The DLC is a Fifth Column within the Democratic Party.Its positions

[KlatooBNikto]

do not reflect the vast majority of Democrats.It needs to be expelled.Or true Democrats should split away and form another Party of progressive Democrats.

[qazplm]

1. huh?

See, this is what I dont get, this is why we lose.

We have three sections of democrats and EACH section thinks their way is the only way.

Reps have three sections too but they suck it up and unite come election season, even as they are nasty and bitter towards each other outside of election season.

We need to find common ground more than ever. Disagree with the DLC "path"? Fair enough. Think it the wrong way to win future success? By all means say so and suggest a better way.

But calling them a "fifth column"? Sorry, dont really see how that helps. And dont see how you really think we are going to win anything by pushing away fellow democrats.

[xultar]

3. Check out this thread from last night. Dude they were off the CHAIN

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1408360&mesg_id=1408360&page=

[KlatooBNikto]

4. I do not consider a group that includes Xell Miller, Al From and Joe

Lieberman to be Democratic at all. They are better off being outside.Their expulsion would energize our base.Their support for this war bugs me the most.

[itzamirakul]

6. The Right Wing has infiltrated everything else so why not...

the Democratic Party itself? Since 2000, when Lieberman ran such a lackluster campaign with Gore and showed himself to be more in favor of the rightwing's policies and methodologies, I have believed him to be a "right-wing plant" in the party. Why not? What better way to assure that we NEVER again gain the White House than to have those who CLAIM to be loyal Democrats actively working behind the scenes to destroy our chances at victory?

[qazplm]

8. our "base"

is 18 percent of the country.

It's BEEN 18 percent of the country for a very long time.

I'm fairly liberal...prochoice, pro gay marriage, strong separation of church and state, the whole litany of liberal issues I'm onboard for about 90 percent of it.

But I am also practical. There IS NOT A GROUNDSWELL OF PEOPLE THAT WANNA BE LIKE US IF ONLY WE CAN REACH THEM!

We are the minority. We win only if we can convince enough of the moderates to join us that we win 51 percent or more of the vote. That means we need another full 3rd of the electorate to agree with us or all of our great ideas main jack.

Conservatives have been hovering around the 1/3rd level for awhile, they need less than a fifth of the rest of the electorate to join them to be in charge.

So it seems to me, instituting a purity test is a great way to insure that we are meaningless for a long long time. I wish everyone was liberal, maybe one day they will be, but that day isnt today, and it isnt going to be tomorrow either.

And the sooner we recognize that revolutions can happen slow and gradually too, the sooner we eventually DO get back in power.

[KlatooBNikto]

12. With the strategy you have outlined, we have lost two presidential

elections and countless Congressional seats.I might add these losses came despite fielding very strong candidates. We need a course correction.

If we continue to go the path of the DLC we are going to run aground. We need to energize our base, form a true coalition of liberal whites, Asians, Jews and Hispanics, reject the platform of supply side fraudulent economics,reject war as the first choice and give our people hope once again.That will not happen so long as Xell Miller and Joe Lieberman keep pulling at our legs.

I suggest that all Dean supporters demand the expulsion of this fifth column.

[cali]

16. Zell Miller

is a red herring. No one thinks he represents anything but a tiny minority of dems- and they vote rethug anyway. He has no influence on the party. Lieberman's influence in greater, but he hardly has a tidal pull on the party. The DLC is more influential than it deserves to be, but they have every right to lobby for their point of view. I'm sick of this purge mentality. We need to increase the influence of reform dems, to argue our points vigorously, to raise money, support progressive and liberal candidates, build progressive think tanks, etc. We need to compete with DLC types and prevail. Dean would be the last person to agree with your premise that we should demand the expulsion of the DLC<breve>

[Blue Wally]

44. The DLC.....

was largely made up of Democratic governors. In other words, guys who could win elections!!!

[cmkramer]

77. Zell Miller and the DLC

Remember how critical they were of Howard Dean? Well, they're just as critical of Zell Miller. They consider his views as far out of the mainstream as they did Dean's.

[Pepperbelly]

19. Dean supporters are not ...

the majority of the Party.

[cali]

21. Could you point out where

I suggested that Dean supporters were the majority of the party?
I didn't. Are you sure you were responding to the right person?

[Pepperbelly]

31. response to #12. See? The same post to which you responded. nt

[qazplm]

23. ah yes,

so take a losing platform, remove a chunk of its members, consolidate and then...

wait I am missing the part where we win?

I have yet to see a scenario where you get X number of percentage of votes, you subtract from that percentage of votes, and then win.

This election was a perfect time for those liberal whites, asians, jews and women and minorities to come out. Never has there been a more clear contrast between a liberal democratic candidate and a conservative republican candidate.

I am not sure there will be one again for awhile.

And we couldnt pull it off. I have no problem with getting back to the idea of standing for things. We certainly have gotten away from strong ideas and been more fractured in our approach of what we stand for, but all this fifth column, kick em out, let's retrench and get smaller is loser talk quite frankly.

