Is Maine the Arkansas of New England?

[smoltchanov]

To be clear Smoltchanov, I'm not saying that the parties shouldn't nominate moderates necessarily--though it wouldn't be my first preference for other ideological reasons. Honestly, something like the Canadian system, where the parties all sit very close to each other near the center would be acceptable from the heuristics perspective. But every Democrat in national office should still be to the left of every Republican.

America has these things called state parties, and they like to win a Senate or House race once in a while.

Exactly what i said. If you are serious about running (and having chance to win) as a Democrat in MS-04 - you must be at least Gene Taylor (may be - even more conservative). If you run as Republican in CT-04, and want to win - you must be at  least Chris Shays (and may be - even more liberal).

[Sol]

I don't think y'all understood my last post. I wasn't saying that Democrats shouldn't run conservatives in conservative districts--what I was saying was that it is best if the Democratic candidate is still more left-wing than the Republican candidate, and vice-versa.

Furthermore, all Democrats on the federal level should be to the left of all Republicans. I don't care how far to the left, but there should be at least some gap between the parties.

[smoltchanov]

I don't think y'all understood my last post. I wasn't saying that Democrats shouldn't run conservatives in conservative districts--what I was saying was that it is best if the Democratic candidate is still more left-wing than the Republican candidate, and vice-versa.

Furthermore, all Democrats on the federal level should be to the left of all Republicans. I don't care how far to the left, but there should be at least some gap between the parties.

So, ALL Democratic congressmen must be to the left of ALL Republican one? (U.S. Congress is a Federal level, isn't it?). If so - i understood, and already explained why i disagree. Democratic congressman from Mississippi may be way more conservative then Republican from Massachusetts, simply because Mississippi is no Massachusetts, but much more conservative state. And it was normal for me last year when Democratic candidate for governor of Oklahoma (Dorman) was much more conservative then Republican candidate for governor of Massachusetts (Baker). If "in every district corresponding Democratic candidate must be to the left of corresponding Republican" - i would generally agree (with exceptions from time to time)

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Another issue is that many of the issues that people find important are not directly left/right issues. Is protectionism right or left? Are agricultural subsidies right or left? Are those who oppose vaccine mandates and GMOs right or left? Saying Republican=Right and Democrat=Left really doesn't communicate so much to be a reliable guide unless we live in a world where people consume media and parrot views that coincide with sides in a national debate, and ignore issues which may affect their lives in a more direct way. Insisting that parties are uniform on a federal level rather than suited to the region wherein they live means that local and regional issues are pushed aside in favor of talking points from Fox News and MSNBC.

[smoltchanov]

Another issue is that many of the issues that people find important are not directly left/right issues. Is protectionism right or left? Are agricultural subsidies right or left? Are those who oppose vaccine mandates and GMOs right or left? Saying Republican=Right and Democrat=Left really doesn't communicate so much to be a reliable guide unless we live in a world where people consume media and parrot views that coincide with sides in a national debate, and ignore issues which may affect their lives in a more direct way. Insisting that parties are uniform on a federal level rather than suited to the region wherein they live means that local and regional issues are pushed aside in favor of talking points from Fox News and MSNBC.

Two words - fully agree.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I always thought that Susan Collins could have been vulnerable if she had been challenged by an honest-to-goodness top tier candidate.  Why she gets a free pass is beyond me.  She ought to be hammered daily as one who seeks an "independent" image while doing the Tea Party's dirty work.  She ought to be linked to LePage, whose victory makes me scratch my head. 

[IceSpear]

I always thought that Susan Collins could have been vulnerable if she had been challenged by an honest-to-goodness top tier candidate.  Why she gets a free pass is beyond me.  She ought to be hammered daily as one who seeks an "independent" image while doing the Tea Party's dirty work.  She ought to be linked to LePage, whose victory makes me scratch my head. 

Dems tried that in 2008. It didn't turn out too well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Maine,_2008

[Thunderbird is the word]

I always thought that Susan Collins could have been vulnerable if she had been challenged by an honest-to-goodness top tier candidate.  Why she gets a free pass is beyond me.  She ought to be hammered daily as one who seeks an "independent" image while doing the Tea Party's dirty work.  She ought to be linked to LePage, whose victory makes me scratch my head. 

Sheena Bellows was a pretty decent candidate. Both the national Democrats and grassroots activists were stupid to ignore her, you'd think that in a year with shaky prospects for Democrats they'd spend more time supporting a solid progressive in a blue state then hacks like Grimes or trying to get Kay Hagen reelected. Should have been a prime pickup target.

[smoltchanov]

I always thought that Susan Collins could have been vulnerable if she had been challenged by an honest-to-goodness top tier candidate.  Why she gets a free pass is beyond me.  She ought to be hammered daily as one who seeks an "independent" image while doing the Tea Party's dirty work.  She ought to be linked to LePage, whose victory makes me scratch my head. 

Sheena Bellows was a pretty decent candidate. Both the national Democrats and grassroots activists were stupid to ignore her, you'd think that in a year with shaky prospects for Democrats they'd spend more time supporting a solid progressive in a blue state then hacks like Grimes or trying to get Kay Hagen reelected. Should have been a prime pickup target.

Hagan's race was winnable, Bellows - absolutely no (especially in year like 2014, when even LePage got almost a majority). Why must party leaders to endorse (and, most important - spent money) on "unwinnable bold progressive" in hopeless race in (as it turned to be at least in 2014) not so blue state? Only because "she is bold progressive"? Hell, no!!

[IceSpear]

I always thought that Susan Collins could have been vulnerable if she had been challenged by an honest-to-goodness top tier candidate.  Why she gets a free pass is beyond me.  She ought to be hammered daily as one who seeks an "independent" image while doing the Tea Party's dirty work.  She ought to be linked to LePage, whose victory makes me scratch my head. 

Sheena Bellows was a pretty decent candidate. Both the national Democrats and grassroots activists were stupid to ignore her, you'd think that in a year with shaky prospects for Democrats they'd spend more time supporting a solid progressive in a blue state then hacks like Grimes or trying to get Kay Hagen reelected. Should have been a prime pickup target.

Well, considering Collins won >60% of the vote even in the Democratic wave year of 2008 against a very strong challenger that represented half the state in Congress, is it really that surprising they wrote the race off?

[Thunderbird is the word]

I always thought that Susan Collins could have been vulnerable if she had been challenged by an honest-to-goodness top tier candidate.  Why she gets a free pass is beyond me.  She ought to be hammered daily as one who seeks an "independent" image while doing the Tea Party's dirty work.  She ought to be linked to LePage, whose victory makes me scratch my head. 

Sheena Bellows was a pretty decent candidate. Both the national Democrats and grassroots activists were stupid to ignore her, you'd think that in a year with shaky prospects for Democrats they'd spend more time supporting a solid progressive in a blue state then hacks like Grimes or trying to get Kay Hagen reelected. Should have been a prime pickup target.

Well, considering Collins won >60% of the vote even in the Democratic wave year of 2008 against a very strong challenger that represented half the state in Congress, is it really that surprising they wrote the race off?

I guess not, i'm more surprised by the fact that she even failed to generate the kind of enthusiasm among netroots types that Elizabeth Warren ever did. Guess civil liberties have become a much lesser concern to progressives in the Obama years.

[Podgy the Bear]

And in the end, even Gene Taylor had to switch parties last year to have a chance at getting his House seat back (didn't work for him, however).