I don't know if it's a response to the Hackett situation but definitely blog readers should get involved with defeating Lieberman.

I certainly wouldn't oppose a primary challenge to Lieberman but would you/anyone honestly support Rick Santorum in the Senate so you can "teach insiders not to push us around anymore?" ....REALLY?  I mean, even if you disagree with Casey on nearly everything, surely you can agree that the vote for leadership/the vote for Democrats controlling the agenda is far better than Rick Santorum ....right??

I'm not sure we should connect Hackett with defeating Lieberman, but as a CT democrat I am truly tired of holding my nose and voting for him just because there's a D next to his name. I will be happy to support anyone who mounts a credible, intelligent primary challenge.

Lieberman is your best shot. There needs to be a coordinated effort to put a negative story each week about Lieberman in the CT media outlets. A letter writing campaign to Lieberman's donors. Also, intensive lobbying of members of the CT Democratic Party. Many of the local party leaders are probably on "our" side. And the blogosphere needs to do everything it possibly can to ensure that MoveOn jumps in the primary on Lamont's behalf. They have the ability to direct millions his way, and or could fund an anti-Lieberman 527 that could drain his treasury.

How 'bout both?? Fuck 'em all I say.

I still like my solution better. Let 'em have their party, they bought it with their donor list's money.

I'll just throw my own party on election day. Hopefully there'll be a hockey game for us to watch.

My online poll: choice of beer at that party.

1) Molson Canadian (show your patriotism and loyalty to a union barnd)

2) Molson Export (Ditto, but in a French Canadian sort of way)

3) Molson Ice, in honor of the game, or

4) Some of that Sam Adam's or similar non-union microbrew stuff that the Vichy Dems running my former party tend to favor.

Votes can be cast at janloufada@blogspot.com

You don't need to destroy Casey publicly, just throw  the blogosphere's support and resources behind Pennachio - have a dignified race here. At the end of the day, Casey is better than Santorum.

http://www.chuck2006.com/

In Connecticut, take the gloves off, this is little Republican danger, so let him sweat a little by supporting Ned Lamont.

http://www.nedlamont.com/

Schumer and Co. are screwing with more states than Ohio.  Here in TN they are attempting to squeeze out more progressive candidate state senator Rosalind Kurita in favor of Harold Ford Jr, who will be destroyed in the general.  Schumer has stated publicly that he "will take care of" Sen. Kurita and the DSCC has refused to list her as a primary candidate on their website.
These guys are so out of touch with what is happening on the state level it is ridiculous.  I understand that the DSCC feels they should back those candidates who can raise money more easily, but really they have no business deciding who a the nominee should be in TN, OH or anywhere else.  All it is resulting in are disaffected folks (like myself) at the grassroots and a bunch of well funded political hacks who consistently get their asses handed to them.  This is exactly why I am in the minority party in Tennessee.  
If anyone wants to buck the DSCC and their kind, they should seriously look at Rosalind Kurita down here.  Our primary isn't until August, so we still have plenty of time to stick it to Schumer.

http://www.cegelisforcongress.com

Clearly, Cegelis is the more progressive candidate, the more charismatic candidate, the candidate that the local folks like more, and, like Hackett, the one shunned by the insider establishment. Her biggest problem of course, is money, and that's in great part to Rahm and DCCC insiders trying to redirect her donors over to Duckworth, but of course if we knew Cegelis as well as she performed with such small amounts of money in 2004, she will spend it well and be very frugal. It would be quite hard for the blogosphere to influence the races in big states like Ohio or Pennslyvania, or even smaller states like Connecticut, but it's certainly possible to influence a district with only 660,000 people in it as opposed to a state with 12 million in it.

Let's get behind Christine Cegelis!

The DSCC and DCCC are some of the most top-down and powerful organizations in Democratic politics.  Why can't the grassroots set up an alternative?

Um, how is there even a question?

Santorum is crazy and literally works tirelessly against democratic values.

Lieberman may be a DINO, but keeping Ricky in the Senate instead of Lieberman is F-ing ridiculous considering things...like say...chairperson ships, majority leadership...

I mean...seriously????

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.

yes, they actually did.  in the kerry-romney fight, conservatives fought against romney just to teach the establishment a lesson.