It worked for the conservatives because, guess what, there are more of them then there are of us, by almost a 2-1 margin!

Numbers dont make right, but they do win elections.

[mike_c]

72. and without that 18 percent the dem moderates have no hope...

...of winning elections. I think the 2004 presidential election was the greatest penetration into the left-- represented by liberal democrats, greens, and progressive independents who voted for John Kerry-- that the democratic party will achieve for some time unless they veer leftward.

[American Tragedy]

86. So, if they veer leftward, who exactly do they gain?

[InvisibleBallots]

73. 18% social liberals, sure, 60% if we run on economic populism

"prochoice, pro gay marriage, strong separation of church and state, the whole litany of liberal issues I'm onboard for about 90 percent of it"

18% of people really care about the issues you mentioned. 60% of people want lower taxes, higher wages, universal health care, and fair trade policies.

You're right if we continue to run on "litany of liberal issues" you listed, we'll continue to lose.

[Pepperbelly]

9. Bill Clinton not a Democrat?

I think you might reconsider that remark.

[Warren Stupidity]

10. yes we of course have factions in the DP

but the DLC isn't just a faction, they control the party leadership and have for at least the last 12 years. So they are the 'faction in charge', and the issue is, given that they have led us to defeat after defeat, given that they do not represent mainstream DP values, why are they in charge?

p.s. leaving the party, a la nader, is stupid. Thye two party system is institutionalized. However there is no reason why progressives cannot simply take over the party leadership. If we are in fact the mainstream of the DP this should be no problem at all. Then we get all the cookies. The DLC can take its corporate whore money and either go home, or like those few moderate republicans still left in the Taliban-NeoClown run Repuglican Party, live with it.

[newyawker99]

38. Hi Warren Stupidity!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[xultar]

2. Flame bait-7am for the first round of Saturday's circle firing squad. n/t

[Q]

11. You could choose to participate in the discussion...

...why not explain your position? Why shouldn't we object to the DLC trying to move our party to the right?

[Warren Stupidity]

14. obviously because

moving every more rightward is the only way to win elections :-)

[KlatooBNikto]

20. And, obviously too, that strategy has worked out in 2000, 02 and 04.

BTW welcome to DU!

[Perky]

26. We Barely lost those three elections two reasons

1) we had candidates who could not effectively concince middle America that we were smarter and looking out out for their interert in obtaining the American Dream.


We failed to nationalize the 2002 election in the wake of 9/11.

I wish epople would realize that the message that works for the liberal base and the minorities doe not work for the the Middle Class, largely because we tend to criticize what they aspire to next: Higher salaries and bigger homes.

If we were foundationaly moderate/suburban and thus reaching out to the minorities and liberals we would be far far more succesful then teying to convince moderates that we are party with power centers in Boston and San Francisco rather than Chicago, St. Louis and Atlanta.

[Jose Diablo]

32. No no no

we did NOT lose the elections because:

"1) we had candidates who could not effectively convince middle America that we were smarter and looking out out for their interest in obtaining the American Dream."

We lost the elections from fraud, with the help of the DLC. This keeps getting lost on many. It is not 'moral' values. It is not effectively convincing the moderate voters. It is fraud with the help of the DLC that are no more moderate Democrats than the neocons are just right wing republicans.

It is the corporations using both sides to screw the people.

[Warren Stupidity]

43. exactly

Nader's analysis is not wrong, its his prescription that fails.

[booley]

85. uh..no..

"largely because we tend to criticize what they aspire to next: Higher salaries and bigger homes."

I sure don't criticize higher saleries and bigger homes. I hope and plan on getting a higher salery and a bigger home.

I may criticize HOW one gets thos ethings. I may question why CEOS should get a higher salery when thier employees can barely make ends meet, I may feel that mansions are not as important as making sure everybody at least has a home.

but I don't think that's outside the mainstream. And yes, I am a big flaming liberal.

I know a lot of liberals. There are lots of Liberals in Saint Louis. and you know what we beleive in? in fairness, helping those less fortunate, governmental accountability, a safe country for kid sot go up in.

last I heard a lot of suburban's beleive in those things as well.

it's just the republicans have gotton people convinced that they beleive in those things too even though thier deeds shwo they don't. Indeed, even many self described conservatives have this gap between what they think thier party stands for and what the republicans actually do. (some have even gone as far as to unknowingly parrot and support Kerry's positions on issues, beleiving that they were actually Shrub's stances...which is funny and confusing as hell)

Though frankly, the dems were having problems as far back as 1996 from what I saw.

There was no one thing that lost us those elections. But I do think the Dem parties movement to the right was a big contributer. I mean, the Republicans haven't moved an inch to the left. they've only come more radical.

Notice how they keep winning?

Maybe instead of ceding ground, we need to show why our positions are better.

