If eight more Blue Dogs had crossed over and voted against the stimulus, it would have failed.
Of the 27 Democrats who voted with the Republicans to oppose Obama's stimulus bill, 21 were Blue Dogs:
If eight more of the 52-member Blue Dogs had voted against the resolution, it would have been defeated, ending any hope that Democratic leaders had of passing – or even finishing debate on – the stimulus bill this week.
Indiscussions about whether supporting the bank bailout bill was the progressive position or not, it was noted that there was a distinction between the members of the conservative New Democrat Coalition and the Blue Dogs and how they voted. An interesting analysis was made:
[O]ne ideological difference between Blue Dogs and New Dems is that Blue Dogs more often appear to have a political interest in being seen as distinct from Democrats rather than being a distinct type of Democrat, as is the claim of New Dems.
New Dems and progressives have a political interest (at least at this stage of the game) in allowing themselves to be closely associated with the Obama administration, and in being seen not to be obstructing it. Blue Dogs, however, are a different story. They will, in large part, benefit politically by distancing themselves and being seen as only skeptical, cautious and hesitant participants in [Obama's] plans.
Progressive Democrats Vote for Bailout; Blue Dogs Don't
The Congressional Progressive Caucus voted in favor of continuing the bailout by a 49-15 margin; by contrast, the more conservative Blue Dog Democratic Caucus voted 27-17 to block the bailout. And nearly every Republican voted against the bailout.