I'm sorry Ned Lamont lost too, Matt. But you're going to have to get over it.

Did the "progressive" movement really "unearth" the notable republican scandals?

Did the progressive movement make the Iraq war a disaster?

Not to say that the progressives don't have a lot to be triumphalist about, but on the first point, it appears you're taking the good ol' "MSM" for granted, on the second, for things beyond your control. This was about the Iraq war, and not  a debate over it's morality, we lost that in 2002, 2004. But a referendum on it being such a colossal fuck up.

Otherwise, yeah big win.  

I think the problem here is considering Rep. Tauscher's remarks as being directed towards the "netroots" and progressives in general. She's clearly angling within the Democratic caucus itself.

During the race for Minority Leader, a large swath of the California delegation tried to strongarm her by threatening to have her district redrawn & her forced out if she didn't support Nancy Pelosi for leader. If that's playing by the rules, then clearly the Game is a little trickier than we'd like to realise. You can't take the politics out of politics and Rep. Tauscher is simply trying to secure her & her ideaological comrades' security & safety within the party through numbers.

I realise this isn't what Chris was objecting to. He was balking at the notion that Progressives would drive the party left off a cliff. First of all, considering what we've had to endure these last 6 years, to focus on fears of moving too far to the left really illustrates shameless & thoughtless lack of priorities on Tauscher's part, and considering all the things the Progressive movement has done for the party the last few years and, let's face it, considering some of things that have been done & supported by Democrats of the Tauscher mode in recent years, they should be on their knees with kisses and praises for "The Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party" to speak of them as a nuisance is the height of disrespect.

I've always admired the pragmatic respect Chris Bowers, who by his own admission is very very progressive, has shown toward more conservative factions of the party, even when they don't deserve it. So for him to be offended probably means something is offensive & I apologize for characterizing is as melodramatic earlier. I'm just trying to point out that a lack of internalisation of the "We are the world" memo among Democrats isn't limited to the "New Democrats" alone.  

Wow, talk about blowing things out of proportion. My god.

All this talk about following rules, exactly what "rules" did Rep. Tauscher break exactly?

Just the other week you were speaking in a glowing and triumphalist manner about the Progressive wave about to sweep the party and about the successes of the House Progressive Caucus' in recruiting members. Now that Tauscher and the rest of the Centrist squad are sorting out their own idealogical comrades you act like some sacred trust has been broken.  

?? Did I miss the Declaration of War or something?

"You know, I wish that we could have party unity, but it's obvious that New Democrats simply cannot help themselves."

Yes I'm sure you're just positively grief stricken at the prospect of an intra party war (of who'm you're the one advertising & promoting) I mourn your broken heart.  

So Matt & Johnathan are paid bloggers?

As was said before, looks like a thinly veiled hit piece to me.

Obama > Stoller

Anyone seriously pretending that Schlesinger could actually win this thing, even if just trying to drum up support for the Republican, is offending human intelligence.

I think any definition of anti-semitism has to have at least as much to do with hwat you say as what you do, and what you do to be judged as anti-semitic has to be more than an apathy or dispalced priorities, which in hindsight look uglier. However he acted toward European jewry, FDR, almost from his first day in office, was practically a saint to American jewry and many Jews served in cabinet positions in his administrations.

So, call me anything you want, so please don't call me a lefty?

Yeah, just what we need, ANOTHER Israel lobby.

Instead of trying to get the U.S. to "solve" the Israeli-Palestenian conflict (we do such a good job in these things) just commit the U.S. to a position of supporting Israel, but not unconditionally & out of scope with other liberal democracies. International bodies like the U.N. & NGOs are the ones who should be solving the Israeli-Palestenian affair.

If this thing is going to happen, it would be nice if the new organization could maybe peel away the more liberal/Democratic friendly corners of AIPAC away (such as the ones that only give money to pro-choice Democratic women & such) and get them tojoin the new kids. That way they would have power leverage.

And whatever can be said of Soros, blaming jews for the anti-semitism expressed against them is just perverse & plain wrong.

