The Class of 2008: Who’s Going to be Progressive?

38 thoughts on “The Class of 2008: Who’s Going to be Progressive?”

1. keep up the good work; let me ask you question since you have been doing these varying demographic analysis across the board; of all 435 congresspersons; who’s voting record(using the metric you used on your last posting)goes FARTHEST from the leanings of his or her district? see what i’m saying? for example(it will never happen in reality);say a dennis kucinich in a jim marshall district; see what i mean? i hope i didn’t confuse you here; i am just curious as to who the PUREST liberal(and conservative if you have that info as well)is in congress

2. He was one of the earliest signers to the Responsible Plan, has ripped the Democratic leadership for the FISA “compromise” and has a wonderful record on the environment and economic populism. His district is R+6 and has certain rural interests (like tobacco and farming) but he is lightyears better than Goode.

   I really appreciate the legwork on this. My only concern is that a candidates geographic specific concerns will make them look more Dogish than they really are, and cause a lack of support amongst candidate who should be netroots heroes.

3.    I asked Dan Seals and he said (unfortunately) that he was undecided on which caucus to join.  He did say that he wish there were a caucus centered around issues for “young families.”  I wasn’t sure where he was going with that.  I think what we’re going to see is a lot on unaffiliated Democratic freshman who vote mostly to our liking.  

4. As someone that is working on Debbie Cook’s Campaign in CA-46 and has met her personally, allow me to assure you, she will be infinately more progressive than Dana Rohrabacher. She is a great candidate and a very nice lady. She just needs money to help make her competitive. insert shameless fundraising pitch here lol Check her out at Actblue and give as generously as you can! Otherwise I expect each and everyone one of you at her campaign headquarters. haha fun for me!

5. I really hope it’s wrong because I wish there were more progressives, but we’ll just have to wait and see.  Your posts are a nerds wet dream.

   Madia will probably be a New Dem.  He is as liberal as you can get on social issues but when it comes to the fiscal issues, definitely New Dem area.

   I’m not sure where Sarvi would be.  I havent gotten to meet him or hear him speak but my impression is that he’ll be a lot like Walz, meaning he’ll probably be more liberal than we think (Walz isnt a Blue Dog).  I was pleasantly surprised to see that Walz voted against the FISA compromise so hopefully Sarvi is more like that.

   Tinklenberg will almost assuredely be a blue Dog.

   I can see some of those NY pick-ups being more progressive than New Dem.

6.  While Missouri’s Ninth District is conservative and used to be represented by Dixicrat Blue Dog type Harold Volkmer, I can most assuredly say that if Judy Baker (D-Columbia)  wins taht she will NOT be a Blue Dog. She is currently one of the most progressive voices in the Missouri State Legislature, and if elected her voting record would probably be to the left of the center in the Democratic House Caucus. I don’t know if she would join teh progressive caucus or fit more with the new Democrats but she is definitely and unequivocally not a potential Blue Dog. Her primary opponents from outside Columbia, Steve Gaw and Lyndon Bode, however are to the right of her and Bode would be a blue dog for sure with Gaw a question mark but a possible blue dog as well. A fourth primary opponent, Ken Jacob from Columbia would also not be a blue dog but is less progressive than Baker.

   Judy Baker represents the liberal end of electability in Missouri 9 and if able to win, her voting record would be as radicla a departure from Kenny Hulshof’s (R) that she might bring a greater shift to her district than the shift from Gil Gutknecht (R) to Tim Walz (D) in Rochester/Southern Minnesota brought.
   

7. There are two factors to consider in deciding where to put ones effort and/or money.  One is how progressive the canddiate is in an absolute sense and the other is how progressive in relation to the incumbent.  On that scale, Tom Periello (VA-05) and Betsy Markey (CO-04) are really deserving of support, since they would displace Virgil Goode and Marilyn Musgrave, two of the most odious GOPers.  Debbie Cook in CA-46 asa well.

   I’ve heard that Judy Feder is more or less a traditional liberal–I’d question “New Dem” for her if she wins.

   Thanks again for a very helpful post.

   1. if i’m not mistaking

   2. interested in the PVI/Vote Index, which is something I put togeher a few months ago. (Or see this diary, if you want to see it in cool graphic form.)

      What I found (if you don’t want to click through) is that Artur Davis (AL-07) is the most out-of-whack Dem in terms of being conservative in relation to a liberal district, and Walter Jones (NC-03) is the most out-of-whack Republican in terms of being most liberal in relation to a conservative district. Conversely, Chet Edwards (TX-17) is the Dem who’s most liberal compared to his conservative district, and John Kline (MN-02) is the Republican who’s most conservative compared to his liberal district.

      (I didn’t use DW-Nominate scores on this one, which is the scale that runs between McDermott at 1 and Paul at 435, so if I re-ran the numbers using DW-Nominate scores, things might change a little.)

8. I would say one thing. Perriello would not be a Blue Dog for sure. He might not join the progressive caucus but he will be much closer to the progressives then the Blue Dogs. I also think Trauner and Barth would be more like Boyda so not really Blue Dogs.

9. So I’m relying on you guys in the comments to debunk my analysis and provide the anecdotes that prove that so-and-so is going to be a Progressive, district demographics be damned!

   In his last live blog on BlueNC, Larry Kissell was asked point blank if he’d join the Blue Dog caucus.

   You know…
   
   Submitted by Larry Kissell on Thu, 01/03/2008 – 7:33pm.

   I’m not much of a joiner. Robin Hayes, however, is on dozens and dozens of caucuses. It certainly hasn’t helped his representation of this District.

   But as a matter of policy I think it’s irresponsible to say which 2009 caucus one will or will not be joining given the long road ahead. But folks who know me, know that while I’m moderate on some issues and progressive on others, I’m no blue dog.

   Robin Hayes votes with his party over 90 percent of the time, even when it’s against the best interests of his constituents. That’s blind loyalty, and it cuts both ways. I refuse to be anything but a Representative of my constituents first, and party second.

   Emphasis mine. If you know Larry Kissell as I do, you know his word is his bond. He’s no Blue Dog. He’s promised one thing, to represent the people of North Carolina’s 8th District.

10. There is a progressive running in NY 13.  His name is Steve Harrison.  Against Fossella in an under funded campaign in 2006, Harrison received the highest percentage of the vote ever by a Democrat under the district’s current configuration. He announced his candidacy in August 2007.  

    The logical thing for the DCCC and the local Staten Island and Brooklyn Democratic party to do when an underfunded candidate receives a higher percentage of the vote than any Democrat ever in the district would be to fund him.  Instead the prop up McMahon who has not met fundraising criteria Harrison had to make to get help.  If the DCCC would have given Harrison the same treatment he’d have $3 million by now.

    There is a primary and Progressives turn out disproportionately, so don’t anoint McMahon yet.

11. . . . a knowledgeable insider from the state Democratic Party in Michigan, Mark Schauer is no Blue Dog.  He is a likely New Dem with Progressive potential.  Just because he’s from the western side of the state, doesn’t automatically make him a Blue Dog.

Comments are closed.