Why don't Democrats try and purify their party of moderates?

[redcommander]

Republicans went through that phase last year, but Democrats for some reason seem much more accepting of their DINO's than Republicans are of their RINO counterparts. Why is it that Democrats don't try and primary Conservative Dems?

[Jacobtm]

Democrats made gains in '06 and '08 by getting Conservative Democrats to run in races that most didn't think were winnable.

[Napoleon]

Democrats made gains in '06 and '08 by getting Conservative Democrats to run in races that most didn't think were winnable.

Democrats made more gains running against the war in Iraq and corporate and political corruption.

[Jacobtm]

Democrats made gains in '06 and '08 by getting Conservative Democrats to run in races that most didn't think were winnable.

Democrats made more gains running against the war in Iraq and corporate and political corruption.

There were a ton of factors that went into '06 and '08 being good Dem years. Yet you should never write off candidate selection. Some close '06 races where seemingly ''fine'' Republican incumbents were taken out by insurgent Dems who ''shouldn't'' have won:

Montana: 50-47 D win
Missouri: 48-47 D win
Virginia: 50-49 D win

[Napoleon]

Democrats made gains in '06 and '08 by getting Conservative Democrats to run in races that most didn't think were winnable.

Democrats made more gains running against the war in Iraq and corporate and political corruption.

There were a ton of factors that went into '06 and '08 being good Dem years. Yet you should never write off candidate selection. Some close '06 races where seemingly ''fine'' Republican incumbents were taken out by insurgent Dems who ''shouldn't'' have won:

Montana: 50-47 D win
Missouri: 48-47 D win
Virginia: 50-49 D win

Yes but they ran against the war. Right wingers like Harold Ford couldn't win. We won 2006 and progress and didn't put that mandate to use. Democrats basically co-opted the Bush administration.

[Guderian]

Talk of the Republican "purifying" is gross overstatement. In the great "purifying" year of 2010 only Republican congressional incumbents to lose primaries were Bob Inglis and Lisa Murkowski. One of them was a guy who went wobbly in one of the most conservative districts in the country and the other was borderline mentally retarded person appointed to Senate by her corrupt father. I guess I can be generous and count that last-minute party-switching whore Griffith. So that's three! 3! What a massacre!

[Free Palestine]

Because only perhaps 10% of the Democratic Party is truly left-wing.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Talk of the Republican "purifying" is gross overstatement. In the great "purifying" year of 2010 only Republican congressional incumbents to lose primaries were Bob Inglis and Lisa Murkowski. One of them was a guy who went wobbly in one of the most conservative districts in the country and the other was borderline mentally retarded person appointed to Senate by her corrupt father. I guess I can be generous and count that last-minute party-switching whore Griffith. So that's three! 3! What a massacre!

I guess Robert Bennett was a member of the House of Lords.

[Capitan Zapp Brannigan]

Talk of the Republican "purifying" is gross overstatement. In the great "purifying" year of 2010 only Republican congressional incumbents to lose primaries were Bob Inglis and Lisa Murkowski. One of them was a guy who went wobbly in one of the most conservative districts in the country and the other was borderline mentally retarded person appointed to Senate by her corrupt father. I guess I can be generous and count that last-minute party-switching whore Griffith. So that's three! 3! What a massacre!

Mike Castle wasn't an incumbent for the seat he was running for but he should be included in this. That was by far the most insane one.

[Napoleon]

Talk of the Republican "purifying" is gross overstatement. In the great "purifying" year of 2010 only Republican congressional incumbents to lose primaries were Bob Inglis and Lisa Murkowski. One of them was a guy who went wobbly in one of the most conservative districts in the country and the other was borderline mentally retarded person appointed to Senate by her corrupt father. I guess I can be generous and count that last-minute party-switching whore Griffith. So that's three! 3! What a massacre!

I guess Robert Bennett was a member of the House of Lords.

We don't have a House of Lords. What is your point? Bennett didn't lose a primary.

[phk]

Purging the party of all non-liberals basically means purging Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Union Labor Whites.

The D's are a coalition of groups.

[Username MechaRFK]

Purging the party of all non-liberals basically means purging Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Union Labor Whites.

They are all liberals on economics, so I wouldn't say they are conservative, just on the social issues.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I believe that parties shouldn't just appeal to their core base - the Democrats need to have room for many groups - the same should go for the GOP.

I think if you think that the Dems can win outside of the NE, the West Coast and the metro areas without moderate/conservative voices - or can afford to not care about those areas - then sorry, you're being blinkered.

