The Democratic Party is slowly moving to a consensus...

[kentuck]

There are a few holdouts from the moderate and DLC side that still cling to the old and failed theory of "playing to the middle" but, it seems that the Party is moving gradually but surely to the idea that the best way to oppose the Republicans is to "oppose" them. Oppose them on every idea that runs counter to the best interests of the majority of America. They are readying themselves to take back their title as the 'Party of the People'.

It has been slow in coming but, as we sit on the brink of economic and military disaster, they are finally waking up. The moderates and DLCer's would be wise to get on board. Otherwise, they will be left behind scratching their ass and trying to figure out what went wrong, like they have been doing for the last 10 years...

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

1. I hope you're right

But how can you explain Reid as minority leader? or the obsession with Vilsack as DNC chair?

[PAdem2]

8. I know it's tough to admit it but

It turned out to be true that the Clinton team is the only one that has had a winning strategy in the last 20 years. It turned out to be true that Kerry came close but failed in the end, after infighting between the Kennedy team and the Clinton team for control of the party. It turned out to be true that the Hillary is well positioned for a run in 2008.

Here's some other hard truths:

* She's going to run from the middle, with experience in the Senate, in defense committees and posibly even a run for Govenor of New York as a better platform to jump from than a Senate seat.

* She knows that we're outnumbered in the Senate and Congress, and will run on a position of "checks and balances" to the repubs.

* She is going to distance herself from the hard left. Move-on and the other dot-orgs and 527's aren't going to get any love for the remainder of the next 4 years.

* Moderate democrats are going to be calling the shots in the party from here out for a long time. Deal with it or go Green.

[Walt Starr]

10. Thankyouverymuch

When presented with a choice of a Green, a Republican, or a Republican in Democratic clothing, I'm going to vote for the real deal Republican and embrace the full horror.

[kentuck]

11. How do you define "success"?

Whatever Clinton accomplished had no lasting effect whatsoever. It was gone with the wind the day he left office. And , we had lost everything in the process. When he came into office, we had the WH, the Senate, and the House. When he left, we had nothing. That's the facts.

[Angelique]

56. I agree, Whatever Clinton accomplished had no lasting effect whatsoever..

We need to show a clear and unambiguous divide from the Rightwingnuts or we are doomed to continue to losing elections.. Why would people choose an unconvincing copy of a wingnut when there is one already on their ballot.. Sorry, but I have had it with the Clinton love-fest a long time ago.. about the time when he shamed his family, friends, the Democratic party and our country with his lecherous conduct.

[xxqqqzme]

25. the 'Clinton team'

was successful because Clinton is a supreme political animal - top of the political evolutionary chain. AND people were on2 poppy's lying. The media had not acquired, nor did it enjoy, it full whore status as it does 2day.

As direct result of 11/2 and its aftermath, If it ain't progressive - I ain't voting 4 it!

[greenohio]

54. You must enjoy losing...

because that is what you'll do. Clinton was a Southern Chair of the DLC. I cannot believe everybody on this board hates him. I am sensing some real loser mentality here.

I voted for Kerry though my heart was with the greens. I did this to win. Everybody on this board demonized me for defending the greens because we had to win. Now that it looks like we've lost, the whole attitude is principle over winning. Where were you guys 3 weeks ago when the greens were looking for votes?

[deminflorida]

29. I Know it's hard to admit it, but Wes Clark is going to destroy

Mrs. Clinton in the primaries. He'll leave no progressive Democrats behind, he speaks to both sides of the isle, he speaks to progressives as well as moderates and conservatives.

Hillary will never be able to find her legs among true moderates and conservative Democrats. She will only be able to raise alot of funds initially. The south will turn it's back on her, period.

Watching her and her husband campaign together would be like watching two dogs having sex in the parking lot after Sunday Church. You see it but you don't want to talk about it in public.

[Q]

37. That's really funny!

- The moderates may be calling the shots...but they'll be shouting to an empty theatre. Like it or not...the rest of the party isn't going to go along with the sellout. Just try winning elections without liberals, progressives and Blacks.

- That's right...Blacks are on board and they're tired of the DLC sellouts. Like progressives and liberals...they want the party to go back to its roots and really BE the party of the people.

- We won't go green. We'll simply back our own candidates. And we won't ALLOW the DLC to do the choosing for us.