So let me get this straight... You would keep SANTORUM in the Senate just to spite Reid and Schumer for their actions vis a vis Hackett? For "undemocratically pushing us out of the process"? I voted for Lieberman in your poll but not because I think punishing him should have anything to do with the Hackett situation. I think he should be punished for his consistent record as a GOP enabler/apologist, and I therefore would back Ned Lamont if I lived in CT. But Casey is (arguably) the best shot we have in PA, and is inarguably better than Santorum. Why should Democrats do the enemy's work for them? I don't agree with how Hackett was treated, but I certainly won't react by openly trying to sabotage other Democrats who give us a real shot at winning one or both houses of Congress. Back Penacchio and back Ned Lamont, fine, and criticize the Hackett situation, but don't link one to the other as a part of some childish quarrel/faux power struggle with the DC establishment. I usually find a lot of great and intelligent content/discussion here and at Daily Kos/TPM and elsewhere, but I think Matt needs a reality check: Blogs aren't the Democratic Party. Blog readers are a small, self-selected and highly engaged but non-representative faction of the larger Democratic party. I, for one, think we demand ideological purity at our own peril, and I think the blog community has a somewhat overinflated perception of its political influence and capabilities. Matt, I understand the anger you and many of us feel at what happened to Hackett, but I hope you don't really mean to advocate "draining" money from the DSCC and helping SANTORUM stay in the Senate just to "royally piss Schumer off" and "teach insiders not to push us around anymore". If I understand it correctly, wasn't the pressure on Hackett to drop out of the Senate race also part of an effort to recruit him to run for the House? Is it possible that the effort was perhaps based on what Reid and Schumer thought were valid strategic considerations (though we may disagree with their assessment of the situation)? And even though it may have been approached in a strong-armed and yes, undemocratic manner, does that justify our actively helping the GOP in order to "register discontent" with the party establishment? I just think this mentality is self-destructive and would guarantee us loser status for many elections to come. The way I see it, saving this country starts with winning elections and gaining majorities, and that doesn't happen without a big-tent electoral coalition that welcomes a broad range of divergent interests and viewpoints.

   

He posted a diary on this subject on Kos earlier.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/14/ 153941/520

I'd rather not encourage the Dems at all. I wish I had voted for Nader in '04 like my instinct told me instead of being jerked around by the usual Democratic leadership jerk-offs who just screwed Hackett.

I'll give my money to Sanders, and he can see fit to do with it as he pleases. I'm through encouraging these sleazeballs who run my former party.

You want to call me a GoOPer, go right ahead if that makes you feel better. Though given my political beliefs, that'd be quite a stretch for you to truly believe.

Riddle me this batman: name me one fundamentally progressive and new initiative on the federal level the Dems have gotten into law in the past three decades.

As to Sherrod Brown being the only one who's run a statewide race - what's that got to do with it? As  you are  saying it's the power vs the rest. I don't see Andrew Cockburn as working class either - read the whole thing - I wrote in June of '04 that Kerry would lose because he was being led by and was listening to the likes of Emmanuel. Emmanuel has nothing to lose he's wealthy and a political insider - like Rumsfeld and Cheney he'll get a CEO position until his guy wins and recalls him to DC - the great unwashed are unworthy, they'll trash "our town".

http://www.counterpunch.org/andrew120920 05.html

Only Millionaire-Fence Straddlers Need Apply
Meet Rahm Emmanuel, the Democrats' New Gatekeeper

However it seems that in Emmanuel's opinion, Cegalis stinks. Never mind that excellent record against the giant Hyde, forget her well-crafted support network in the Chicago district, Cegalis has not yet raised a million dollars and, even more damningly, she is calling for troop withdrawal from Iraq. So Emmanuel set out to recruit a more suitable candidate. Initially, he approached two millionaires and urged them, serially, to run against Cegalis in the primary.

Now, with the Democrats presented by their opponents with their best chance in years, Emmanuel is ready to ensure that, come what may, nothing will really change, except for the worse.

This is absolutley bat-shit ridiculous.  You want to punish "Reid and Schumer" because they may succesfully knock off Santorum, repeat, Santorum.  Anyone who truly believes now is the time to punish the party should begin to work now on the Sheehan 08 run, becuase they are (that) based in the real world.

Oh, forgot,  Emmanuel comes out of the Clinton Administration - Begala, et al had a chance to keep Santorum out of the Senate in '94 but their guy was the super progressive Harris Wofford - they lost and now we're supposed to believe that the real candidate to beat Santorum is Rick with a different suit?  No, the DLC is in here somewhere and Emmanuel is just doing their job - don't be fooled by all this "only one to run statewide" - best candidate to win talk - we need the Hacketts if only to get rid of the Emmanuels

When the DSCC picks Ohio's candidate, that's not democracy.  When Ohio picks Ohio's candidate, THAT'S democracy, but that's not what happened.