[serryjw]

50. Whom the F*CK cares?

moving every more rightward is the only way to win elections :-) What the hell am I winning IF they don't represent me?

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[xultar]

7. Door knob removal in-patient or out-patient surgery? n/t

[Gman]

13. Why do people dream and obsess on the DLC at night, then at 6:14 a.m.

post trash about the DLC to rid theirselves of the obsession?

[Q]

15. Isn't it obvious that many, many Democrats have concerns...

...about the DLC? If they can't express those concerns on DU...where CAN they express them?

And it seems that the DLCers on this board have done nothing to allay their fears. Instead of defending the DLC...they simply trash those with concerns.

It's a rare thing to see something actually defend the DLC with facts.

[KlatooBNikto]

18. Thank you.I will list my concerns for some of the DLC supporters

to answer.

1. They have supported the tax cut policies that favor the wealthy
which is, in essence, support for Supply Side Economics. Even our own Paul Krugman has called it an unsustainable theory.
2. Not one of the DLC supporters even questioned the basis for the Iraq War. Not one of them has expressed any grief or anger at the deaths and destruction that this fraudulent policy has caused. It was left to our own beloved Robert Byrd to break the silence of these cowards.

3.Despite knowing what was done to Al Gore, they remained complacent with Kerry's election strategy until it was too late.In Ohio, a state that is reeling under plant closures and high unemployment, if our party had stood with working people we would have clearly won.We failed to energize the base and tried to be "me too" Republicans. We deserved to lose.

If this was just something I dreamed up overnight the poster may have a point.I have been stewing over this question since Novemebr 2.

The DLC has had their fifteen minutes. It is time our party's faithful take back our Party with our principles intact instead of trying to be what we are not.

[depakid]

25. It's a rare thing because

there aren't any facts to defend them with. Not on a national level.

The DLC strategy has proven an unmitigated disaster in election after election. All they are left with are bare assertions or "Clinton in 92."

Of course, even if you believe that perot didn't have a major effect on that dynamic- all you have to do is see how long that DLC formular for "success" lasted- 'til around November 94.

After that, it's had nothing at all to recommend it- and tons of evidence to detract from it.

[Gman]

47. Sure it's obvious Q,

and I respect your opinion as you've been here on DU a long time now.

What people here don't understand is that extremism, whether it be to the right or the left does not last long. Americans like things nice and cozy in the middle. Americans can support abortion rights and tax cuts at the same time. Americans will support a strong military while simultaneously supporting gay rights. Americans will support strong business growth while at the same time supporting programs for the disadvantaged. In short, Americans are fiscally conservative and socially liberal. The DLC walks that line between the two and works to present candidates as middle of the road where the vast majority of Americans are.

Politics is like a pendulum. The current completion of the swing to the far right is the complement of the swing to the far left in the 60's. THis current swing right does not have very much longer to live. (...assuming we ever get a fair election again in this country)

[m berst]

82. put it in context

If we accept the right wingers ideas as to what the issues are - gay rights, abortion, gun control and tax cuts - and accept the right wingers ideas as to what left and right are, then what you say is true. The problem is that what you describe as the middle is somewhere between Rockefeller Republicanism and the John Birch Society.

If the Democratic party is going to look at the political landscape as created and described by right wing extremists, accept that as the given, and then look for a nice cozy middle for the sake of winning, then that is a description of what is wrong with the party, not what is right. Ignoring the ways in which the right wingers are poisoning the well is to abandon ALL Democratic principles, it is not
being "moderate" or "practical" or centrist.

Aside from the morality of the party's stance - putting "winning" and practicality above principle - it isn't working.

Talking to Republican voters about the Democratic party, the complaint is that the party doesn't stand for anything and has no backbone or principles, and is elitist, hypocritical and arrogant. When I tell other Democrats that, the response is that those people must be stupid. Well, I must be stupid, too, because I agree with them.

[cali]

17. Fiddle dee dee

The DLC is not a fifth column. It's an organization devoted to a tactic more than a view point. I believe their time is past, and it's time to reform the party from within. I'm not about to leave the party, and I'm not going to engage in the breathless overstatement that's become so prevalent lately.

[KlatooBNikto]

22. A group that supports the Bush tax cuts even our economists say is

based on the false premise of Supply Side Economics, is a Fifth Column in my opinion. A group that accepts the fraudulent premise for the war when people like Ambassador Wilson, Hans Blix have proven they were fraudulent is a Fifth Column in my opinion. Even as late as yesterday, Al From says he would like to purge true Democrats like Michael Moore from the party because of his questioning of the War's premise.

Their plant in our party ,Joe Lieberman, made an ass out of all of us
in his obsequious performance in the VP debates in 2000.And, of course, the DINO Xell Miller, made a mockery of of our Party's principles by appearing on the Republican Party's Convention and raving about our party's direction.

More than anything else, what bothers me is that our Party is being sapped of its will to defend our base by the constant carping on the sidelines by the DLC types. I would like to see our party mount educational " teach-ins" on the economic, health and war issues like Senator Fulbright used to do.That would keep a real platform alive throughout the season that the mainstream media cannot ignore.

