I've read all of the "Obama is a corporate sell-out" and "I'm not wasting my time with the Democrats anymore" diaries.
Yes, I wanted a public option in the health care reform bill. Yes, I wanted a bigger stimulus; I agree with Paul Krugman and Robert Reich that the stimulus that was passed was too small.
And so, I want BETTER DEMOCRATS. In order to get them, I am willing to sit out 2010 and 2012, under one condition....which I'll talk about below the fold...
The current US Senate rules allow for 41 Senators to filibuster any legislation and the Republicans have 41 votes and have abused the filibuster again and again.
And, of course, we have the "blue dogs" who also obstruct. Yes, we need to replace them. So where do our Democrats in the Senate come from?
Here are 17 of them, listed by state and the percentage (rough calculations) of the vote that Obama got in that state in 2008:
Red States:
Montana: Baucus, Tester (49 percent)
Alaska: Begich (39 percent)
North Dakota: Conrad, Dorgan (45 percent)
West Virginia: Goodwin, Rockefeller (43 percent)
South Dakota: Johnson (45 percent)
Louisiana: Landrieu (40 percent)
Arkansas: Pryor, Lincoln (40 percent)
Missouri: McCaskill (barely McCain)
12 Senators
------------------------
Nebraska: Nelson (42 percent, but 1 CD)
----------------------
Blue for the first time in many years:
Indiana: Bayh (less than 51 percent)
Virginia: Warner, Webb (53 percent)
North Carolina: Hagan (less than 51 percent)
17 Senators: 13 from red states, 4 from "barely blue for the first time in decades" states.
So, just how are we going to replace those 13 "red state" (soon to be less) Democrats with liberals?
How are we going to replace the "newly and barely" blue states senators (4) with liberals who think like us?
How are we going to get 60 solid liberal votes in the Senate?
When you present a feasible plan to do that, I'll go along.
Until then: I'll take what we can get and accept the fact that I am to the left of the US Senate.