How Powerful is the Netroots?

There's an interesting symmetry right now in the blogosphere, in the cases of Albert Wynn (D-MD) and John Doolittle (R-CA). This is a post yesterday over at FireDogLake:

So I have to ask — if we’re to accept Pelosi and Reid’s assertions to the effect that they can’t get anything done because they don’t have the votes, why is Pelosi sticking her nose into a primary to help get reactionary Al Wynn re-elected?

We’re going to try and raise money for Donna Edwards like we did for Darcy Burner before her...

So it’s up to you. Donna is a fantastic candidate. If you want to mitigate the effect that people like Pelosi and Reid have on keeping Bush Dogs like Al Wynn in office and in power, please consider giving to her campaign.

It’s a nice way to tell Nancy Pelosi to stop abusing her position to give reactionary incumbents an unfair advantage.

This is from a somewhat-dated post from RedState:

Meet Eric Egland. You might know him already. He started TroopsNeedYou.com to deliver resources to our troops in harm's way. He's been on CNN talking about his book, The Blog of War. He's been interviewed by Michelle Malkin. And most importantly, Eric Egland has fought in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

He's a pro-life conservative in a very Republican, conservative district. In fact, he's running against a Republican and we want you to help us help Eric Egland.

Eric is running against the corrupt, embattled John Doolittle, the national face of Republican scandal. Doolittle had to step down from the House Appropriations Committee because of the pending investigation against him. The FBI has already raided his home. But Doolittle won't retire because if he gets re-elected one more time he can get his full congressional pension.

This is a seat that will stay Republican. But, should Doolittle stay in it, it's a seat that could drag down other Republicans because of Doolittle's scandal. In 2004, Bush won it with over 60% of the vote.

Eric Egland is a stellar candidate, a small government conservative, and our choice for CA-04.

For all the attention to the Democratic Netroots -- the teams at DailyKos, FireDogLake, MyDD, OpenLeft, and elsewhere -- it's not at all clear to me that they have any more influence over the policies of their party in Washington than do the blogs of the Right. As righty bloggers seek to grow our influence inside the beltway, it's important to keep expectations reasonable. It's probably also important that bloggers attempt to continue to grow hand-in-hand with existing conservative institutions -- such as Heritage, Club for Growth, as well as business associations such as NAM, the Chamber, NFIB, and other right-leaning lobbies.

To the extent that conservative blogs can stay on the same page as existing powers in the party, it increases our ability to wield influence effectively.

Netroots Doing the Work of the NRCC -- A Continuing Saga

Read it at the Standard.

Netroots Nightmare: O'Hanlon Teams Up with HRC

Read it at the Standard.

Impeachment: the Cure for Every Problem

Dan Riehl has the story.

The rules of the House of Representatives feature a mechanism called a discharge petition to prevent popular legislation from being bottled up in committee. If 218 Members sign a discharge petition, the Speaker of the House must schedule the legislation for a floor vote.

House Republican leaders should consider a discharge petition on the impeachment legislation sponsored by Congressman Kucinich. As the legislation approached 218 signatures, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer would be forced to decide whether to schedule a vote, or to insist that their Members not sign the petition. It would force Democrats to choose between the Netroots and America.

When Republicans held the majority, they forced Democrats to take politically difficult votes on reinstatement of the draft, and an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. In the same way, Democrats in the minority used discharge petitions to force debate on alternate proposals for Iraq.

Turnabout is fair play. Should House Republicans force Democrats to take up impeachment?

Netroots Doing the Work of the NRCC

Read it at the Standard.

Lieberman's Endorsement: More Trouble than It's Worth?

From CQ:

But this alliance has been met not with chagrin, but with something approximating glee, by liberal activists who have vilified Lieberman for his pro-war stance — and whose support boosted upstart challenger Ned Lamont, whose victory in the 2006 Connecticut Democratic Senate primary forced the incumbent to achieve re-election as a third-party candidate.

Anti-war groups contend that Lieberman’s close identification with President George W. Bush’s Iraq policies is not an asset in Maine, a Democratic-leaning state where both Bush and the war are mostly unpopular. And they contend that his endorsement could be more a burden than a boon for Collins, who has been portrayed by these groups as inconsistent about the war.

While Collins has publicly stated she opposes Bush’s decision to increase U.S. troop levels in Iraq this year, she has stuck with the administration so far on the most pivotal Senate votes, including her opposition to Democratic-crafted measures that would create a timeline for withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.

MoveOn.org, a major liberal group, has responded to Lieberman’s intervention in Maine by aligning closely with Allen.

In retrospect, this was a no-brainer. If the Left couldn't claim Lieberman's scalp, they'll probably try to kill anyone close to him -- metaphorically speaking, of course. Kinda reminds me of...

Nah, that's over the top. Great scene though.