As far as the DLC goes, the Democratic Party has been more than tolerant true to its principles. But two consecutive losses in Presidential elections and many Congressional contests have done it for me.

[qazplm]

24. i'm really no fan of Lieberman

but its silly to make it as if he somehow was a "plant" to ruin Gore's chances.

VP candidates do one of several things:

a. nothing
b. maybe give you their home state
c. nothing
d. hurt you

Lieberman did a and c (Conn goes Dem no matter what)
Guess what, Edwards also did a and c

Miller of course is another story but he is a wild wing nut, not exactly your moderate democrat (although he approximates midwestern and southern "moderates" more than we would like to admit).

Again, turning on each other is a ritual post election exercise. Everyone tries to make the argument that the "Clinton way" didnt work in 2000 and 2004...then again it DID work in 92 and 96, and its been the only Democratic way that did work, outside of the great timing that was Carter in 76, since the 60s!

America, sadly, has changed, and we can keep pretending there is some silent majority just waiting to rise up (there isnt) or we can recognize that right now, we are going to have be patient and fight incremently and yes even compromise temporarily if we want to get back in power.

[paulk]

39. you don't know what you're talking about

The DLC has a website where you can learn what their positions are, (and different members have different opinions), but to say that the DLC supports the Bush tax cuts is flatly untrue.

To say that the DLC is for supply side economics is completely false.

[KlatooBNikto]

40. Why did the Democrats in overwhelming numbers vote for the Bush

tax cuts? Even Kerry voted for the tax cuts for the rich.The only one who has been screaming about this is Paul Krugman and he is the best economist we have.

To say that the DLC is not a supply side wannabe is to ignore the obvious.We are getting good at that game too thanks to many years of brainwashing by our propagandist press.

[paulk]

42. Kerry did not vote for the Bush tax cuts.

The Democrats did not vote in "overwhelming numbers" for Bush's tax cuts.

Go to the DLC website if you want their opinions on tax policy -

instead of just making things up.

[fujiyama]

58. Kerry did NOT vote for Bush's tax cuts

I'm not a big fan of Lieberman or Bayh, but to give them credit, they too voted AGAINST Bush's '01 tax cuts.

Unfortunately Bayh did vote for a later set I think.

[TwilightZone]

27. "true Democrats"

Who, exactly, is going to decide who the "true Democrats" are?

You?

For supposedly being such an inclusive party, we sure have a funny way of showing it.

[KlatooBNikto]

28. True Democrats are those who reject the premise of Supply Side

Economics.They will not vote for tax cuts for the wealthy.They will not undermine Social Security.They will stand up for our people's needs, like prescription drugs.They will call for the impeachment of a President who led us into a war by lies. They will, at the very least, ask questions in the Senate as Senator Byrd did about this war.

Finally, why does the Democratic Party tolerate people who support the PNAC agenda ( like Lieberman) when that agenda has not even been debated by the Party?

[fujiyama]

60. Very few

in the party voted for Bush's tax cuts. It was a few reliable sell outs like Breaux, Baucus, Nelson of NE, and a couple others that did.

There are issues where the party caved in. IWR, the recent budget, the prescription drug bill, and the PATRIOT Act are several such examples.

But what are we going to do? Purge hawkish Dems? Lieberman is a twit and I won't bother defending him, but I'll still take his annoying whiny ass in senate over some repuke.

Our only option is taking over the control structure. We need to take over the leadership. Let the DLC, no longer be a "leadership" council, but just another group of Democrats.

[mmonk]

29. IMO

Anyone that doesn't stand fore square behind the Bill of Rights and the Constitution (including separation of church and state) and against using the military for purely imperialistic means, or for a society with no safety net shouldn't be in the dem party. What will the meaning of "democrats" be without these principles?

[KlatooBNikto]

30. Agree absolutely.

[Warren Stupidity]

33. i hate to bring this up...

as it is flame bait, but there is that pesky 2nd amendment, and in general the DP just takes a walk about that one.

Both the left and the right have problems with the rights that are enumerated in the Bill of Rights, and both ignore the limitations on federal authority in the constitution proper.

On the other hand we tend to have a problem with 1/10 of the BoR while the neoclown-theocrats have a problem with 9/10. The compromise of course was to ditch the entire 10.

[KlatooBNikto]

34. You are right.our party used to stand for something.Its fidelity to our

Constitution and Bill of Rights was one that separated us from the other party.We stand for nothing except expediency now.We are becoming indistinguishable from the other party.That is why we are losing even moderate voters who would normally support us but see no point when there is really no difference. When you stand for nothing etc.

[chaska]

35. I can't speak for everyone but...

I think moderates in our party need to realize that the left side of our party is dying. We've been effectively killed by conservatism within and without our party. I just can't vote for another DLC candidate. I will not revive without a candidate that moves me based on my beliefs.

