The Road To 60

Announced jointly from all of us at MyDD

The more the progressive blogosphere continues to grow -- whether it be our readership, our community, our influence -- the more complex things we can accomplish. So with the retirement of the Blue Majority ActBlue effort, the various partners from that project can now embark on more targeted fundraising goals unique to each blog's interests. As you know by now, Markos has created the Orange to Blue list with its own criteria and OpenLeft is targeting "Bush Dog" Democrats who enable the President. And here at MyDD, we've just created our "Road to 60" list to win a Senate supermajority.

Jonathan, Todd and I have written extensively about the infrastructure advantages of the Democratic party this year. We've looked at Obama's 50-state strategy, McCain's impending game of state-by-state catch-up, and the financial inequities between the Congressional and Senatorial committees.

But in the end, we're most excited about the progress that can be made in the Senate and the potential for a 60-seat supermajority (without Lieberman).

The Republican Senatorial Committee's website quaintly encourages supporters with a reminder that they need only "two seats to capture the Senate," but  we all know just how unrealistically rosy that outlook is. Chair John Ensign admits a goal of losing only 3 seats, calling this election the toughest for Republicans since 1974, the era after Nixon resigned.

Ensign also tells Republican donors to think of the Senate as a "firewall" to a Democratic President and House. And so should we.

So we're happy to announce MyDD's Road to 60 fundraising effort. Between now and the election, we'll be profiling and targeting several Senate races that themselves serve as the NRSC's firewall against our getting to 60. They will include seats that the GOP simply should not lose...and if they do, then we know 60 is within reach.

Our hope is, with your help, to turn longshots into competitive races and competitive races into top tier ones - and above all to make the Republicans spend money to defend and retain seats where they've never had to before. We're going to douse that firewall.

Sixty (true) Democratic Senators would bring a game-changing supermajority to Washington and essentially ensure an unobstructed working progressive majority.

Admittedly, this campaign is a bit more tactical and less ideological than others - but we will always highlight the progressive work of the candidates profiled and encourage them to stand up for progressive values. This campaign also reward Democratic challengers who not only understand that we need to challenge everywhere but are actually stepping up to do it, even in the reddest of states and districts. We need to encourage challengers to stand up, especially those that can't self-fund, and that's what our Road to 60 list will strive to do.

We'll be introducing our first Road To 60 candidate soon, and will roll the rest out over the coming weeks. I hope you'll help out. It won't be easy to decide how to distribute our finite resources this year, considering the deep pool of quality challengers we have to choose from at every level. But remember, the fact that Democrats are competitive in so many red districts and states is a testament to the 50-state strategy and the "compete everywhere" mindset we've been pushing for years. This is what we've asked for, so we'd better be prepared to step up.



Display:


Re: The Road To 60 (2.00 / 1)

60 is a nice-sounding number to me, and certainly attainable.  Bring it!


John McCain wants to stay in Iraq.
by ihaveseenenough on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 01:51:36 PM EST

Re: The Road To 60 (none / 0)

super cool-


by alyssa chaos on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 01:53:47 PM EST

Definitely on my end-of-quarter list (2.00 / 1)

I've been jotting down who I want to give to between now and 6/30.  This is a cause I can get behind!


by RT on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 01:55:10 PM EST

Re: The Road To 60 (2.00 / 4)

Please give some love to Kay Hagan of North Carolina who is sadly one of the very few female nominees (only 3 by my count) that we have this cycle.


Polawtics. Where awareness of the internet happens.
by ASDem on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:02:42 PM EST

Re: The Road To 60 (2.00 / 1)

Where is Scott Kleeb?


Rochester Turning: Turning the tide Upstate.
by sayhar on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:18:16 PM EST

Excellent idea (2.00 / 1)

Mark Warner, the Udalls and Jeanne Shaheen will all win comfortably without much help so I suggest the emphasis should be on blue states with Republican incumbents (MN, OR and ME). Then in states with large AA populations, the open seat in MS and NC. Those incumbents with weak re-elect numbers in OK and TX. Finally, the big enchiladas, the corrupt Ted Stevens and Mitch McConnell in KY. If you want to be really greedy look at the open seats in ID and NE and maybe even Roberts and Chambliss in KS and GA respectively.


by conspiracy on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:20:29 PM EST

The closer we get, the better (none / 0)

And if we're close, I have no problem with invoking the "nuclear option" as the thugs threatened us with.  There is no constitutional right to a fillibuster.


by activatedbybush on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:25:43 PM EST

Always remember - - - (2.00 / 4)

you will always one day be back in the minority, sooner or later - - -
be very careful how you act when in the majority.
John McCain says he would stay in Iraq for 100 years? That's crazy talk!
by kosnomore on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:38:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Always remember - - - (none / 0)

True.  But demanding a legit filibuster isn't too much to ask, either.