We have this issue in Australia too - the traditional base of the Labor Party is the blue-collar, socially conservative types - who want the party to focus on jobs, education, workplace fairness... but they also have a strong base who are focused on social justice, equality, environmental protection etc etc... so there is a huge divide within the party... mind you, the same exists in the Liberal Party too. The Liberals have the moderates who basically support gay marriage and aren't social conservatives but want less economic regulation and lower taxes - but then you also have the hardcore social conservatives who tend to not bother about the economics...

[freepcrusher]

well 30% of all americans are conservative compared to 25% of liberals and 45% moderates. Naturally conservatives may make a bigger percentage of republicans. But regardless there aren't very many moderates in EITHER party.

[cavalcade]

They successfully purified their party of me in 2008.

[Username MechaRFK]

They successfully purified their party of me in 2008.

How? It wasn't like they elected a far-leftist like Barbara Lee or Dennis Kucinich for presidential nomination.

[cavalcade]

They successfully purified their party of me in 2008.

How? It wasn't like they elected a far-leftist like Barbara Lee or Dennis Kucinich for presidential nomination.

(1) They elected somebody fairly far politically from what I had considered the Democratic Party to be (Clinton/Gore).

(2) They elected somebody who had served in the Senate just over two years before running for the nomination, had no other national-level or gubernatorial experience, and had no other circumstances that made him well prepared for the Presidency.

(3) (Really more my fault for having previously considered myself a Democrat) It became clear to me that the reason for (1) was that the Democratic base was much more economically liberal than myself, and in fact many of them considered the Clinton Administration to be a disaster because his policies were too conservative.

(4) It's New England, being an independent is much more acceptable than in many parts of the country.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Because the Democratic Party is controlled by "moderates."

[Napoleon]

Moderate is an undefined word. What makes one a moderate? Am I a moderate? Is Obama? What about conservatives such as Joe Manchin or Ben Nelson? I'd start by getting rid of those types and try to pick up voters based on social issues.

[DrScholl]

Because ideological liberals do very little to drive the party and because strategically, it makes no sense to do so. Democrats win self-described moderates in almost every race, so there's a big attachment there.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The moderates can stay, but the conservatives should be kicked out.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Moderate is an undefined word. What makes one a moderate? Am I a moderate? Is Obama? What about conservatives such as Joe Manchin or Ben Nelson? I'd start by getting rid of those types and try to pick up voters based on social issues.

Ben Nelson is a right-winger. Inouye is a moderate. Sanders is a liberal.

[redcommander]

Moderate is an undefined word. What makes one a moderate? Am I a moderate? Is Obama? What about conservatives such as Joe Manchin or Ben Nelson? I'd start by getting rid of those types and try to pick up voters based on social issues.

Ben Nelson is a right-winger. Inouye is a moderate. Sanders is a liberal.

Inouye is a moderate? Well what I meant by the term is Moderate Hero status that Republicans like to apply to people like Snowe, Collins, Spector, Brown, etc. In the Democrats case that would be Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, Joe Manchin, Heath Schuler, Mary Landrieu, and most of the Blue Dog caucus. People in the party that try to take conservative/moderate positions to appeal to the electorate, but also try and win liberals because they have a D next to their name.

[Mechaman]

Moderate is an undefined word. What makes one a moderate? Am I a moderate? Is Obama? What about conservatives such as Joe Manchin or Ben Nelson? I'd start by getting rid of those types and try to pick up voters based on social issues.

Well according to wikipedia Dan Boren is considered to be "moderate" even though he has the voting record of a standard southern Republican.

Though I have to say that strategically speaking an ideological purge on social issues would be worse than one on economic issues.  I mean that is unless you want to tell AT LEAST 35% of the party to go f*** themselves and make South Boston a swing district.

[Napoleon]

Moderate is an undefined word. What makes one a moderate? Am I a moderate? Is Obama? What about conservatives such as Joe Manchin or Ben Nelson? I'd start by getting rid of those types and try to pick up voters based on social issues.

Well according to wikipedia Dan Boren is considered to be "moderate" even though he has the voting record of a standard southern Republican.

Though I have to say that strategically speaking an ideological purge on social issues would be worse than one on economic issues.  I mean that is unless you want to tell AT LEAST 35% of the party to go f*** themselves and make South Boston a swing district.

They said the same thing about Goldwater now look where the GOP is.