Defeating Reid is pointless

What people often forget when discussing the "failings" of caucus leaders is that caucus leaders do not represent the interests of the wider movement that elects that caucus. Their constituents are not the Democratic voters. Their constituents are the other members of the caucus.

That's why Nancy Pelosi, a liberal Democrat from a liberal district, had to be more moderate in her approaches to managing the caucus in the previous congressional term. She didn't just represent San Francisco. She also represent the Democratic congress people from the South.

Why do I bring this up? Because simply demanding the defeat of Reid is pointless if the caucus as a whole will just elect another Reid-like leader. If you really want to change the leadership of the caucus then you need to change the caucus itself. You do this by either persuading its members to vote differently, or you elect new members who will vote differently.

Reid's "spinelessness" is just a symptom.