good can come from Trump...nothing.

[yurbud]

83. in some areas, like K-12 education Arne Duncan and Dems in Congress pressed the privatization

agenda as aggressively as Republicans, damaging our public schools and demoralizing a large, loyal cohort of foot soldiers for the Democratic Party, TEACHERS.

Republicans didn't twist Obama's arm to appoint Arne, and Republicans aren't twisting Rahm Emanuel's arm to attack teachers and close schools in Chicago.

If Democrats could say no to Wall Street, hedge fund managers, and trust fund babies on this ONE issue, and listen to teachers and real education researchers instead of those who pay to be heard, that could turn the tide in a lot states-- and it's the right thing to do.

[Demsrule86]

89. We will be fortunate to still have any sort of Public education when

Betsy and the GOP are done...not an issue that works.

[Demsrule86]

96. No such thing as DLC new Democrat...hasn't been for years.

This is a term Green types toss about...and is insulting. We need money for elections...so until we can repeal United which the Greens gave us with Bush's election...there is no choice.

[yurbud]

99. Third Way, New Democrats...you know something is wrong with a product when you have to keep changing

the name.

Like Blackwater to Xe to Academe to fuzzy bunny slippers or whatever they are now.

or VD to STD's to STI's.

Also, what is insulting about the name if you agree with and defend the ideas they represent?

[yurbud]

73. If you were just concerned about funding campaigns, Bernie and Howard Dean before him should have

been cause to celebrate not wring hands since they got most of their money from small donors, which freed them up from having to kowtow to wealthy as much.

Even when there isn't a quid pro quo, the people you spend most of your time hanging out with, and working for both before you're in office and after you leave is naturally going to color what you think is reasonable and what you think is a "purity test"

[Demsrule86]

74. I adore Howard Dean actually...but he purged no one.

There are not enough small donors at all times and for all candidates especially at the state level and during the mid-terms. I have no doubt there could be 'influence'...it is the nature of politics...and purists never understand this...you have to deal with reality in order to win.

[yurbud]

86. you have lost nearly everything with the current approach

[Demsrule86]

87. That was not Howard Dean's approach...after we stopped the 50

state solution, we lost...and the states were the worst...the gerrymander has caused the House to become dysfunctional. We barely lost in 2016...I am not willing to turn the Democratic Party on its head because of a so called movement that could not win a primary. Time to fight Trump and those who can't...well so be it. No more time or patience for those who try to hurt the party and leave the GOP alone.

[yurbud]

106. good point about not purging.

[JCanete]

93. Before United, we were taking money. I think we have to be careful about tone though.

There is no reason to assume that our politicians who play the game as it has been designed(though its not like there's no blame to go around on that design) are necessarily ill-intentioned. They could have the best of intentions. It is totally true that if you don't have a seat at the table, you can do very little, except to try to push on the people with the seat at that table.

The question is whether or not our strategy is working ... whether or not taking money from corporations is tying our hands and making us less effective at taking them on and making a clear, un-muddiable distinction between our ethics and those of Republicans ... so damn crystal clear that false equivalencies fall flatter on their face. It is't good enough to get just enough support from corporate interests to come in second place.

So I reject that this has anything to do with purity tests. It has to do with finding a strategy that actually gains us back what we've been losing for decades. We can't simply be apologist for why we too have to take money, not even if we parse the difference in influx like Barney Frank did.. and ever hope to break this trend.

[kevink077]

76. Yep

Many progressives are content with losing year after year as the dems are not pure enough. They sit home and pout on Election Day or throw their vote to a 3rd party tea party funded spoiler (stein)

[lagomorph777]

4. It worked for the teabaggers. I'm in.

Will donate when I have some time and $.

""The 53 Senators, including Democrat Joe Manchin, who voted to put millions of jobs at risk by putting another Wall Street banker in charge of the Treasury Department shouldn't expect to keep theirs," Charles Chamberlain, the executive director of the liberal group Democracy for America said after Manchin joined Republicans in voting to confirm Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin Monday."

[Tanuki]

84. Out of curiosity, (asking this as someone who grew up in WV), can

you name a Democrat you would support who would have a realistic chance to win the senate seat, or is this all hypothetical to you?