I know I'm doing a lousy job of explaining this. We can either be a party with no real values in that we too much resemble the other side, or we can move the country to be more like us. If it's not the latter, I'm sorry, count me out. The dead tend to be a little lazy. I won't work for you if you won't represent me.

[Cleita]

36. We should all join the Green Party.

Their values are the same as the values of the Democratic Party I joined forty years ago. This new Democratic Party that holds the middle road leaning to the right is where the Republican Party was forty years ago. It's time for a mass defection. If the DLC takes in moderate Republicans then the neo-con Republicans can slink back into their little dark dens where they belong and maybe we can take our country back to a place where we can be proud to be Americans again.

[Jose Diablo]

37. It won't work

the voter base is still with the Dems and if we could get honest elections we would win again.

Even migrating to the Greens would not work for it would premanantly split the vote.

The corporations would just launch another cash cow for the Greens thus replicating what was done to the Dem.

No, the solution has to be take the Dem party back from the corporations somehow. Although with what we have now, it will be difficult. It is a very complex problem, with many fronts: leadership, grassroot engagement and ousting local/state level power centers, media, reorganizing unions, winning right for people depending on the party.

Question is, who will organize the efforts? I doubt the existing power will welcome the effort with open arms for this would threaten their positions, and corporate money can be habituating.

How did we get in this position, has the party be asleep for 25 years? It is like the fairy tale, Rip Van Winkle. Where we are now has been carefully orchestrated by not just our enemies, but many that claim to hold our values, but they don't really. I imagine we will see many Dem politicians bailing-out within the next 4 years. This was probably the plan all along, weaken the party within then jump ship to where they really were all along.

The New Democrats sound a lot like the New Republicans from the 60-70's. You know, the Dixiecrats had to jump ship in the south to keep their jobs. With the enfranchment of the black voters, town after town was voting them out of the Dem party. This is what I don't understand in the south, why are the blacks voting republican, or have most moved to the cities and gerrymandering has once again left their vote irrelevant in so far as local politics.

From the standpoint of economics, the south should be overwelmingly Democrat, why isn't it?

[Warren Stupidity]

45. They vote democratic.

This is what I don't understand in the south, why are the blacks voting republican, or have most moved to the cities and gerrymandering has once again left their vote irrelevant in so far as local politics.

There just aren't enough of them. The south is polarized politically along racial lines. Blacks vote democratic and whites vote republican.

[serryjw]

49. We will see by whom the DLC chooses for the chair of the DNC

I promise you I WON"T LIKE IT!...Personally, I was anti-Nader..I was never anti GREEN. If 20 million of us on the left leave for GREENER PASTEUR'S something will happen in the future. We can not win when or nominee CHOKES on the word LIBERAL> I am damn proud of being an FDR dem and I want it back.

[Oak2004]

41. This is exactly what I have been privately wondering about

I'm a liberal Republican in exile. I saw, firsthand, how the extreme right took control of the Republican Party. It wasn't with banners flying, proudly singing their Straussian fascist anthems. It was bit by bit, trick by trick, scheme by scheme, till it was impossible for anyone within the structure of the Republican Party to fight them.

The selling point of the extreme right, to Republicans, by the way, was that they could win elections. And a lot of traditional Republicans bought it, till one day they woke up and realized they were now marginalized within a party they no longer recognized. That is, those who have managed to wake up from the slumber of winnability.

The DLC, or at least many of its members, look suspiciously like the same folks who stole my party. Even more suspiciously, you do realize that some of them have been reported by the media to be buddy-buddy with people like Karl Rove?

In my gut I believe the Democrats are in the middle stages of being taken over by the very same crowd that stole the Republican Party. I'm not sure I could "prove" this. But it sure looks like deja-vu to me.

[KlatooBNikto]

54. You have hit the nail on the head. The reason our base does not respond to

our candidates is that they simply do not see any difference in their platforms and those of the Republicans.The Trojan Horses of the DLC have seen to it that we feed at the same money trough and sing the same songs.For a while we saw the hope that Dean brought by raising all his money from the grass roots which threatened the money bags of the DLC.So out went Dean and all our hope for a person with a real Democratic agenda.

[Gman]

46. Ok, newby... Just who do you consider to be

the "vast majority" of Democrats and how do you come to this conclusion?

{Loaded Question Time}

[KlatooBNikto]

53. The vast majority are the people who voted for Kerry and Edwards

in spite of the propaganda that was directed at them by the Republicans. I would say they are overwhelmingly Middle and Lower Middle income Americans of every racial and religious affiliation.They certainly include a large number of older Americans who live on fixed incomes thanks to FDR and who live in fear of being deprived of even this pittance by the greedy Republicans. They certainly include Black Americans who see almost every civil right that they have earned in the past thirty years being in danger of stripped away. They certainly include Jewish Americans who, not being the rich types who populate the DLC, have to live in fear of losing their medical insurance.They also include Hispanics newly arrived in this country who see their very citizenship rights being called into question.

