EXCUSE ME; right-wing Democrat? I understand if you don't like her economic stances, which BTW fit this wealthy, pro-business district very well, but she is socially quite progressive - pro-choice, pro-gun control, etc. Her only area of conservatism is fiscal policy, which it should be given the demographics of IL-08.

If you are such a litmus-test, one-issue voter that you call Melissa Bean a right-wing Dem, you have really drunk the Kool-Aid.

15 seats and the Unions win everything, didn't any of you guys actually read crashing the gate, or Femminist and Enivormentalist have to shut up, but labor gets to ruin us with our support.

Yup.  There's always some self-serving justification put forth for forming a circular firing squad.

A single seat isn't worth much?  It's 6.67 percent of the difference between bupkis and having control of the House.

I support Ned Lamont in Connecticut because not only does Lieberman need his knuckled rapped but Lamont can carry the state if Lieberman is ousted.  I

In contrast, if Bean loses, this will be a dicey seat to win back for the Dems.  !@#$%^&*! stupidity.

Left wing indepedent challengers cause Republicans to win.

Period.

This is crazy! Melissa Bean, regardless of her vote for CAFTA, is a good Democrat! Far more progressive and far more of a Democrat that Ben Nelson or Joe Lieberman. We should be telling this independent to get out of the race and help Melissa Bean get reelected. The Republican candidate will vote against us on every issue, including CAFTA. Getting a majority in the House is worth more than anything right now, you should be ashamed of yourself for threatening to help an Republican get elected!

I've bitched plenty about conservative Dems, but a challenge from an independant an a primary challenge are two totally different things.  This district is also not a gimmie for Dems.  I don't think I'm crazy about this one.

Hmmm...

Could it be that they're wise to the DLC after the Cegelis debacle???

Paybacks are a BITCH, huh Rahm?

Can't agree with this strategy unless they have a realistic hope of winning the general.  They should fight like hell in the primary and if they lose back the Democrat, because they'll get a hell of a lot more out of a Dem committe structure with her in the House than they will with her out and a Republican in her seat.

the party of working people?

Oh, really?

Well, that explains why the Democrats (sans Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-ND) support a pro-corporate, free-trade "immigration reform" agenda that needlessly increases the supply of cheap foreign labor, and the immoral erosion of wages and job opportunities for working-class people? Yep, sometimes it's just that simple.

against Bean instead of supporting an independent, who wouldn't win anyway. IMO, labor can field credible primary challenges in just about any CD in the country.

They should look to doing that in other "Cafta 15" CDs, where the deadlines haven't yet passed.

Payback should end up shooting oneself in the foot.

Its about time - till the Unions stand up to the Dems they are just doormats.

If a Dem doesn't support the Unions then the Union's really have ABSOLUTELY NO REASON to support the Dem.

Until Progressives & Unions stand up to the Democratic Party the Party's power structure has absolutely no reason to care what they think.

It won't take many Melissa Bean's before the Dems figure out the cost of their actions.

are you nuts?  Bean is a good solid Dem.  this is a 52/48 district.  you run an independent and you're really gonna hate the R that gets in there. Snap out of it!!

Great Post Matt.  I agree 100%.

So now a Republican in preferable and leave the House in the hands of the WH?  Get real.

This is why "liberals and progressives" will always be a minority. I am sure that the far right will support Lincoln Chaffee in Rhode Island until the end (with the exception of the Club for Growth) because they know that he is the ONLY type of Republican who could win in that state. This is in spite of the fact that Chafee is (somewhat for a Republican) symapthetic to organized labor and pro-choice.

Does the left realize that Bean is probably the only Democrat in a generation who could win this heavily affluent and suburban district? Of course not, so they have to "defeat her to send a message". So on election night, when this seat flips, they can be self-righteous (just like the Pennachoids in PA may be if Casey narrow loses to Santorum) about "sending a message on labor issues" while someone 100% hostile to their issues takes over. Yep that's smart.

So apparently these people want someone in office who disagrees with them on almost everything because Bean disagreed with them on one or two issues. Bean probably still is better for organized labor than her GOP opponent. But of course they would rather have some openly hostile to unions because Bean actually has to be responsive to her constituents.

Again, if one seat determines who controls Congress, and if this is the one district that flips, I will be here to tell you all "I told you so". But of course the left has to cut its nose to spite its face.

