Working to elect the Democrats we want is fine, but in the end we DO need a majority in Congress

I just saw an article which heralds the possibility of our party 'recruiting' two lifelong Democrats to run for the seats of two prominent republicans. These two Democrats aren't what some may consider 'progressive', and may even have their views fall under the category of what some term 'moderate'. But, without endorsing those two specifically, I'd like to point out the value there would be in electing two more Democrats to Congress, despite the misgivings some may have over their 'moderation' on some issues.

We, rightly, campaign for and support those candidates who we believe most effectively represent our views. That effort should be unapologetic and vigorous. The value of elected officials who adhere to progressive values as they advocate and vote can't be understated or underestimated.

But these Democratic votes in Congress don't occur in a vacuum. There is also going to be a vigorous republican opposition, in some form, which would assume the majority if they managed to elect enough of their kind to office. The destructive effect of that potential republican majority, also, can't be understated or underestimated.

As important and vital as progressive voices are in Congress, there are parts of the country where they are not appreciated as much as those whose views and positions would not allow them to be considered as progressive as others. Certainly, if voters in those parts of the nation want progressive candidates, they should support and advocate for them with every fiber of their being. But, the value of electing Democrats in those areas against the efforts of republicans and their candidates, is the prospect of either obtaining or holding on to our majority in Congress.

No one can tell me that there isn't a difference between a republican majority and a Democratic majority. The ability to set the agenda in Congress, and the ability to set the priorities in our national legislature was the most pernicious aspect of the over a decade of republican rule that we just survived (barely). All Democratic voices in those Congresses -- liberal, moderate, progressive -- were drowned out by the daily drumbeat of the lemming-like sham of republican conservatism.

On every issue republicans promoted in their majority; on every initiative they advanced behind their ability to control the agenda, republicans systematically destroyed decades of law, understanding, and precedent which once upheld the democratic values and principles which had been achieved by past Democrats when they held power and influence. In those past Congresses, the makeup of the elected Democrats was far from a singular ideological bent. Moderates, Liberals, Progressives, all pulled together to make that progress which republicans, in their majority, took glee in dismantling.

In the committees which are responsible for our government's oversight, republicans in control made a mockery of our constitution and carried out their role in the majority; not just as promoters of one philosophy or the other -- but as effective roadblocks to progress, accountability, and to the upholding of the rule of law. There just isn't any comparison of their obstinacy with whatever shortcomings we may feel our Democratic majority has experienced in the past or the present majority and their control of those committees of oversight.

There is also the matter of committee votes for nominees to courts or positions in the Executive body which are at stake when considering the effect of a republican majority in control of those committees of accountability and consent.

All of that is what makes the ability of our elected Democrats to assume the majority in Congress so vital to the realization of those things we all say we want and need. Having the majority, of course, doesn't at all assure that we'll always get our way on the issues and concerns we support, but the opportunity to advocate and press for what we want in Congress would be severely stifled with republicans in charge and in control of our political institutions. It's one thing to fall short in a session of Congress of the votes needed to advance legislation in our majority; it's quite another to be denied that opportunity to even bring those matters to the floor for a debate in a republican-controlled body - or even bring those issues and concerns to a vote.

That's why I believe we need to keep ourselves focused on maintaining our Democratic majority. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't press for those Democratic candidates we feel most represent our own views and concerns; but it does mean that we shouldn't stand in the way of those candidates who are willing to come to Congress and advance Democratic initiatives and ideas who become the ONLY alternative to republican candidates in those regions of the country where our party has been traditionally locked out of opportunity to serve, just because they may fall short of some ideological position (progressive or otherwise).

If we fail to maintain the majority we just achieved in the last election, we will reap the destructive effects of a republican majority which will respect and advance NONE of our Democratic principles, values, initiatives, or proposals. That effort to maintain the majority shouldn't be derailed just because of some disagreements we may have with some Democrats who haven't, yet, advanced all of the things we say we want from them.

That effort to maintain our majority should encompass, not just those who identify themselves with whatever specific issues we personally espouse, but also, at the end of the campaign -- given the choice between a Democratic candidate who hasn't toed whatever line we've drawn, but nonetheless will organize and vote with our party for the majority of the issues we represent, and a republican who would move their party to a position of dominance -- we should support Democrats to preserve the ground we've managed to gain in the last election.

If we lose the majority, all of what we fight so hard for will be lost to republican obstinacy and ignorance. That's why I defend my party, and that's why I refuse to abandon the party or denounce them because of some shortfalls in what I expected them to achieve, or some ideological difference in strategy or approach to the issues we all care about. We need to stay engaged in pressing our majority to represent and advance those things we say we want, and not be put off of our party just because some predictable opposition from republicans has, so far, prevented us from achieving them.

