"America's anti-liberal myth"

[RFayette]

Please liberals, take the advice and nominate Sanders or Warren. 

And say hello to President Walker.

[RFayette]

Please liberals, take the advice and nominate Sanders or Warren. 

And say hello to President Walker.

Right, the conservative Democrat always wins. Mark Pryor didn't just lose by 17 points. Got it.

1. Believing that a more conservative Democratic nominee is more electable than a much more liberal one does not mean that said conservative Democratic nominee will win, just that they'll do better than the alternative.  If Liz Warren ran in Arkansas, she would've lost by more than 17 points.  It's a conservative state.

2. Comparing Hillary to Mark Pryor is disingenuous.  To my understanding, Hillary supports gun control, raising the minimum wage, opposes the Keystone XL pipeline, and has other positions well to the left of Pryor.

[RFayette]

Please liberals, take the advice and nominate Sanders or Warren.  

And say hello to President Walker.

Right, the conservative Democrat always wins. Mark Pryor didn't just lose by 17 points. Got it.

1. Believing that a more conservative Democratic nominee is more electable than a much more liberal one does not mean that said conservative Democratic nominee will win, just that they'll do better than the alternative.  If Liz Warren ran in Arkansas, she would've lost by more than 17 points.  It's a conservative state.

2. Comparing Hillary to Mark Pryor is disingenuous.  To my understanding, Hillary supports gun control, raising the minimum wage, opposes the Keystone XL pipeline, and has other positions well to the left of Pryor.

Baldwin, Brown, and Franken are liberal Democrats who won in swing states. And not a single class 2 or 3 Senator is a Senate Democrat from a Romney state, regardless of how liberal or conservative the nominees were.

Baldwin and Brown ran in Obama states with weak opposition (Tommy Thompson was popular, but a very poor campaigner) in a year with significant Dem coattails.

As for Franken and Merkley, I absolutely agree a liberal can win in "swing" states [neither are *that* swing-y though] and liberals can help fire up a Dem base.

However, for red states and the country as a whole, the Dem base isn't enough to win without a good share of independents.  The right kind of liberal Democrat can do that.....I think Brian Schweitzer would be a good example.  However, a cookie-cutter liberal Dem who toes the Liz Warren/Progressive Caucus party line is going to alienate cultural conservatives a ton (Hillary would too, but a really liberal Democrat would only exacerbate this) and potentially scare of fiscally moderate swing-voters.  Warren and Sanders are less electable than Clinton.  I think that's pretty much a fact.

[RFayette]

Please liberals, take the advice and nominate Sanders or Warren. 

And say hello to President Walker.

The problem isn't liberal ideas, it's that working class voters in middle America have come to associate them with coastal elites. Somebody like Brian Schweitzer who governed as an old school prairie populist winning in Montana is proof that progressive ideas can win if they're framed in the right context. The problem is a culture war narrative and shallow identity politics dominating our current discourse instead of economic populism.

Agreed.  See my above post.  But remember Schweitzer is pro-coal and pro-gun.  I just can't see a down-the-line progressive Democrat having a lot of appeal nationwide.  Something's got to give (social/cultural/energy issues usually).