Look at Republicans like Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Chris Shays, Connie Morella, Arlen Specter, Lincoln Chaffee, Nancy Johnson, Ed Simmons, and the other Republicans in liberal states. The national GOP, the White House, the NRSC/NRCC, and the conservaitve movement (with of course, the exception being the Club for Growth) all will fight for them until the end. Why? They know that a Tom DeLay conservative could not win in those states.

Unfortunately the left still hasn't grasped this. It is sad that they are going after perhaps the best Democrat for that district. IL-8 is not a city district.

As I have said in the numerous anti-Casey threads, for many on the left, losing is the same as winning. Some on the left love losing and being a matryr. In fact I would say that many of these activits even take some perverse pride in their marginalization. They would rather lose than win.

I say this because they always have problems with any and all Democratic candidates. There is nothing to satisfy these people.

I really hope that Bean wins with this independent candidate on the ballot. I hope that Casey wins without the militant Pennachoids. For if they both win then Democratic candidates will no longer have reason to get on their knees and kiss the asses of the 5% militant fringe of the party that is not happy with anyone.

As a Union member (full disclosure), I think that the Unions are correct to oppose Bean.  However, I disagree with the method that they are using.

Matt, you're not quite right here.  The place for the Unions to challenge Bean is the Primary.  Once the Primary is over than the Unions must get behind (but not necessarily support) the chosen candidate.  To get an R elected is self defeating in the long run.  YES, make her feel the heat in the primary, just like Joe L is feeling the netroots love in Conn.  But, to run a spoiler is self-defeating.

My second point, Money: I see no reason in the world for Union money to be wasted in the support of this candidate (Bean).  There are others that Union money in Il. would help more(Duckworth?).  If she wants to vote against workers interests than she will have to get re-elected without their money, without their work.  If that is too hard for Bean to understand, tough. It seems that the DNC or DCCC is trying to make an end run and have people "not associated with the (Bean) campaign" solicit money from the Unions for the Bean Campaign.  

This is just plain wrong on the part of the Democratic Party.

Although Unions are dedicated to advocate on behalf of their members, I contend that it does them no good to put an R into office by running a spoiler.  

I feel that the Unions can not ask other single issue groups to stand aside in the General election where they have an single issue problem with a candidate, without walking the same walk where the positions are reversed.
 

I also agree with Matt.  The unions have got to be looking out for the interests of their members, and that is by supporting pro-labor legislators and defeating anti-labor ones.  Its pretty clear which category Bean will fall in.  If Bean loses, and Schuerers vote total is greater than the margin between Bean and her opponent, other Democratic congressmen will take notice.  And that will help labor.

(And btw, Nader's 2000 campaign increased the influence of the left in the Democratic party.  Thats probably the reason for half the bellyaching over it).

However, Bean is going to lose even without the third party candidacy.  IL 8 is a deep red district, the Bush relection percentage was 58% and the other elected officials are Republican up and down the line.  However, they had a "Jim Bunning" problem with the previous Congressman.  People voted for Bean to get rid of Crane, knowing that they could elect a younger Republican two years down the road.  Bean doesn't own the seat, she just borrowed it for two years.  Even if the Congressman here was the second coming of Abner Mikva, for strategic reasons it would be a bad idea to try to defend it.

pride.

And pride isn't worth a damn thing.

Getting rid of this Republican Congress will do more to halt bad deals like CAFTA than getting rid of Melissa Bean.

In the scheme of things, I'd rather have a 218/217 Democratic Majority with Melissa Bean over a 218/217 Republican Majority with David McSweeney.

Having lived in West Texas for 30 years, and being accustomed to a somnambulent local Democratic Party, I can tell you first hand how moronic it is to  try to enforce a litmus test on candidates. For chrissake, it is far better to have a conservative Democrat who will help you obtain a majority than to have a shiite republican who won't be a vote for a Democratic Speaker. Wake up - half a loaf is far better than none. Obviously, I have been in the wasteland too long to even appreciate the nuance between party purity and eschewing the opportunity to control the levers of power based on one's rating by the progressive powers that be. Get real, folks. We don't have the luxury to be anything but pragmatic at this juncture. Wait until we are in power before we start a purge.

txswami

I literally can't believe I just read that.

