The profile of the competetive races has been peculiar. It has almost been as if the partisan idex of the district didn't matter. This means that most of the newly elected House members will be representing districts that are more conservative than the average Democratic House member. Since we can't pass things that aren't overwhelmingly popular over Bush's veto, anyway, it will be important to pick fights that Democrats can unify around, and the community will need to understand the strategy.
Chris - this is your advice in every state. Virginia is a state where IIRC Republicans control almost 2/3 of the legislature. How did Kaine and Warner win? I don't believe it was by emphasizing their Democratic brand. Let people in Virginia make this judgment. It sounds like a suicidal gesture to me in this particular state.
Based on the results in CA-50 and generally this year, I think we should be more optimistic about the districts where a plurality or near equality of the voters are now calling themselves "Democrats" and less hopeful about the districts where a margin of votes is based on carrying a large majority of the voters who are calling themselves "independent." I think we can count on those who count themselves as Democrats to turn out in large number this year. Those who call themselves "independents" are all to likely to have their disgust turn to non-voting as it did in CA-50.
Since we're all so happy with the results of progressives walking out in the 2000 election (since both candidates were toadies of corporate interests), let's see if we can do even better in 2008.
Bush has been great for recruiting liberals and progressive, but there's still nearly twice as many conservatives as liberals in the country.
And how many times have conservatives actually walked. Some walked in 1992 and that worked really well for them too.