[lagomorph777]

107. Well, I live "next door" in a purple state, so perhaps I have it easy in a way.

I do see that Manchin is functionally a Republican, and WV is deep red. So until the day when WV voters are able to make the connection between their own poverty, and the thievery of the people they vote for, I guess we have to write off any hope of Senate support from WV.

[Stellar]

118. hear, hear! nt

[OKNancy]

5. Stupid people - this is why we lose

Great way to elect more Republicans in red districts. Just what we need to never take back the Senate much less the House.

ETA: I see they want to go after Claire McCaskill! JFC.

[alarimer]

6. This is the only pressure they will respond to.

The threat of losing their cushy fat-cat jobs.

It's about time.

No DINOs.

[Demsrule86]

17. Yeah ...a DINO is about all we can expect in WVA

But go for it...I mean why not elect a few more GOP types in 18 ...what would we lose...other than Medicare, social security, ACA...etc etc.

[Demsrule86]

60. Here is the deal if this was 2008 when Democrats could do something...

by all means...but we have no power right now and attacking Democrats now is a stupid move that will lead disaster for liberals. Go after Republicans. They sow the seeds of disunity and will damp down the vote...are they secret Trump supporters maybe? I have always wondered if Stein was.

[cstanleytech]

8. Wouldn't it be wiser to work to get more Repugnants out of office first since

they have majority control over many of the state level governments as well as Congress?

[NurseJackie]

12. Yes, but nobody ever thinks of anything so simple or practical. It's all about the "purity"...

... not about being practical. People who think this way are short-sighted idiots.

[Demsrule86]

19. This sort of thinking put Trump in the White House.

And instead of trying to elect Democrats this group wastes money on primaries.

[Me.]

26. True

And I have an issue with the way the DReamers treated PBO. He put himself on the line for them, caught hell and whose rallies did they protest? His!

[emulatorloo]

35. Yes.

Another group who finds it more important to attack Democrats rather than Republicans

[nini]

92. Not when your goal is to weaken the Democrats

I honestly think these people are more concerned with harming Dems than taking out the Repubs.

[msanthrope]

9. Astroturf. nt

[Hortensis]

10. Damn! Just looked and they're a bunch of barn-burners.

I went over expecting to donate my own $5 to primarying some conservative Democrats, but first looked to see who they are and what they want. They instead want to take out some of our strongest moderate leaders because their names are well known.

I'd love to see a good fight right now, but there are REASONS why our current leaders aren't blowing our capital and burning our bridges fighting battles that simply cannot be won. All the while making sure there's plenty of news time and space left open to cover the ongoing disaster on the right. We don't want to divert attention awy from Republican disasters to Republican victories over Democrats fighting a string of losing battles!

There are also reasons by the illiberal left can't form their own party and set the nation straight by themselves. And, boy, does this illustrate that. Their fondness for shooting into their center kills them off. Bernie knows. It's why he said a big no to an attempt to draft him to lead a new party.

SO WE SHOULD HELP THEM ATTACK US INSTEAD? GO AFTER THE DAMNED REPUBLICANS!

[demmiblue]

11. That is an impressive coalition.

Cool. There is nothing wrong with putting pressure on Dems from Dems, especially those who kowtow to Trump.

[Larkspur]

13. As one who helped drive Holy Joe Lieberman from the Dem Party

I have no problem with this group's goal. However, finding a candidate to primary a Dem may be difficult.

In 20063, Ned Lamont was searching for one to oppose Lieberman but no CT elected Democrat one was interested in opposing Lieberman. One of the people he tried to recruit told him he should run and that is what happened. Lamont overcame a 59 point deficit to defeat Lieberman in the 2006 Dem Senate primary by 4 pts. Unfortunately, He lost to Lieberman in the GE, but Lieberman's approval numbers tanked about 6 months after his re-election and he never recovered. In 2012 his approval numbers were so bad that he voluntarily decided not to run for re-election. We now have a good Democrat, Sen. Chris Murphy, in his seat.