Stoller, you really need to back off of commenting about IL politics; you really have no idea what is going on here, and your comments only make things worse.

First you play right into the DLC's hands by being agnostic on the IL-06 primary.

Now you are undermining a fiscally conservative Dem  in an otherwise GOP district because of some pet litmus test.

Really, just butt the heck out until you do a little more research.

What was the last statistic I heard? Only 8% of non-government workers are presently in a union.

Let's face it: it's time to start pondering what the post-union solution might be, even if it is nothing more than advocating like hell for a minimum wage hike.

I don't see how the unions can ever re-assert themselves in American politics.

I think Union backing of an independent Bean challenger is GREAT NEWS.  Bean should be ashamed of herself for the way she has voted over the last two years.  She voted to reauthorize the PATRIOT Act, voted for the Bankruptcy Bill, and voted for CAFTA.  She is a corporation-beholden fool and deserves to go down.  Dems are so blinded by their lust for control that they will pursue it at any cost.  All that's necessary is slapping Pro-Choice and Democrat next to their name and they'll give the green light.  I will support her challenger knowing he will not win and in the hopes she will lose.  The message needs to be sent that if you want to run on the democratic ticket then you need to act like a fucking democrat.  and until that happens, you're going to continue to lose.

First of all, Melissa Bean is not a right-wing Democrat. Your application of the "right-wing" label is used liberally, and doesen't seem to be based on any special analysis of the person's politics.

Secondly, if you are supporting an independent challenge to a Dem candidate (which only hopes to succeed in siphoning off enough votes to make Bean lose) than you are a fairweather Democrat and of no use to the party.

Oh, and Matt once again proves that when it comes to politics, he can generally be depended upon to be a moron. Which isn't very good, considering he makes a career out of this.

"The message needs to be sent that if you want to run on the democratic ticket then you need to act like a fucking democrat."

According to Progressive Punch, which tracks all votes, Melissa Bean has a progressive score of  75.60 which is approximately 45 points higher than the most liberal Republican in the congress. Considering she serves in a red district, I'd like to know exactly what you expect of her.

You bitch and moan claiming that Duckworth won the primary

What I'm doing is pointing out what is now obvious...Rahm backed the wrong candidate in IL-06, in the eyes of the unions at least, and now the rest of us are going to pay the price for it.

Zion, Illinois:

1 in 10 live below the poverty line, and the median household income is in the 40s.  I do not consider this affluent.

The voters were "victims" of the disinformation spin from people like Obama, Durbin, Rahm and yes, Nathaniel Ament Stone. And like the unions, many of them now realize that they were duped, too.

At least that's the sentiment I'm seeing on Non-Political blogs, which have many posters from IL-06 in them. And these are the "Average Joe" voters who don't pay attention to politics...They just trusted that Obama was being honest with them...And they're PISSED!

I'm referring to blogs like Broadband Reports (formerly DSL Reports), and groups like that. Groups that are about as apolitical as they come. They were chock full of irate posts shortly after the Primary. It's died down now, of course, because they are apolitical blogs. But it's a safe bet that the sentiment is still there.

Oh really.

Well how about this. I will authorize you...in writing...to check my Primary voting records for the last 20 years or so. When you view them, you will see that I've pulled about as many REPUBLICAN ballots as I have DEMOCRATIC ballots.

It's a matter of public record. Check it yourself.

She won by 2.1 votes per precinct.

The "conventional wisdom" being spewed by the DCCC and bloggers like Stone was that Cegelis was "unelectable" and had no chance against Duckworth, who would win in a landslide.

OOPS!

Gah.  What an idiotic post.  Things like this are the reason why Democrats never win.  We never win because people like Matt Stoller are incapable of keeping their eyes on the prize.

We must retake the House.  DON'T NADER.  Let me repeat: DON'T NADER.  Let's not hear any exceptions, qualifications, what-ifs, or weasel words.  DON'T NADER DON'T NADER DON'T NADER DON'T NADER.  Mr. Stoller, please bang your head into a wall, hard, until you have absorbed this message and realize how incredibly misguided you are on this issue.

Really embarassing sometimes to read such juvenile posts from a front-pager. You would expect more thorough analysis. Ugh

The argument is simply that the district is uniformly affluent.  I have demonstrated that this is not the case.  And I know that many of the unincorporated areas of Lake County are very poor.  Yes, the average is above the national average, but Lake County is not altogether affluent.  I take issue with this characterization, as I know of many poor areas of District 8 that are offset by new development by the nouveau riche.  