And, we need MORE Democrats elected to give our party the ability to present our concerns and legislation with a veto-proof, filibuster-proof majority of legislators. That effort should embrace different candidates from different regions who may not always share all of our ideas for successfully advancing what we want and believe in, but, nonetheless, will organize with our party to give us the elevated platform of the majority to keep pressing them forward. We've always been a party of moderates, liberals, and progressives working together to advance those things we support and believe in. No one group appears to have enough support around the nation to bring our party to a majority with the weight of their supporters alone. It will always be a collective effort which allows us to maintain power and influence in a majority. We should not lose sight of that as we advocate and work to advance our ideas in this political system.

And did you have a link?

"two lifelong Democrats to run for the seats of two prominent republicans"

And do these four have names?

"New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen to run against GOP Senator John Sununu and Bob Kerrey to run for the Nebraska Senate seat that would be vacated should Chuck Hagel decide not to seek reelection."

Shaheen is fine, and in fact she had her election stolen by documented and convicted republican election fraud. Bob Kerrey is a complete and total war party asshat. Oh he is a confessed war criminal as well.

except for Warren Stupidity. :eyes:

I intended to provide the link, but I forgot. That's all, so you can take your petty insinuations and stuff 'em.

My argument for supporting and working for a Democratic majority still stands.

Omitting the disgraced and unacceptable Kerrey from your post appears to me to be a contrivance on your part. Which is why I asked. Which is why I was totally unsurprised at the answer.

How about Zell Miller? Joe Lieberman? Any limits on the 'D' you will break out the pom-poms for?

Miller was an obvious creep, and Lieberman is not a Democrat, in my view.

Does that pass you ideological litmus test, whoever the fuck you are?

not ours.

We hire them, they are hired to represent us. If they do not then there is not one reason to hire them. There will be little if any difference in a Dem majority and a Rep majority if we do not find some way to make them accountable to us.

So far all the calls, emails, snail mails, meetings, protests, screaming is not working.

Tell me, what do you suggest? Please do not tell me that voting for a DINO will change things. It does not work that way anymore unless you are a bottomless pit of money to buy legislation.

I am seriously frustrated, seriously angry and seriously out of ideas. All I do know is that voting just because they are Dems has not made them accountable to us. On the contrary, it has let them know that they can do anything because we will still be there because they are our ham sandwich.

I'm not satisfied to just throw it all up in the air and hoe, in the end, that we get a majority. A republican majority is the most destructive thing I can imagine to happen the issues and concerns we all share ad Democrats. In a republican majority, NONE of the principles, values, ideas, initiatives, proposals, or anything else Democratic will be allowed to see the light of day.

I can see that it was not always like this, not this bad. True conservatives would have never toed the line like this new bunch has.

I do not see Republicans as inherently bad and I most certainly do not see Democrats as inherently good.

A Democratic majority full of DINOs will not represent me any better than a majority of Republicans.

A majority is the least of my worries.

in fact, during the republican majority we seemed to elect even more liberals/progressives in response.

But, in the past, there were many more of in our majority who sided with conservatives, and we managed as a party to advance and defend many progressive issues and concerns.

Not the same thing anymore. We have gone over to the dark side and nobody can really tell without remembering or learning what used to be. Yes, we are left of the Neocons but we are also right of the old time Republicans.

Not a good place to start and not a good place to end. Nixon was far enough left of where we are now that Hannity would shit bricks over his liberal policies. (he was also an insane criminal, I just want to clarify that I am not saying he was a good guy)

I can't do it by the old rules anymore because the old rules got us here.

That ham sandwich has gone very bad and I am sick.

past or present.

And, I don't remember anything close to the open opposition that we've seen from this generation's Democrats. We did have more time in the majority back then than we do today, though, for folks to reflect on now. Not really fair to judge because of that IMO. I still wager that I could stand Democrats today, legislator for legislator and show that there was more moderation 'back when'

but let me say that I am glad you are happy with the way things work. I am not, I am furious so we will have to leave it at that. Keep plugging away. I will keep plugging away. Something has to make a difference. If it is your way then I will congratulate you heartily and be happy that we are getting back on track.

NGU

advocate their defeat, or refuse to organize and advocate for Democrats' election.

I believe we share the same goals in holding the administration as accountable as we are able under the law . . . and then some.

good luck with that.

SLIGHTLY less than their criminals! THAT'S THE TICKET!

to a position to do more than just protest in the minority.

you would not even have the slightest opportunity to expect that those concerns would be addressed. Not so, with this Congress, even though they haven't yet moved forward with the extreme remedy of an impeachment. There is still a vigorous effort in committee and elsewhere to carry out their many other responsibilities in holding the administration accountable which may not rise to the level of removing someone from office.

From what they've done (or failed to do) so far, I say big f**king deal.

It's never going to change.

you wouldn't even get the slightest bit of visibility, much less a vote.

A republican majority would completely lock our party out from consideration of our agenda, which encompasses much more than those issues which have sparked so much debate in recent months.

Cheerleader thread.

And it must be SHOCKING for you to see a defense of the Democratic party and their majority on a site called "DEMOCRATIC Underground"