Paul Hackett was embraced by the blog community because he seemed serious about correcting abuses of power by people who are in power.  Now he's out because our guys in power used their power to impose a candidate on the state.  Their judgement was more important than the voters'.  In principle, is that different than the Bush Administration's whole "trust me" act?

I want to contribute to the Lamont campaign. But I will only do it after he has formally announced.

I think taking Lieberman out in the primary is the only route to the right message. Lamont would presumably hold the Senate seat for the Democrats in the general election. As for Casey, better him than Santorum because that would be a pickup. If Casey loses, the party and media hacks will just say that Santorum came back using the power of incumbency. To take a sitting senator and former candidate for vice president out in a primary would scare the crap out of them.

The guy Schumer really hates is Elliot Spitzer.  And it is a class thing.  Schumer has it in for the "rich kids" and favors the so-called middle class types and especially the system strivers.  He's gone so far as to really work hard to blow a safe governor's seat and maybe a pickup of two or three House seats in NY by trying to start a big time no prisoners primary in NY.  

What is the job of Chuck Schumer and Rahm Emmanuel?  Does anyone really know?  Is it to recruit "good" candidates for all seats up for election this year?  This has nothing to do with this as both Brown and Hackett were recruited.  Is it to select candidates?  I thought this was the job of each state's Democratic voters.  Is it to raise money for Democratic candidates for the general election?  Not so likely if you burn up money by running ego trip primaries (Tammy Duckworth).

Chris and Matt are at least within hollering range of the establishment.  maybe they know.  Right now it seemed a whole lot more important to increase the Democratic field in Ohio by making sure every congressional seat had at least one candidate than winnowing down the senate field.

Couldn't we at least run somebody against Boehner for pete's sake?  And as for Jeff Seemann in Ohio 16, let's actually run somebody before we completely tear the guy down.  

Matt, I think you're missing something with this post.

As per Chris's post on class, there is no "us" anymore.  Maybe there never was.  The treatment of Hackett has done serious damage in the blogosphere to the "us", whatever there was of it.

I won't forget what happened next time Kos puts out the call for help as he did for Hackett once.  By becoming one of the "aristocracy", it fractures the blogosphere.  Sure, some will "get over it".  But some will never look at some of the "big" blogs the same again.

I liked Santorums book, I think I will vote for him this time.  I've got to vote for Lynn Swan also, he was a hell of a good reciever.  A good reciever is like a god in Pittsburgh.

Did I just say that????????????

This is so ridiculous.  If anyone pushed "us" out of the process it is Paul Hackett.  He's the one that  dropped out.  Why is it that the netroots should have the right to support any candidate that they want but other individuals (or groups) can not?

I hear a lot of stuff about any person identified with the party shouldn't take sides and interfere with a Democratic primary.  Well, what about DFA, the one time arm of the chairman of the party?  If it is OK for them to get involved in Connecticut why can't Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer tell some potential donor that they shouldn't bother giving money to a guy who has no chance of winning a statewide primary in Ohio?

I mean, it isn't like Schumer controls the check-writing hand of donors, they get to make up their own minds because it is their money.  If someone on this board wanted Paul Hackett to run they should have considered that when they weren't writing him a $2,000 check a month ago.

Enthusiasm alone can't win a primary, much less a general election and Hackett no doubt looked at the long odds, weighed both the fact that the establishment was against him but that the "netroots" were for him and decided it ain't worth it.  Did he expect the establishment to push Brown out of the way?  According to a lot of people online the establishment shouldn't be allowed to throw their weight around (which they've done), but these same online commenters wouldn't have a problem if the establishment had thrown its weight their way.

Anybody that wants to can run for office in America, and anybody that wants to can support them.  Those anybodies include party leaders whose primary concern is winning elections.  Sometimes it sucks when a candidate we like isn't the favorite, but life's not always fair.  It's time for a lot of people to grow up.  Politics is a grownups game, and if your childish response is to try and defeat a Democrat who is leading his general election opposition 50-40 and his primary opposition 70-1, then maybe you should stick to t-ball instead.

Fer chrissakes, three comments:

1) This all you got? Three decades and this is all you got?