[Demsrule86]

20. and what was the result...in the end Joe ran and won as an independent and with a score to settle

blocked Medicare for 55 and over. I would not brag about accomplishing nothing really.

[Larkspur]

21. I'm very proud of my work to oust douche bag Lieberman

To this day he is persona non grata in CT. If we had not ousted him from the Dem Party, he would still be in the Senate. We stripped him of any credibility of being a dissenting voice inside the Dem Party that Republicans could use to browbeat other Democrats.

Lamont's battle did help the Democratic Party in 2006. While he did not ultimately win the senate seat, he did help change minds in the Democratic Party about opposing the Iraq War and making it a major issue. 2006 across the nation became an anti-Iraq War vote, thanks to Lamont making it a center piece of his primary battle. If he had kept it up in the GE, he would have won the senate seat.

[Demsrule86]

40. I hate Lieberman

The point is he was a Democrat and voted with us more than against us...but after he became independent...he voted with the GOP and cost us a great deal in health care...including medicare for 55 and older...so the point is what was accomplished? Not a damn thing. He was still in office but he voted with the GOP more than before. We had no leverage.

[Larkspur]

45. If we did not primary Lieberman he would still be in the Senate poking Dems in the eye today

and giving cover to Rethugicans. He would still have opposed the public option even if he was not primaried.

He did that as a Democrat BEFORE his primary, not just as an Independent. The reason why he was primaried was because he was stiffing Democrats. He was ALWAYS a pro-corporate Democrat. He was a DLC Dem along with Clinton and Gore.

[Demsrule86]

46. No he wouldn't still be in the Senate in my opinion

But had he been there in 2009 as a Democrat, we might have a better health care bill. I want to have as liberal a body as we can get. But we have to way cause and effect. And the prospect of primarying Senators from blues states is wrong...put the money and effort into getting rid of the GOP...no progressive group that targets Democrats will get one dime from me...not one until we have some power back. We are in crisis her people.

[Larkspur]

47. You are wrong

Lieberman had been stabbing Democrats in the back and eye for a long time.
He would have opposed the Public Option as a Democrat because he was in bed with Big Pharma and the Insurance Industries. And he would have been re-elected until the day he died if he was not primaried because CT rarely removes incumbents. The national Republicans loved him only because he was a perfect foil for them to use to browbeat Democrats.

Joe Lieberman was a corporate whore and a Democrat in name only. He NEVER believed in the Democratic Party or its core ideals.

I am proud of participating in primarying that Corporate Whore and Pious Blowhard. He deserved it and we are much better for it.

As far as the public option, President Obama could have put pressure on Lieberman, but he decided to listen to that other a-hole, Rahm Emmanual, another corporate whore, and try to kiss Liberman's ass.

[Demsrule86]

53. We will never know.

But I consider primarying Lieberman foolish...despite the fact I dislike him. At a time when we have nothing...no power and some pretty horrific GOP plans in the works...we need to focus on the Republicans...not primary Democrats because they are not pure enough...this is like holding up the white flag, and we will lose if we do this...I would not give one dime to any organization that works in states like Massachusetts to primary Democrats...for God sakes did they learn nothing from the debacle that helped elect Trump? Set your sights on Republicans ...and I would add, are any of these groups working in red states trying to elect Democrats...there is a good shot at picking up Price's seat in Georgia. This is where my money is going ...helping Democrats to take back the House and the Senate.

[yurbud]

85. great points.

[m-lekktor]

32. wow, I haven't seen a Lieberman apologist on a DEM discussion board in long while.

I am from Connecticut and was glad to vote against that piece of shit and for Lamont.

[Demsrule86]

39. Apologist?

I despise Lieberman...but primarying him did us no good...Try going after the GOP for a change...I used to live in Connecticut by the way...but Lieberman had he remained a Dem would most likely have voted for Medicare for 55 and over...what did you accomplish? Nothing. I see that some are working in safe Democratic areas? Are you kidding me...that is foolish and then some...use money and resources to beat Republicans.

[Larkspur]

49. Thanks to our primary of Lieberman in 2006 we now have a good Democrat in his stead

Chris Murphy would NEVER have challenged Joe Lieberman in 2012 if we had not primaried him in 2006.

