Okay, see if you can spot the irony here. Late last year, Blue Dogs and some freshman Democrats oppose a second stimulus bill, even as it becomes apparent that the first one was woefully inadequate:
“I think we have just got to get serious about the deficit,” said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), the president of the class of freshman Democrats. “I would have to really be persuaded of a dire situation and one that’s getting worse, frankly, to have any enthusiasm for a second stimulus.”
Rep. Baron Hill (D-Ind.), a co-chairman of the 52-member Blue Dog Coalition, said he would have to hear a “very compelling” justification for further adding to the deficit, even for the sake of fostering more job growth.
“My constituents, I think, have had it with spending,” Hill said. “And I concur with their sentiments.”
And now this year’s midterm election is looking terrible for House Democrats because why?
Top Democrats are growing markedly more pessimistic about holding the House, privately conceding that the summertime economic and political recovery they were banking on will not likely materialize by Election Day.
In conversations with more than two dozen party insiders, most of whom requested anonymity to speak candidly about the state of play, Democrats in and out of Washington say they are increasingly alarmed about the economic and polling data they have seen in recent weeks.
They no longer believe the jobs and housing markets will recover — or that anything resembling the White House’s promise of a “recovery summer” is under way.
And which Democrats are going to pay the biggest price for voter dissatisfaction with the 9.5% unemployment and crappy economy?
The pattern is clear: Some of the most conservative members of the House Democratic caucus, those with vote scores that rank them in the high 100s or low 200s of the 256-member caucus, are in trouble.
Blue Dogs or other House Democrats who often vote with them are going to account for the vast majority of House Democratic losses this November, which is not a real shocker to anyone following the situation closely;
In other words, the Blue Dogs and their conservadem fellow travelers engineered their own downfall by putting their simplistic (and highly selective) “fiscal conservatism” ahead of the wellbeing of their constituents and the country as a whole.
It’s a pity they’re not self-aware enough to realize that opposing the public good can have adverse electoral consequences, because it’s something they really should keep in mind when it comes time to vote on the Catfood Commission’s recommendations to gut Social Security. And Obama might want to think about it too, before he signs anything into law.
Simply put, the best way to survive a backlash election is to not invite one.