That's my theory.  I mean do any of these hot-headed types really undertsand that, at the end of the day, obstructing looks just as bad as passing something that isn't helpful?  They seem not to understand this.

Also, I think they don't realize that the Democratic wins in KY and VA are due at least in some measure to GOP incompetence and crookedness, more than to some deep-seated liberal shift.  Gilliard and Stoller aren't Virginians, and can't be expected to understand the dynamics of the race is ways that we might.

Plus, they ascribe to a theory, for which I think there is very little evidence, that tacking hard to one side is actually a good thing because it "Sharpens the choice."  Well, on that theory, Kilgore should be governor and Allen should still be in the Senate.  Maybe the adherants of that theory either haven't worked on a winning campaign in a long time, or else they have unrealistic beliefs about how many strong Demovcrats there really are out there.

Personally, if the Political Compass is to be believed, I'm only about half as liberal as the average Kossack, so that may be a factor, I admit.  But I think a lot of them just don't seem to know what the political climate is like, especially in the south.

I'm not surprised at all.  Kos and Singer both seem to think their one-sized answer for American politics fits all.  Here in Kentucky, we're pissed.  We like, at least, a little pretend say-so.

Word is Chuck Schumer and the DSCC have picked Crit and they'll get involved in the primary.  This leaves "Fighting Dem" Andrew Horne out in the cold along with several other good candidates.  What sort of deal the DSCC has with Kos and Singer, I don't know, but I don't like the way this smells. 

potential candidate to me.  I'm not sure what's going on with this situation, but I'd love to know more.

In other words....Joe Democrat really is as liberal as I am, but doesn't want anyone to know it.

The same goes for the scores of Democrats, and you know who you are, for saying the same thing about Sen. Webb in recent months. Maybe, just maaaaaybe, a guy who once supported Ronald Reagan and George Allen is not always going to see eye to eye with you on every issue. But I guess gnashing your teeth and calling a war hero a coward is just easier.

Personally, I ascribe to the theory that the Democrats, as the broadest party in America, benefit from internal debate, when it is coherent debate and not inter-personal sniping.

Largely, Kos and the rest appear to keep their criticisms to actions, behaviors and legislation. That is the idea behind the "Bush Dogs" campaign on OpenLeft. I personally dislike the BushDogs campaign, as I think we're better off helping all Democrats, as long as they're not corrupt and don't vote with the Republicans a majority of the time.

Some of the commentary here has seemed to be "Kos bad" and "Stoller bad" without specifying why. Lowell, my compliments for calling out specific actions to critique in the posting.

I think it is very important that if we choose to criticize fellow Democrats (be they elected officials or bloggers) we should criticize their actions and not their persons. For example, while I really dislike Chris Bowers' Bush Dogs campaign, I am grateful for his wide contributions to the online Democratic community in general and his fantastic analysis of congressional voting patterns in particular.

Just how I see it.

Honestly, I ignore the national blogs. I understand why they want to have an opinion on what is going on everywhere, but it seems to me that it is impossible for them to really have a handle on what's going on in every state, not to mention every region of every state.

after all, a great deal of the attention Jim Webb got on dailykos came because Lowell and I posted there regularly, Lowell even before he went on staff for Jim.

And there were local people posting about Jon Tester, about a lot of the Houe candidates.  So I think if you ignore a national blog like dailykos you might miss how a local or state-wide race can potentially resound.

It is harder to persuade people to pay attention to state legislatures per se -  that of another state is often too vague, the topic too diffuse.  Sometimes an individual race can catch attention.  Don McEachin's race against Bennie Lambert had some catch because of Bennie's relationship to Allen.  And Chap's race also got some attention because his opponent is married to Tom Davis, who is a figure with some national reputation.

I am not a Virginia specialist the way some of you are, but I do post on Virginia specific things from time to time, and occasionally some of those diaries do get a fair amount of attention.

One builds a reputation on a national blog like dailykos.  Then sometimes people will click to see what you have to say just because they usually like what you post.  Otherwise it has to be a topic that interests them - nobody reads all 250-350 daily kos diaries everyday.  There has to be a reason for people to click and read.

before and after I went on staff for the Webb campaign.

Let us consider that in the last twenty years, no great strides have been made by either the left or the right to accomplish their long desired objectives (we still don't have national health care, abortion is still legal, etc...).

I remember debating with a few national bloggers who didn't care for Tim Kaine's strategy back in 2005.  They didn't like that he wasn't liberal/partisan enough.  They predicted Kaine would go down in flames.  Well, they didn't know Virginia.

The same is true today.  The activists on either side, the ones with a national megaphone, drive the party.  And when they are out of power, they are more forgiving to those who are not as ideologically pure (hence the rabid support for folks like Jim Webb, Jon Tester, and Chris Carney amongst others).  Now that they are in office and Democrats have the power of Congress again, these gentlemen don't support the Democrats on a few issues, and this they feel is a betrayal.  We do not elect empty suits to parrot a party line.  We elect men and women who will be leaders and vote based on their own conscience.  That means we cannot expect perfect party unity (although Democrat party unity scores are very high, much higher than GOP unity scores).

The GOP, as we've observed in Virginia, is in the process of purging the party of anything that isn't ideologically pure.  Whenever this happens, the ideology that they must support becomes the most radical and insensible ideologies imaginable.  It is inevitable, and it works this way on both sides.  Liberal national bloggers should be careful that they do not fall into this trap, but allow us to debate these issues so that together we can find the right solutions that makes government work and work beneficially.

Folks like Mark Warner and Tim Kaine know what it takes to make a state run, and it isn't by being an ideologue.

Matusleo
Ut Prosim

n/t

In 2005, I worked to get Dave Marsden, a former Republican, elected as my Delegate.  This year, I worked to get Chap Petersen, a fairly moderate Dem, elected as my Delegate.  In both cases, I can honestly say I was more motivated to defeat the Republican nominee than to support the Democratic nominee.

If either were to be challenged from the left in a primary, I'd probably vote for the challenger, assuming he or she wasn't a kook [for example, I think Mike Gravel is a kook, and I think Dennis Kucinich isn't].  I'd vote for the lefty even if I thought the non-lefty was more electable.  I'd resent anyone telling me I was wrong.

In the end, if I really deplored my elected representatives that much, and if I found I had no realistic prospect of seeing my fellow voters elect someone I didn't deplore, I guess I'd vote with my feet and move to Arlington, Alexandria, or [dare I say it?] DC or MD.

So they didn't write about the Virginia General Assembly. Big deal. Did we go to dKos for heart-stopping updates on the Illinois State Legislature?

It's not what they aim for.