Is that good enough for you, oldie?

[Gman]

56. No its not

because you're guessing and really don't know what people want. You're projecting your own impressions on the population and assuming it to be reality. I know of no empirical evidence that supports much if any of what you're assuming.

Assuming a fair election (which at this point is hard to do, but for the sake of argument) we do know that Bush got that extra 2 - 3% of the hispanic vote that helped give him the election. This vote came from what is known in South Texas as the HIGHspanics. Bush also got much more of the vote from the working class than he should have because of the faux fear factor. The DLC had nothing to do with any of this. In fact, I think you're probably misreading the messages from the 51% of voters that went for Bush. These people bought into the gay marriage thing, and the fear factor among a handful of other contrived issues. Bush didn't full all of the people all of the time in this case. He only fooled enough.

I'm not sure exactly who did vote for Kerry/Edwards. I can tell you that there were a great many people that voted for Bush and against their own self interest. The DLC was responsible for a great many middle of the roaders voting for K/E. Without the DLC message, this election wouldn't even have been anything near close.

I grow very annoyed with the sheer ignorance and stupidity of whiners that think the Democrats could have won with some way out left platform. I grow even more annoyed when they talk about forming another party. Pisses me off.

[KlatooBNikto]

59. Who is talking about a way out left platform?It is possible for to put

together a coalition of fiscally conservative candidates who are socially liberal.And, where did you get the idea that the DLC was instrumental in bringing in the socalled Moderate voters?

I believe that we need not go far out left to put together a winning coalition.Dean's primaries taught us that a grass roots campaign based on our values would have a great appeal to our base.It would also appeal to those who have been disenfrachised by our cozying up to the Republicans.

[Gman]

64. Whatever...

"where did you get the idea that the DLC was instrumental in bringing in the socalled Moderate voters?"

Learn a little about politics before you say stuff like this.

[KlatooBNikto]

65. I do not need lessons from you.

[m berst]

48. the difficulty

The difficulty that people have in discussing this is that is that we can't get past our identification with the party labels. So, we see the Democratic party constituency as being static and unchangeable - as a "team" of us against them - and we see anyone who declares themselves to be a Democrat as being one of the team members. From that thinking, all people who call themselves Democrats have to be taken into account, no matter how conservative they may be. Then the response is "you can't grow a party by throwing people out." You can if the throwing out allows you to develop a progressive platform that regains 100 "Reagan Democrat" blue collar voters for every 10 DLC people you lose.

The Republican party has become some sort of thuggish dumbed down reactionary mob, and many intelligent, compassionate, and principled people who at one time would have been called moderate or liberal republicans are in positions of dominance in the Democratic party and fight tooth and nail against any stances by the party that they see as "class warfare" or "far left."

The reason to eliminate the DLC people from power and influence is not to purify the party nor is it to make it radical. It is so that we can return it to its progressive roots and attract the working people away from the Republican party.

People who are conservative Democrats throw a fit at this suggestion, because they can only imagine conservative politics as being the Republican party as it now is, and cannot imagine ever being associated with that.

How about this? We will dump the labels. We will have one party called the DLC party that will consist of all of the white collar people who favor flat tax ideas, free markets, and free trade. The other party we will call the progressive party, and it will consist of us "far left" people and the workers and the poor. In this scenario, people will be better aligned with their outlook and interests, and there will be no place for the Republican party as it presently is. There should be no place for it - it is not conservative, and it is not democratic. It is reactionary and fascist.

So long as the DLC exists in the Democratic party, and so long as the party is not home for progressives and for workers and the poor, there will inevitably be a fatal conflict. The needs, interests, and philosophies of the two wings of the party are too fundamentally opposed to one another for compromise to work.

I would hope to see either we "radicals" leave the party and from a new party that can attract the working class back from the Republicans, or for the DLC people to leave the party and reform the Republican party and bring it back to its historical positions.

As it is right now, the Democratic party is becoming the party of the intelligent and the educated, regardless of political persuasion. Since no sane political positions or ideologies are allowed anymore in the Republican party, all are now kludged together in the Democratic party and trying to find unity. It will never be found. You can't build a unified party when the only qualification for membership is being intelligent and educated. That merely forms a debating society of elite people.

on edit - added a few words for the sake of clarity

[serryjw]

51. IF WE ALL LEAVE..........

We have something the DLC dems are not counting on.......50 MILLION disenfranchised voters that are looking for a leader whom represents them. It can be done....lets not forget how well Perot did as a short funny looking man with no personality....PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR TRUTH! We can bring back millions of we give them DK or someone like him.

[m berst]

76. yes

Moderate and conservative Democrats and DLC supporters love the idea of a closed system - x number of voters labeled such and such a way - they call this "reality" and tell us to grow up and face it.

What if all of the left wing people left the party? That would free us up to build a movement around the the needs of the have-nots without the continual bitter infighting with the people who are happy with the status quo - or were until the Bush administration went too far.

