It sounds odd but I like the Kohler faucet ad where a couple asks an architect to design a house around a faucet. The same logic should be employed—in my opinion- to select congressional candidates: start from the desired result and operation backwards, or start with the type candidate who can win in that particular situation and plug in the right person for that candidacy. The faucet in that ad conveys a certain elegance and style which the couple feels reflects their lives and they want that continued in their home. Can the same be said about “home” congressional districts?
Georgia congressional politics in swing districts involves the left, the center and the right. The candidate who gets two of those three segments can win. Currently, the Blue Dogs get the left and the center in a skillful display of balance. The right seems to have little interest in producing candidates with centrist appeal. If the suburban dwellers that are center-right become more comfortable with the Blue Dogs (reacting to the anger of the protesters, the negative vibe of talk radio and T.V. and the pending presidential bid of Palin) the right won’t be able to win swing districts—and they know it.
But, what those of us in the center don’t seem to understand is that conservatism leaves little room for flexibility. Conservative friends have been saying that for years but people would not listen. Everyone remembers the classic Oprah show when Dr. Maya Angelou said people tell you who they really are when you first meet them—believe them. Conservatives are not looking to build a winning coalition with anyone else; they are waiting for the rest of the voters to “realize” the error of their ways and move right—far right. I still can’t believe that some on the right view Georgia’s Republican senators as liberals. Really—not centrists or moderates but liberals. Senators who national sources rank as clearly conservatives. The same people are beating up Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham this week for not being real conservatives also.
Okay, let me see if I finally get this:
-Not every Republican is a conservative.
-Not every Democrat is a liberal.
From those two theories, the 2010 congressional elections in Georgia look bright for the Blue Dogs because the traditional Democrats (liberals) afford them leeway to be somewhat conservative or centrist, but the conservative purists are purging their ranks of any Republicans who are not pure-bred red. Putting the castaways in the doghouse—the Blue doghouse.
Project Logic Ga 
Go Blue Dog Democrats!
On what basis do you make this claim? The ability of these BDD to win these “swing” districts is based solely on the ability to mimic conservative positions at home. With Bush in office, they could use him as cover for massive government expansion (e.g. NCLB or Medicare) or as foil when public mood shifted on the issues of war or massive government spending. With Obama in office, they no longer have the cover of the “conservative” Bush and will forced to show their true colors (yellow) (i.e. will they endorse Obama leftist agenda or were they serious about the fiscal conservative mantra they spouted to get elected).
McCain and his lapdog Graham are in the conservative doghouse is because they appear to relish attacking their friends and allies than they do their enemies (a trait they appear to share with Obama (at least in the foreign affairs arena)). Plus they go out of their way to seek the approval of institutions (NYT, WP, Georgetown dinner set)that are antagonistic to conservatives.
he could have been iulcnenfed by Conservatives once he won was right. At least we would have had a better chance influencing McCain than we do Obama now. And the one thing that I did like about McCain was he did want to reform the way some things were done in DC.. He NEVER took any earmarks.. He would have been a better foreign policy President and he was an honest man and a war hero..