In 2006 Lieberman still had enough support among Unaffiliated Party voters to win the GE, but after 3-6 months of winning re-election, Lieberman's approval among Unaffiliated Party voters dropped and he ended up in Dubya approval ratings territory - low 30%.

Lieberman never recovered and that is why he chose not to run for re-election. Being forced out of the Democratic Party was key to him choosing to retire. He would not have had any access to the Party's infrastructure to mount a re-election campaign against a young and energetic Chris Murphy.

DEPRIVING Lieberman of Party infrastructure support was key to getting him out of the Senate for good.

And Lieberman not being in the Senate since has deprived Republicans of a PR foil to whack against Democrats. Democrats are more united now because Lieberman is not there to muck things up.

As far as the public option and Medicare for 55, Obama is more at fault than those of us who voted with our dollars, our spare time and our votes to primary Lieberman and oust him from the Democratic Party.

[Demsrule86]

50. Maybo so...

But we also have lost all power ...the GOP has everything...and may end health care this year...with a better outcome in 2009, we might not have been where we are today who knows...I will say this in the short term primarying Lieberman hurt President Obama and ended any chance of Medicare for those over 55. With the GOP, prepared to up the Medicare age to 67 which would cause the deaths of thousands of Americans...that would have really been helpful. I think Lieberman would have lost anyway. We should turn our attention to getting rid of the GOP now...not primarying anyone unless they are completely helping Trump...and in red states it is stupid.

[Larkspur]

56. Again you are wrong and you sound like a defeatist

Obama could have used the primary over Lieberman to show that if he wanted to get back in the good graces of CT Democrats he should have supported the public option.

Saying that we can not primary bad Democrats, especially those like Lieberman who take glee at poking Democrats in the eye and being used by Republicans as a foil against Democrats, is equivalent to saying that we have to accept our aristocrats whether we like them or not. That's defeatist mentality that depresses turnout and supports Democrats behaving like Republicans, which further depresses base turnout.

[Demsrule86]

61. He didn't have the votes for the public option...and there

is no way to pressure red state Democrats anyway...they cost us the public option. As for defeatist...reality bites sometimes but...it is better than the fantasy that attacking Democrats for purity will somehow help us now...time for all hands on deck to defeat Trump and his minions.

[Larkspur]

66. Not about attacking Lieberman type Democrats for purity

Attacking them for not behaving like Democrats.

[StevieM]

44. I am still trying to figure out how so many Bernie voters came to the conclusion that HRC was

practically the equivalent of Joe Lieberman. That is how they treated her.

[Larkspur]

48. They both loved corporate money

Lieberman saw corporations as his base.

[StevieM]

55. HRC did not have a different voting record or different priorities than Barack Obama, Joe Biden or

John Kerry. And they took corporate money too.

And she most certainly did not have a record along the lines of Joe Lieberman.

The comparison was unfounded and unfair.

[Shell_Seas]

15. Maybe they can get Jill Stein to lead them....

[nikibatts]

22. this is a good move but I am afraid if they pick candidates too far to the left, that won't help us.

We need to learn to support the "good" and strive for the "perfect."

[YOHABLO]

28. Too far to the left? What does that even mean at this point? So what will ''help us" more DINOs?

Progressively left left left is the only way to go. That is what people are waiting for. Doesn't anyone get this?

[emulatorloo]

34. Yes, as Russ Feingold's and Zephyr Teachout's stunning victories in 2016 have proven

[Demsrule86]

41. It means that no matter what you will never elect a liberal in West Virginia...

If you run one...the Republican will win which could tip the Senate if it's close.

[Demsrule86]

64. Yes...a 'dino' in WVAis better than a Republican in WVA...

[Cognitive_Resonance]

24. The Koch Bros. will be glad to make a donation. nt

[KittyWampus]

30. I suspect they already have.

[elmac]

25. Time to do some weeding nt

[HassleCat]

27. I know I'm supposed to condemn them because we will lose some seats.

But what are we supposed to do about candidates who use our name, enjoy the support of our party, use our contributions to get elected, then turn around and support Trump? If anyone can suggest some other way to get them under control, I would love to hear it.