"But that will destroy the party," comes the cry. If the party disappeared tomorrow, do people imagine that opposition to the reactionary forces of fascism would disappear? Or would those forces not be stronger once freed from the obligation of lugging around the dead weight of the DLC?

And why do so many people not vote? I can fully understand their decision. Who would you vote for? A party that won't even fight to protect your vote? A party that compromises with the opposition to the point that the difference between having a Republican or a Democratic administration is not detectable in the life of the average person?

Talking like this gets many people very angry, but it should not. Things won't improve if we don't talk about them. If people can get past the us versus them mentality and their strong identification with one of the "teams" and use common sense, it is easy to see that there are other ways to imagine the two parties that would better reflect the needs and the interests of the different segments of the population.

It should not be as difficult as it is to advocate for the poor and the minorities and the workers as it now is in the Democratic party. I have harder time with today's Democrats on these issues then I once did with Republicans. This doesn't make the moderate and conservative Democrats bad or wrong, it just makes them poor allies for the left wing and progressive people because the differences are simply too fundamental and profound to easily resolve.

[serryjw]

78. I'm already there........

come join me!...and bring a bunch of people with you.

[m berst]

79. odd feeling isn't it?

It is strange to realize that your country and your party don't really want you around.

[KlatooBNikto]

80. Like someone has said: we did not leave our party, our party was

taken away from us.

[serryjw]

81. It's been a tough 3 years......

I have lost several life long friends,my party and country and I don't agree on very much.
I took a taxi today and the driver was a (30) young black man/republican/voted for Bushit. I spent 20 minutes listening to his rants. I was in the twilight zone.
We (he) started talking about gays and marriage. WHY DO PEOPLE THINK they should have a say in what ANYONE does in the bedroom?

[m berst]

83. you can sense it

You are one of those no doubt who can tell that something is way, way off. People will tell you that you don't see what you do see,that you don't hear what you do hear. Things have gone seriously haywire and people are somewhat crazed and deranged. On the surface is this bland bloodless nonchalance that everyone has so down to an art form, and a lot of dried up reasoning that tries to explain things. Anyone who says "boo!" or who shows any passion or emotion is treated as a threat to the illusion and dismissed or attacked.

[serryjw]

84. It's actually a lot worse than I allow myself to think about.......

1) a country divided
2) a party totally lost with no leadership
3) an education system in peril
4) an environment that is getting destroyed on a daily basis
5) corporate money/influence CONTROLS our political system
6) The "Dollar" is ready to collapse
7) a deficit that negatively effect everyone for decades
8) A healthcare system than only works for the rich
9) an election system that is a joke
10) a media whom are co-conspirators in beating the propaganda drums.

There is not much to happy about...and I see nothing changing for the balance of my life. Once SCOTUS is controlled by the Republicans I will not recognize my county.

[KlatooBNikto]

62. I think what gives the DLC Pseudo Democrats the power is their

ability to generate money, nothing else.So they create fear in our candidates and ask them to tone down their Democratic rhetoric which they label as Liberal or Far Left.Our base sensing a betrayal of our principles, stays away in droves from the polling booths.When a true democrat like Dean emerges and appeals to the grass roots for his funding, he sends shivers into these DLC types who fear losing their Kingmaker role to which they so graciously appointed themselves.This is the reason Dean was so eagerly set upon by this crowd.After he was defeated, they now spread the word that he would have lost in overwhelming numbers as though they now hold a divining rod in addition to the money they have generated.

I believe that our Party has no choice other than to take risks but remain true to its principles.We may become marginalized or we may win astounding victories. Just as in life, in politics there are no guaranties.

[Zynx]

52. Moderates and Conservatives are more numerous in the party than Liberals

That's a fact. What would splintering the party do? It would only insure Republican wins for decades to come. Sure, you have made your statement, but you will lose everything.

[KlatooBNikto]

55. I believe the moderates and the conservatives in our party are fiscally

moderate, not socially moderate.They want our older people to live out their golden years in dignity.They want Black and Hispanic people to have equal rights.They want a tax system that is fair, not weighted toward the rich.So, I do not think our Moderate and Conservative groups are the same as theirs.We can build a coalition of all our people based on our Democratic values handed down to us by
probably the greatest President Since Abraham Lincoln, FDR.The DLC has undermined our values and stripped our party of any difference it had from the Republicans.

I believe a call to our roots by a leader like Dean or John Edwards will have great resonance within our base ( i.e the 50% who voted for our ticket, if we believe the election returns).That will even include what you label as Conservatives and Moderates.Once again these are fiscal Conservative and fiscal Moderates not the social and religious extremists of the Right Wing.

[Zynx]

57. There are a lot of social moderates in our party as well.

Sure they want equal rights, but that is much different than being in favor of affirmative action.