Chris, I think your analysis is interesting, but fails in some areas.

You stated that the Cook Political Report currently lists 28 seats as either toss-ups, or as leaning toward a shift in party control. All 28 of these seats are held by Republicans. Only six of those 28 seats, FL-13, FL-16, FL-22, NC-11, TX-22, and VA-02, and in the eleven states that once formed the confederacy"

Which is probably technically true, but there's two problems. One; dividing the country into simply "The South" & the rest of the country, isn't a very useful analysis, because it ignores the presence of other very conservative areas of the country that are just as conservative if not more conservative than the south. Of those 22 Republican held toss-up seats outside the 11 states of the Old Confederacy, 3 of them are in the State of Indiana; a solidly red state & one in which Bush beat Kerry by nearly 21 percentage points. That's a bigger R to D disparity than in every southern state save Alabama & Texas.

The second problem is that your definition of The South as the Old Confederate states ignores Kentucky, which technically wasn't a confederate state but is most assuredly part of the south & a red state. One of the toss-up races listed in the Cook report is in Kentucky.

Another problem is that a number of these toss up races are in states that, while not arch-conservative, are hardly bastions of cosmopolitan liberalism either. This runs the gambit from swing states like Ohio, Iowa & New Mexico (which both went red in 2004) to trending blue, but still reliably red states like Arizona & Colorado, which account for 7 toss up races.

Second is accounting for just how these people are doing it (or not doing it as you say). In addition to the 3 toss up races in Indiana & one in Kentucky, which includes;

Joe Donnelly: A pro-life, anti-gun regulation, "faith" Democrat who opposes amnesty for illegals & supports building a wall along the border, running against Chris Chocola in Indiana.

Baron Hill: A former member of congress & DLC & Blue Dog alumni running against Mike Sodrel in Indiana

and Ken Lucas: Another former member of congress & vocal "Blue Dog" democrat who is pro-life, anti-gun regulation and anti-gay marriage running against Geoff Davis in Kentucky;

You also have

Ed Perlmutter: a moderate "centrist" Democrat who's also co-chair of the Colorado DLC, running for Bob Beauprez'a vacated seat in Colorado.

John Cranley: A pro life Catholic candidate who opposes abortion rights running against Steve Chabot in Ohio.

Zack Space: A very pro-gun, very hard line anti-immigration candidate who opposes citizenship for non English speakers & supports building a wall along the Mexican border and characterizes any gun regulations as a threat to the constitution, running for Bob Ney's seat in Ohio.

I think it's definitely a shift to the left for the party, but I wouldn't count all my eggs just yet. And I think you'll find that even as certain states in the west * southwest trend bluer, the types of Democrats who will succeed there aren't always going to be the type you prefer.

I work for my county Democratic party and we do blockwalking too, suburbs & elswhere. While I wouldn't call what we do "Triangulating" (a loaded word) we don't approach the issue like conservatism gives us cooties or alters our body chemistry (If we did, we wouldn't be very successful as this is a very conservative county).

To be sure, lots of our walking is intended for finding people sympathetic to the cause & rounding up troops, our most successful efforts this season has been by precient chairs in very cushy republican suburban areas in Arlington who have banded together and decided to do organized outreach to their mostly republican neighbors. In fact, just recently we've been getting an outstanding amount of support from republican voters who told us they were impressed with our gubernatorial candidate Chris Bell (Good guy, but not a fire breathing progressive) after his debate performance & said he changed some of their opinions about Democrats.

Like I said, this is a VERY conservative county in a VERY conservative state, and approaches to this sort of thing will be different in a state like Minnesota which has a rich liberal-populist heritage to build on, but there's a variety of approaches & that's not "Triangulating".

As for us second-class "moderates" well, stick your nose up all you want, this is our party too.  

Didn't the GOP pick up 54 seats in 1994?

This was a really stupid post by Matt, and really shows the gulph between priorities in corners of the liberal-progressive cause. I want my government doing something good for the public good, not wasting, time resources & political capital abusing government for partisan purposes. That's for the GOP.