I'm confused. Where does strategic voting come in?

I mean, we are constantly treated to "don't vote SD, don't vote Green, don't vote VT Progressive, that'll simply throw the election to the GOP, we know you can't stand the vichy Dem we've chosen for you to vote, but you have to admit she's better than the wingnut". We have heard this refrain for a decade now. This is a pitch for strategic voting that benefits the Democratic party to the detriment of other groups that have attempted, with less than stellar results, to keep that party honest.

But when it comes to strategic voting to get rid of a vichy Dem, to make a strategic decision that vichy Dems are bad for the brand, do nothing (in fact, worse than nothing, contribute to the rightward drift of US politics) to further causes we believe important, etc., this is not okay.

You guys sound like you want both the milk and the milk money. Not exactly consistent.

As regards Scheurer, did you read his policy statements? Sound a lot like Kucinich before the Pollitt wing of your party forced his choice shift. I can see where that sort of message would resonate with working class union members, including the third who tend to vote GOP for social issues.

But you guys'll tell us as long as she's for choice and calls herself a Dem, it's worth ignoring the other 90% of her policy positions. And don't get me wrong, choice is important, but it doesn't offset the arguably far more important positions she's terrible on.

Not exactly tempting, I have to tell you.

Sorry, I'm with Matt on this. Democrats who vote to send the jobs of Americans - a lot of them Democrats - overseas, need to be replaced with folks who will go to Congress and represent the working man.

Haters?

The only "hate" I have is for Rahm Emanuel's perpetual lack of ethics.

Q: "What prevented these people from figuring things out before casting their ballot?"

A: Voter apathy. Instead of taking the initiative to research the candidates, they simply took the mailers and ads at face value. They were told, by people like Obama, that Cegelis was "unelectable", and they didn't question it...Until it was too late. BTW-These are their words (paraphrasing), not mine.

Q: "Has Duckworth suddenly ripped off her ideological Scooby Doo mask now that she's got the nomination or what?"

A: Duckworth won by only 2.1 votes/pct. instead of the "landslide" that Durbin, Obama, Clinton,etc. kept predicting in the MSM. That razor-thin margin of victory showed them that Cegelis WAS "electable". And that DW was nowhere near as strong a candidate as the "Beltway Boys" were touting. Again, their words, not mine.

Then when Republicans began attacking DW immediately after the election, they knew for sure that they'd been had.

The National Republican Congressional Committee sent out a release with the taunting headline, "Tammy Duckworth-WWRD: What Would Rahm Do.''

People here in DuPage County DESPISE "Chicago Machine Puppeteers"...Especially Rahm.

Q: "Duckworth's campaign has been very good at turning money into votes..."

A: Yep! Rahm was able to "buy" the Primary for her, albeit just barely. But here's the problem with that strategy. Roskam has a war chest that WON'T QUIT! Last I heard, something like $1.6 million.

Dick Cheney himself came to town to raise $$$ for Roskam recently. Close to $1/4 MILLION in one night. I expect Hastert & even Bush will do the same. Hell, he has Ken Mehlman focused here...That's a FIRST! Roskam also has the County Republican "Machine" at his disposal. They are his ground troops - And they are a very well oiled machine.

Duckworth, even WITH DCCC, Obama, Clinton & Co. fundraising, can't come anywhere near that kind of money. Plus she STILL doesn't have any troops to speak of. Her staff managed to alienate (intentionally, some feel) the core Cegelis troops. Intentional or not, the damage was done.

HOPEFULLY the animosity will die down in time and the Cegelis volunteers will get on board. But it's doubtful that they will have the same level of enthusiasm for Duckworth that they did for her...It's just human nature.

That's what I see here on the ground. Hope that helps.

I just get tired of being labeled a "wacky liberal" for not drinking the DLC Kool-Aid.

I think Both Sides should be smacked upside the head with a 2x4, then drug by their hair to a locked room, where they will remain until they work out their differences.

Sometimes ya just gotta get their attention first, ya know?

You missed the "IN THE EYES OF THE UNIONS" part.

The unions are blowing off Bean in IL-08 in retaliation for being hoodwinked in IL-06. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me" seems to be their new motto.