Dance with them what brung you (to the Senate)

Here are a set of contributions to Kay Hagan from OpenSecrets. The essence of this is: Kay was paid a lot from Democratic/liberal sources for her to now begin maneuvering to center-center thinking to make points with Republicans for cross-over "bipartisanship"? She forgets perhaps the shabby and harsh treatment of Democrats, no matter how well deserved, by Republicans for the past 10 years. Treatment which helped cause our current economic and political woes.

Democratic/Liberal $1,807,286
Women's Issues $474,659
Retired $438,588
Lawyers/Law Firms $391,109
Leadership PACs $246,600
Real Estate $171,432
Securities & Investment $151,676
Misc Business $109,074

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00029617"

Look around at the sources of her funds and tell me that she should be consorting with Bayh and Lieberman. The fact that Kay had about $9m to Dole's $18m plus is astounding but only shows how weak Dole really was. It also speaks to the likelihood she did in fact have some coatails with Obama upon which to ride.

I hope she goes through whatever fit she is having and moves back to the center left where she was thought to be by many of us.

Comments

This thread is odd

It sounds like folks are saying that liberal money was given to buy something? Access, votes?

When I donate money, I don't expect something specific in return. When I volunteer, I don't expect something specific in return. I try to know enough about any candidate I support to know what I'm getting. It doesn't mean I won't work to nudge the candidate more to my way of thinking, but I try to be honest with myself in developing my expectations. Now, there has been a time or two where I felt deceived by the candidate or their staff as to where that person actually stood on the ideological spectrum, but that's not the case with Kay Hagan. We had a fairly long political history to educate ourselves with and I don't recall her ever claiming to be a progressive Democrat.

Anyway...I just think we need to be careful when we tout how much money our interests gave a candidate while in the same breath claiming disappointment that said candidate isn't doing what we want. It makes it look like our expectations are along the lines of pay to play.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

I agree, it's a tricky line

I gave a ton of money last cycle to get Democrats elected. I didn't and don't expect anything special from them ... just to be thoughtful and responsive. And I don't regret any of it. We needed a sea change and we may very well have gotten it. It was worth all the time and money we all put forth.

That said, I'm going to be much more discerning with future contributions. My checkbook is permanently closed to conservatives and moderates who happen to be Democrats.

See....I know you don't expect something specific in return

...but there are hundreds of folks who might read this and not know that.

The other side of that fine line is that we do actually expect for our elected officials to listen to us. It's part of their job. We hope that by helping to get them elected they will be more likely to see things our (Democrats) way. Progressives are a voting block that tend to be very active in the electoral process. We're activists, citizen lobbyists....and sometimes we're just stay-at-home moms who stay on top of politics. It doesn't always feel like we're a minority in North Carolina b/c there seem to be more of us out there actually giving and doing than other factions of the party. Do we want to see a seat go to a Republican. Hell no!



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

I look at it this way.

If I were actually thinking that my contributions influence any elected official in any way, I would be the dumbest stump in the forest. There's zero evidence across my 40 years of supporting candidates that anything I've ever done or said or given has any influence on any elected official whatsoever.

And since I'm only the second dumbest stump in the forest, I know better.

That said, I'm not sure the same is true all donors. I look at how some bundlers pass out money and it's clear those dollars come with strings about how candidates will eventually vote.

To my knowledge.

Pay to play -- well

When I support a candidate (money, time, both, etc.) I generally expect that we are within 10 degrees RMS of one another politically. I may be presented with a choice with whom I am uncomfortable, but who is the only viable choice from a broader perspective. But, certainly there is nothing wrong with working like the dickens to help the office holder remember where their support came from.

Kay spends one tour in Senate and her contributor list will be studded with financial interests, banks, etc., just like many of our pols -- but she went there courtesy of the liberals, whether the vote was anti-Dole or not (it was of course).

I object to the thought she arrives and plants a flag which she did not really fly (yes she said she would balance the budget--but she never did that for NC--witness the growth and raids on various pockets late at night). She also got some draft from Obama, bad as some hate to admit it. So, she then comes out immediately against his budget with no obvious negotiation with the White House
(did they know she was up for bid even?)

If we want to keep some semblence of what we thought we elected, we have to work hard to convince Hagan that we know where the money came from and specifically "who brung her to that dance" before she gets gussied up with corporate givers and forgets our zip code.

We should have known - ha. We did not know she would hotfoot it to Bayh and Liberman or that she would, as a freshman, peremptorily oppose a Democratic President in a number of areas, all of which sounds sort of arrogant in MHO.

wafranklin

 

I don't mean this as a ding

at Kay herself, but I believe a lot of that money was, "get rid of Dole" money, as opposed to, "Kay wants the same things I want" money. I don't know if that makes any sense...

If you'll recall some of her campaign issues/promises, balancing the budget and/or spending restraint was one of her pillars, so we shouldn't be surprised when she actually tries to do those things.

As far as hanging out with Bayh and Lieberman, we'll have to wait and see how long that lasts. That may be more about getting better Committee positions as a frosh than any ideological bent.

Oh...absolutely

it does make sense. I don't think it is a slight against Kay Hagan, either. Everyone has their own motivation behind a donation or stint as a volunteer. I think dumping Dole was a huge motivator for money, volunteer hours and votes.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

It was for me, anyway

Don't get me wrong, I really grew to like and respect Kay as her campaign progressed. Digging for dirt in the early days (and finding next to nothing) led me to conclude that she was a public servant and not a vote-seller. Which puts her above most of her current colleagues, unfortunately. Above all, we need to remember that when looking at her behavior up there during this term.

Speaking as a moderate

Speaking as a moderate Democrat I have to say that Hagan is doing exactly what was hoped that she would do. Be a moderate Democrat.

I'm a moderate Democrat.