I was with Obama from the start.
by SpanishFly on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:49:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I know, I know - - (2.00 / 2)

but we were glad we had it when we were down, and we'll be down again in our lifetimes.


John McCain says he would stay in Iraq for 100 years? That's crazy talk!
by kosnomore on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:51:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I know, I know - - (2.00 / 1)

That's the thing about actually making them do a talktalktalk filibuster, rather than letting them get away with just blocking cloture without paying a price: it works for us both ways, as long as we're on the side of the people.

When we're in the majority, the GOP's spending hours or days blocking stuff that people want, will make them look like jerks.  

And when we're in the minority, if they make us spend hours or days blocking stuff that rich people or corporations want, they'll also look like jerks.

It's win-win.


by RT on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:33:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Always remember - - - (2.00 / 3)

I am glad that somebody read my mind. Personally, I don't ever want to see us talking about a "permanent Democratic Majority" the way Rove was trying to do with the Republicans when they were riding high on the anti-Clinton & 9/11 wave. Permananet Party majorities and even Filibuster proof majorities are dangerous and I'm not even sure they are in the spirit of the New Democratic Party. Two reasons:

  1. Like you said, you run your program down the other sides's throat, it just makes them bitter, and then they are just waiting to bide time before they are in power.
  2. No matter how we slice it, unless Obama wins by 60% of the vote, which is unlikely, almost half of the American voters would not have voted for the Democrtic President. Even if we control all three houses, we cannot forget the fact that there are millions of American citiizens who are not onboard with our program. We must strive to be inclusive when we have the power, unlike the Republicans prior to 2006. And you saw what happened to them

. If Obama's rhetoric means anything, it seems he would much rather have 55 Dems and 5 Repubs that always seem to vote with us on the really big issues. That way we get our agenda through,it has partisan support and we cripple the Republicans for the long term.

The oobjective here is not to eliminate our enemies, because we need them to show what we are against, and how we are better. The objective here is to make the Republicans visible and UNVIABLE!!!!


A PROUD Hopium user!
by xodus1914 on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:12:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Good luck with that (2.00 / 1)

I think that the urgency of these times demand that we ram reforms down their throats.   They cannot be allowed to hold meaningful progress hostage to the whim of a "hold" or a fillibuster on legislation which has a strong majority of support.  Obama's vision is a fairy tale of idealism that I am not even sure he really believes, but it sure sounds good in an election cycle.   The reality is that we need to get stuff done, and if that means passing a whole bunch of 57-43 legislature with the Senate denuded of its filibuster custom then I am for that.   The major confirmations still require a supermajority as do overrides of presidential vetoes.   There are still balances.   But it is time to get things done, and I won't bet on 5 willing Rethuglicans to help us.


by activatedbybush on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:38:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Query re Lieberman - - (2.00 / 1)

If we get to "60-without-him", what do we do with him?
Kick him out of caucus?
Allow him to caucus, but take away his committee chair?
Take away his caucus membership, chair and seniority?
It's kind of un-precedented - -  what do the rules say?   are there rules?  what does the caucus do?
John McCain says he would stay in Iraq for 100 years? That's crazy talk!
by kosnomore on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:35:59 PM EST

Re: Query re Lieberman - - (2.00 / 1)

Regardless of whether we get to 60 or not, for appearing at the Republican convention he ought to be stripped of any committee chairs he holds.  This bastard is siding with those who hold views opposite of those he's held his whole life because he's bitter.  To hell with him.


I was with Obama from the start.
by SpanishFly on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 02:52:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Query re Lieberman - - (none / 0)

Senate rules say chairmanships are established by resolution (simple majority vote) at the beginning of the Congress.  They are usually voted on as a bloc but upon motion of one Senator, they can be voted on individually.  I don't believe

As I understand it, it's basically the prerogative of the Majority Leader to decide who gets chairmanships, so long as he can get his entire caucus to vote for it.  Presumably, if Lieberman were involuntarily kicked out of the caucus, he would try to hold onto his seat by demanding a stand-alone vote.  But if you want it to happen, it's all about lobbying Reid.


