May 24, 2007: How many DEM voters did we lose today?

I wonder...

1/2 of 1%?

Somewhere between 1% and 3%?

I have not a clue of course - but we lost some.

Fast forward to September 2007 as today's war funding bill is about to run out - the war is not going well, more have died, Shrub offers another strategy, Shooter says we need to give it another 4-6 months to determine success on the ground.

The Congress and Senate again authorize more war funding - more blank checks, more heated debate, another re-do. This time the vote's margin of victory is a little closer; but DEMS capitulated again.

I wonder...how many DEM voters will we lose in September?

Maybe even you or me?

The DEM party needs a major tune-up and fast. The future is now and if we don't re-tool the engine from within, we will keep losing dedicated and passionate DEMS to disgust, apathy, or a 3rd party.

And this comes from yours truly - just about 30 years of voting a straight DEM ticket!

How many more DEMS can we afford to lose and still win in 08 or 012 or 016?

But I have no more of a clue than you how many.

I probably wont work next time as hard as I did this past election.

Why work for nothing for them when they deliver nothing for me?

Kicked in the gut, that's just how I feel.

We worked to flip the House and the Senate, and we miraculously DID.

Now, no difference.

:grr:

it's time for a Democratic purge. Time for the Democratic party to get more progressive and get rid of the spineless double-talkers.

May be.

While we rightly chastise our party (or at least those who voted yes), Republican boards are experiencing similar consternation over the immigration bill.

We lost. Rather than whine, pout and pick up our marbles and leave the playground. We have to gear up to fight even harder come September.

either Kucinich or Gore is the presidential candidate.

They lost me unless it's DK or AG.

And everyone in the country knows the Dems fought to stop Bush's war, Bush vetoed that, and, on that front, it is now 100% Bush's war.

I talked to a group of red-necks today. They all oppose the war, and are likely to start voting Dem because of this one issue.

DU is becomming worse than the '68 Chicago anti-war domonstrations, with over 50% infiltrators, it seems. It is a sure sign of effectiveness to see so much undermining of the cause going on.

L. Coyote, you said - It is a sure sign of effectiveness to see so much undermining of the cause going on.

What undermining of what cause are you referring too? Thanks for the clarity.

Anti-war activists are not Democrats first, they are anti-war first. People who are against this occupation are the ones who won for the Dems in '06 and if the Dems lose the anti-war coalitions, they will lose elections. But the Democrats would rather lecture down their noses at the stupid "peaceniks" than actually put their country first and their Party second. No lectures, please, about how naive we all are. And no orders to shut up and do as we're told. The Democratic Party has to earn my vote and so far they are not doing so.

Is that the field narrows now for Presidential hopefuls. The ones who voted FOR the bill have made their beds. The ones who put their votes and their mouths against the war should be the only ones to go on, and we do that by voting in the primaries for the ones who are against the war.

Lets see - I heard HRC and Obama voted NO.

What other spin might you have JPettus on other Pres candidate's vote (or how they would have voted if eligible)?

thanks :)

They've just lost the '08 elections. That's how many voters they've lost yesterday and today.

Last fall we put together one hell of an anti-war coalititon to put the Dems into power, with one express purpose, to end the war ASAP. Right now that coalition isn't walking, but running for the exits. Those on the anti-war left will either vote Green or stay at home. The 'Pugs who joined in because they were fed up with war will go back to the 'Pugs. All that will be left voting for the Dems next fall will be the centerists and corporatist wings of the party, and they don't have the votes to elect anybody.

That's how many votes were lost.

a number of college students. I am only bringing them together so they can have a progressive image of the future untainted by Rahms and Shrums and Bidens and Roves. They will adopt their own methods and go on their own way. Another hope is to the south of us: all the new left-leaning leaders in South America and their awakened peoples. One just has to dump all the DCCC and DLC and other such baggage and work for the Left. I was always aware of the capacity of the liberals to fold. Indeed, that is all they ever do so I was not disheartened as much as others were.

Nasty Co-dependent problem.


The odds of a TRUE viable 3rd party leader that does not die in a small plane crash are slim.



sigh.

outspoken anti-war candidates: Gore, Kucinich, Gravel or Paul. Yes, Paul. At least he has the stones to stand up for what he believes in. I'm certainly sick of the Dem congress after today.

no more; no more hoping and trusting and working and contributing; no more

If there is not an Independent or truly progressive Dem running, I am not wasting my votes any longer to keep this group of pampered beltway prima donnas in high cotton

To hell with all of them

How in the fuck are those on The Hill - or their DEM operatives and handlers - so out of touch that they had no real clue that you would say - To hell with all of them today as a result of that lame ass and cowardly vote?

I knew you would say it.

Many on DU are saying it.

Keith Olbermann is shouting it across MSNBC!

And they still did not listen.

They did not listen to me - a lifelong DEM.

Maybe I'll say it too...

nays 14
Boxer (D-CA)
Burr (R-NC)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Dodd (D-CT)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Obama (D-IL)
Sanders (I-VT)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 6
Brownback (R-KS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Hatch (R-UT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Thomas (R-WY)
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00181

I don't think so. I'm sticking with the party -- they screw up sometimes, but they're far better than the alternative.

Who have blurred the lines on the Iraq time-line question by joining rethugs in giving Shrub yet another blank check, after 5 years of blank checks! One has to draw a line somewhere.

Vote for rethugs, never!

Leave the party because they don't feel listened too --- maybe.