[YOHABLO]

31. Get "them" under control? Challenge them, get rid of them.

[Demsrule86]

42. Who exactly are you referring to?

The guy from WVA? He will never change and you will never elect a liberal in WVA...I lived there too.

[treestar]

112. exactly, it is a miracle that their is a Democrat elected

in W VA.

[Demsrule86]

62. In this environment...it really doesn't matter.

Those sort of things are best done with a comfortable majority. And losing seats is not what we want...it doesn't matter who is elected if we are in the minority...go after the GOP.

[zentrum]

36. Kick!

[nikibatts]

37. Stick to targeting Republicans for 2018. Leave the Dems alone.

[Dr Rise]

38. I like it ...

It's about time something like this got crackin!

[Demsrule86]

43. I am sure you think so...

Welcome to DU...enjoy your er stay.

[JCanete]

94. Why are comments like this acceptable? The post didn't rise to the occasion of a right-wing

infiltration.

[Demsrule86]

97. He defended and praised Trump in my opinion.

I see nothing wrong with my post...and by the way I did not alert on the post...I merely discussed.

[JCanete]

100. in a different post or in this one? Anyway, I appreciate you not abusing the alert function. I never

use it. I'd rather do as you did, comment on something that must then stand on its merits or lack-there-of.

[msanthrope]

113. You seem concerned. Please feel free to air more of your concerns, and enjoy your stay.

Welcome to DU.

[JCanete]

116. Well, been here since 2003, so if its a standard cordiality at this point, Welcome to DU and

enjoy your stay, as well.

[Skittles]

133. it's not the post

it's the smell

[HassleCat]

52. This will be painful.

I'm sympathetic to both sides. I know we need to re-work the party to stem the 30 year slide, but this seems a bad time to do it. On the other hand, there is no good time. On the other hand, if not now, when? On the other hand...

[Gothmog]

54. Lets do our best to make sure that the GOP retains control of congress

[Demsrule86]

63. You can count on these folks to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory everytime.

[TomCADem]

65. Wonder Who Is Funding?

I am not talking about the nominal organizers, but the people writing the checks.

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

98. Democrats need to represent their constituents

And going after ones that do that is stupid.

Fighting against each other only strengthens Republicans.

[Bradical79]

102. If millineals would turn out to vote in higher numbers

then maybe there would be a lot less to complain about. If they get Demcrats primaried then can't mobilize the numbers to win, that's a major problem. Hell, they could've beat Trump AND maybe even gotten Sanders through the primaries.

[treestar]

108. there is a lesson in the little state of Delaware

The republicans were the ones who did it. They replaced a moderate R with a T party extremist. Lost a seat they would have won.

Michael Castle, who had been governor and representative, ran for Senate. A shoo-in, as Delaware allows people to rotate the offices once they win one. The Rs ran witchy Christine O'Donnell instead, and the seat went to a Democrat who would certainly have lost it to Castle.

Extremists just don't get it. They are extreme and the vast middle will not vote for them and they will lose.

[henbuck]

121. Disgustingly Moderate

Both parties in Delaware try to elbow each other out of the exact middle of political spectrum. That is why nothing ever really changes in Delaware.

[bravenak]

128. Oh fuck this shit

[DinahMoeHum]

131. If these people are Greens or are into "political purity". . .

. . .then I say fuck 'em.

They're not the only outfit out there. Groups like Brand New Congress and Swing Left will do a better job in getting more Democrats into offices.

[tblue37]

132. Not a good idea. It would be better to go after Republicans in purple states than after

blue dog Dems in red states.

[nikibatts]

134. YES!

Wasn't 2016 enough for these people? I know a Democrat when I see one and they are not Democrats!

[RandiFan1290]

135. Trump is in trouble??

Quick! Start attacking the 'left' again!!

[Demsrule86]

136. completely stupid when you are trying to flip the House and the Senate...

You have to wonder if they are secretly GOP.

[Blue_Tires]

138. Useful idiots... Needless to say Tulsi probably gets a pass

They'd be better off using this energy flipping GOP seats, but that's not my business...