Which Is Better?
June 18th, 2008at 06:52am Posted by Eli
Would you rather have a right-wing Democratic wanker like Chris Carney who reliably votes with Republicans as your congresscritter, or an actual Republican?
I would argue that as long as the Democratic majority is not in danger, it is much better to have a true Republican in that seat, at least for the moment. Why? Two reasons:
1) Let their idiocy contribute to trashing the Republican brand instead of the Democratic one. Bush Dogs like Carney contribute to the negative popular image of Democrats as feckless and ineffectual.
2) It’s not easy, but it’s easier for a progressive candidate to knock off a Republican incumbent than a Democratic one. They’re not fighting the Democratic party leadership, and they’re going up against an opponent whose party’s brand is even more in the toilet than the Democrats’. I think a lot of Bush Dogs are Democrats solely for that reason.
If you want to be a Democrat, then be a Democrat. If not, then go join the other team. I wish there was a mechanism to “excommunicate” the worst offenders, so that the DCCC & DSCC, and individual Democrats, would all refuse to support them in either general or primary elections. How might the 2006 CT-SEN election might have turned out if such a policy were in place against Lieberman, I wonder.
(h/t Howie)
Entry Filed under: Democrats,Politics,Republicans,Wankers