2) Largely bipartisan

3) If you think unpaid leave to get cancer treatment or care for a dying relative is progressive, you ought to get out more. Maybe to Europe for a 5-week vacation (oh yeah, the American left has not delivered that, though in France, for instance, it came in 1936) or, since you probably only have two weeks, a brief stint in Canada might do.

But if you think I'd make a fine Senator, I welcome your support.

well... you CAN punish Orrin hatch by making him sit within earshot.

If there's going to be any "punishment," at least get behind a credible candidate who is running a decent campaign.  And don't pick a race where you're just running against the establishment.  Some of the non-establishment picks aren't necessarily more progressive choices.

Unfortunately, some of the favorites of the blogosphere have run some poor campaigns.

And if some bloggers are going to go the 'punishment' route, please pick candidates who won't back down from a fight, but won't say anything stupid to the point where the candidate's point gets lost in the grand scheme of things.

I voted Lieberman simply because I already thought we should do that.

I also think a bad democrat (Casey) is still better than a horrific republican (Santorum). So while I'm not happy about what happened in PA anymore than I am happy about Ohio... the choice there is easy.

But the reality is I think there is a third answer.

Do our best to cut off all funding to the DSCC and DCCC while simultaneously funding the hell out of the DNC.

There is a clear demarcation here and I disagree with the statement that we haven't handed the beltway elite a defeat. We have. We elected Gov. Howard Dean, M.D. as DNC Chair against their wishes and their disorganized best efforts. Frankly, we kicked their asses on that one.

So fund Dr. Dean.

Yes, some of that money will end up going to support the beltway boys and girls but it will be Howard, empowered by us, that controls the purse strings and not the Chuckie and Rahm show.

It seems that MYDD has become about enforcing party ideology and is missing the fact that we control no branch of government and have virtually no power to stop anything the Bushies want to do.  I am sorry Paul Hackett left the race but in the last week Chris has suggested throwing moderate Dems overboard and now Matt suggests re-electing Rick Santorum to send a message.  

Holy crap!  Have people here lost their minds?  Rick Santorum is a far right wing lunatic who wrote a book that basically said women should be barefoot and pregnant amongst other 12th century ideas.  I don't know a lot about Casey but I know a dog would be a better Senator than Santorum.

People need to get a grip and focus on the real enemy - THE REPUBLICANS!

The Brady Bill is about as un-progressive as they get since it was based on a law enforcement approach (rather than, say, fighting the root causes of urban violence, i.e. POVERTY) and it endorsed the unfair and racist "prohibited category" approach of the Gun Control Act of 1968.  It also killed our electoral chances in states as diverse as West Virginia and Arizona, perhaps for a generation or more.

I'm still waiting for the Democratic Party to start pushing for some real progressive legislation:

• Repeal of Taft-Hartley Act
  
• America's Redrock Wilderness Act
  
• National card-check union recognition legislation
  
• Double the minimum wage
  
• Single payer health care
  
• Wholesale and total repeal of the Patriot Act, with no equivocation and no apologies
  
• End the War on Drugs and legalize the softer drugs
  
• Repeal mandatory minimum sentencing and civil forfeiture laws

Any chance of this happening in my lifetime?  Anyone?  Anyone?  Schumer?  Schumer?

If you're fighting in a war and your comrade does something obnoxious or stupid, you don't shoot him, do you?

Matt, I feel your pain, the netroots is just not as powerful as it could be (and will be someday). Take pride in that we are the ultimate think tank, and we are providing ideas, language, and inspiration for a growing number of political candidates.

I voted "neither" but I strongly support unseating Lieberman.  I just don't see it as a "response" to Hackett being pushed out, because it's such a different scenario.  The proper response is to focus on a bossed primary and beat the DCCC/DSCC candidate with a better candidate.  If we could realistically get Chuck Pennacchio into a strong position, I'd be all about defeating Casey, but I fear attack ads against Casey won't do the job, he'll still be the nominee, and we need to think carefully about what sort of ads won't help Santorum beat him.

So I think the best response right now would be a campaign among all the lefty blogs to support Christine Cegelis.  That has all the right ingredients: giving Democratic leaders a black eye for bossing a primary, supporting the better candidate, in a race where the better candidate has good chances at wining the primary and the general.  Plus she's an established netroots/grassroots favorite, and one of the first "Dean Dozen" candidates from 2004.