Polawtics. Where awareness of the internet happens.
by ASDem on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:03:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Query re Lieberman - - (none / 0)

The first thing I thought of when I read the post.  Fascinating his power ebbs and flows depending how far from fifty, then how close to sixty the dems get.  I'd send em packing no matter what.


by moondancer on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 07:09:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Jeff Merkley!!! (2.00 / 1)

Oregon Senate candidate Jeff Merkley is in a contested race with Republican Gordon Smith. Merkley is one of the most progressive candidates running for Congress this year. He was against the war from the start, is for UHC and will vote for a single payer bill, and is firmly opposed to telecom immunity. Merkley also led the greenest and most labor friendly session the Oregon House has seen in decades.

Smith has deep pockets and we could surely use netroots support to help compete with Smith's war chest.

I may be on staff now, but as a blogger I volunteered hundreds of hours to his campaign because I truly believed we need his skills in the Senate. He won't just be a dependable vote, he'll be a progressive coalition builder which we desperately need IMO.


Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley
by Sarah Lane on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:04:51 PM EST

Re: Jeff Merkley!!! (2.00 / 2)

This is a candidate who will directly benefit from the netroots in a blue state against a Republican incumbent.

Merkley is also the most progressive Senate challenger and as the folks at Open Left have noted, will make one of the largest impacts in the legislature for progressives.


by carla on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:14:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeff Merkley!!! (none / 0)

Merkley is a good seed.  My PDX friends brought me up to speed on him.  Smith has got to go.

Mojo'd (and I donated).


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:17:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeff Merkley!!! (none / 0)

Thanks so much! We need all the help we can get. Have you seen the new Smith ad he released? He's using Obama in his new ad against us!!!


Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley
by Sarah Lane on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 06:23:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeff Merkley!!! (none / 0)

Jeff Merkley is definitely the first candidate I'd recommend. He's the U.S. Senate candidate who will be getting my funds and time this year.

He's proven his progressive credentials in his work in the state legislature - from standing up to the Republicans on payday loan shops charging 500-700% interest to leading one of the most progressive sessions we've had in recent memory.

He stood up to some of Oregon's most conservative electeds in the House, refusing to back down even when then Speaker of the House Karen Minnis would call him into her office and tear into him.

When I went down to Salem to testify on the payday loan bill, Jeff Merkley was there giving his testimony as well. I've worked with him for about six years now on a variety of issues affecting my part of the state (east Multnomah County), and he's always been there for us. I can't wait to see him take that fight to Washington, D.C.

Oregon is a blue state and has only one statewide office held by a Republican - and it's the one Jeff Merkley is running for this November. It's time to not only add one more Democratic seat to the Senate, but also to give Oregon a U.S. Senator who listens to his state and doesn't try to overturn or vote against issues that Oregonians stand for and approve.


Jenni S.
Gresham, Oregon
by jsimonis on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:33:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's a terrific idea. (none / 0)

Presumably, there will be diaries letting us know who can use the help.  Makes it so much easier to spread around my finite budget for House and Senate races.

We're getting good at this winning business, ain't we?


That One is the Right One for 2008.
by GFORD on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 03:09:50 PM EST

Mark Begich! (none / 0)

Great to see Mark Begich on the list. He's a serious contender to take out Tubes Stevens, and he's definitely not a Blue Dog. He opposes telecom immunity capitulation, supports ending the Iraq War and wants No Child Left Behind repealed.

We have a very real opportunity for a Democratic sweep of the federal races here and for the Democrats to take back the state Legislature. It's an amazing convergence of great candidates, the right issues and an electorate fed up with GOP malfeasance, corruption and broken policies.


by Last Frontier Democrat on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 04:03:13 PM EST

Can we get to 40 first? (none / 0)

that's what it'll take to stop the Bush wiretap bill.




Democratic Candidate, US Senate, Wisconsin 2012
by benmasel on Tue Jun 24, 2008 at 05:00:43 PM EST

Re: The Road To 60 (none / 0)

Even if we do not get to 60, we should invoke the nuclear option on judicial filibusters, as the Republicans effectively did to us.  Keep the present arrangements, which amount to striping of the filibuster by the minority.


by Bob H on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 05:23:34 AM EST

Re: The Road To 60 (none / 0)

This is exactly the kind of campaign we need - focusing on red states and rural areas rather than eating our own young. I've only ever donated to specific campaigns and the DNC, but at some point this summer I will certainly give to Road to 60.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Thu Jun 26, 2008 at 12:22:00 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.