[KlatooBNikto]

61. The ones who, like Zell Miller, do not want to be part of our Party

will vote Republican anyway.What is the point in crying over them? I am not even sure they voted for us in 2004 or even in 2000.The ones who voted for Kerry-Edwards as loyal Democrats are going to stay with us. We need to energize the disenfrachised and disillusioned 15-20% who did not even show up for the elections so they will see a reason to come to the polling booths on Election day.

[noiretextatique]

63. how is it different?

when there is still such a huge equality gap in this country? how is it different when so many people are still living in poverty and receiving poor educations at the primary and secondary level? how is it different when, as always, a disproportionate number of poor people are black and brown? how is it all "equal" now at a few scant years of half-assed redress, considering how long it was so incredibly unequal?
this is an issue (like anything remotely related to race) our side has done a lousy job explaining and defending...and revamping and expanding to address the needs of all those traditionally excluded, including poor whites. one lesson that should have been learned: if we ever hope to address racial inequalities, it will have to be done through the back door. otherwise, there will be far to much resentment for people who aren't interested in any eqaulity, like republicans and their counterparts, to capitalize on.

[m berst]

66. the party was long since splintered

Most of our blue collar support left. Many people who would have in the past been moderate Republicans are now controlling the direction of the Democratic party and continuing to alienate blue collar voters.

If the Democratic party collapsed completely tomorrow, the Republicans would never win another major election in our lifetimes. What would emerge would be a true populist progressive party, and a moderate Republican party. The populist progressive party would be in power for a generation. What prevents that from happening is not the Republican party, but the leadership of the Democratic party.

The Democratic party as it is presently constituted is what keeps the Republicans propped up. They have an easy target to be against. They have an opposition party in the Democrats that lets them easily raid their rank and file have-not voters with nary a whimper.

[KnowerOfLogic]

70. If so, the conservatives should become republicans. why are

there conservatives in the democratic party? How can the democratic party supposedly include and represent every part of the political spectrum from right to left, while the republicans only represent the right?

[m berst]

74. they are homeless

When you get beyond a couple of issues, many conservative and moderate Democrats are Republican in philosophy. We see "reverse racism," flat tax, free trade, free markets and the like argued here from the Republican point of view.

No intelligent person would want to be associated with the Republican party now, especially a conservative intelligent person. They are in the Democratic party because they have no home otherwise. They are frustrated by what they see as "radicals" and "far left" people who they think are holding the party back. After gay rights, gun control (maybe) and pro-choice, many, many Democrats are closer to traditional moderate or liberal Republicans than they are to traditional Democrats. They seek to eliminate or marginalize the left wing. That means that either we left wing people will have to leave the party, or many of the moderates and conservatives will. They probably won't, since they are wealthier and more powerful than we are. That leaves us without a home.

Rather than endlessly feuding back and forth over issues that should never be controversial within the Democratic party and which can never be resolved, why not acknowledge that there are fundamental differences that can't be resolved, have respect for each other, and stop beating up on each other? The divorce between the moderates and the left wing is inevitable if we are ever to pry the blue collar people away from the reactionary party that the Republican party has become. Any program that would bring blue collar voters back to the Democratic party will always be opposed by the DLC and by the conservative and moderate Democrats. They are far too invested in the status quo to ever be advocates for the have-nots.

[Gyre]

67. If you hate the DLC

Starve both it and it's parent beast (for $) and let them know WHY you're stiffing them. Simple.

[KlatooBNikto]

68. The finances of the DLC are heavily weighted toward the fat cats in the

movie industry and other large donors.Small people like us(or I should properly say Me) will not have much of an impact on them unless we follow the thousands who supported Dean during the primaries.

[KnowerOfLogic]

69. Sure looks that way. n/t

[Disturbed]

75. Green Party Member

My post about the Green Party got locked about a week ago but I see that within several posts that some here are Greens. In my view, there are many Dems who adhere to most of the Green platform. I feel that the Dems will get themselves together within the next two years and hammer out a les Repub. Lite Rightwing platform that will garner positions in the Senate and House, partly because there will be a backlash to the Neo Facsists and partly because the Dems will realize that moving further to the right is fruitless.

I vote Green locally and Dem Natl. Until Amerika gets a real multi-party system the two partry Natl. one will only be viable.

[acmavm]

71. Oh man, here we go again. And again I'll say that the DLC does not

represent me or people like me. You know, us dumbasses that think healthcare and education are a right for all Americans. Jobs should be created for Americans, AND KEPT HERE. That descrimination and election fraud are a reason for my party to go ballistic because that means that I've been disenfranchised, and so has each and every member of the democratic party.

Nope, these people do not represent me, or most of this country. And I consider myself a moderate who is concerned about the security of my country, the health and welfare of ALL it's citizens, and civil and equal rights.

These guys are in it for their own selfish reasons. And I do have a right to protest the cowardly way they've rolled over and played dead on command by big money. They can't be everything to everybody, they need to go back to their roots, the roots of our party. And if that means a few of them need to be weeded out, oh well.