[kentuck]

38. That's right..

We just need to take back our own Party. No need to go Green.

[m berst]

45. I don't know about that

I always thought that Meghan was a lot prettier and could really put together the winning team! It is true that Jennifer came close, after all of that catty infighting between Susan and Brandi for control of the prom committee.

Here are some other hard truths, so you will just have to deal with them:

* You will never be able to pass here when you talk like a high school student gossiping about your classmates.

* Using these silly asterisks is soooo annoying.

* You know you are outnumbered here, so I would position yourself to be checked for mental balance any minute now.

* I would distance yourself from hard things, and you won't be getting any love here. what is evebn worse, we won't hate you.

* Democrats will be calling the shots here for a long time. Deal with it and turn green.

[Walt Starr]

2. What Democrats have you been watching?

All I am seeing are the Democrats pulling out pink tutus and puckering up for major ass kissing while moving to the right. And we all know that movement to the right simply makes the radicals moderate because they'll still label us as Liberal Commie Socialists!

[kentuck]

4. "All warfare is based on deception."

Walt, you gotta believe! :) It's gonna happen but we have to unite, If we don't unite, how can expect the Party to unite? We need to take a stand. Are we going to continue to follow the dictates of the DLC? Or are we going to aggressively defend the interests of the people?

[Walt Starr]

5. Yep, it sure is

and I have yet to see a strategic bone in any democratic Leader's body. Not a one of them has demonstrated a capability of understanding what strategic thought is, let alone demonstrate the qualities of a strategic thinker.

[welshTerrier2]

3. great news if true ...

it seems that the Party is moving gradually but surely to the idea that the best way to oppose the Republicans is to "oppose" them.

what is your basis for this assessment ??

while i appreciate the efforts of both Kucinich and Dean, it seems that most elected Democrats are still sound asleep ...

where is the vocal opposition to this unending, insane invasion? where is the disgust over the new "Delay" appeasement? where are the media interviews describing the lurch even further to the right with all these new cabinet appointments? where is the outrage about Goss purging the CIA of those who would dare step out of line to say the truth?

look, I hope you're right ... I just can't see it from here ...

[kentuck]

6. "what is your basis for this assessment ??"

Huh....Look at where we have gone in the last 10 years. We have lost the WH, the Senate, the House, state houses, etc....How much more proof do we need? Is it insane to keep doing the same thing over and over as we fail more miserably each time?

[welshTerrier2]

16. i think you misunderstood my question

i was not questioning the need for democrats to stand up in opposition to the insanity that's taken over our government ... your response that democrats have failed miserably over the past ten years doesn't indicate why you believe that "the Party is moving gradually but surely to the idea that the best way to oppose the Republicans is to "oppose" them."

it seems to me that most elected democrats are still in appeasement mode ... even Kerry's "concession" speech talked about the need for unity and working together for the good of the nation ... is he kidding ???

there is not "working together" ... you either take on these bastards or you roll over and die ... the question I asked you was about why you believed the party was moving toward the idea that it needs to "oppose" republicans ... it was not about the need for them to do so ...

so i ask you again, what signs do you see that the party is no longer going to be the National Appeasement Party (Nap) ... and that's just what i see most elected Democrats doing ... napping ...

[kentuck]

26. I see it in the indecision....

Everybody standing around looking bewildered..."Where do we go from here" look....Well, this is where we are going. Get on board!

[goodhue]

7. What evidence?

I want to believe but have not seen much evidence that party leadership is waking up on the national level. If Dean were elected as DNC chair that would send such a signal. Folks should contact state DNC delegation and tell them to support Dean for DNC chair.

[kentuck]

9. First....there is no "party leadership".

We, the "people", must be the leadership. Lead and they will follow. Let's decide where we stand and fight to the death.

[Walt Starr]

13. Well, you lost me completely there

There is Party leadership. It's called the DNC. They call the shots for the party as a whole.

There's further Party leadership. The Senate Minority Leader and minority Whip are part of this and the House Minority Leader and Minority Whip are also part of this.

[kentuck]

18. It's called "leadership'...

but where are they leading. I still say it is up to the "people' to lead. However, to do that, we must unite on a common ground. Otherwise, we will stand in limbo forever waiting for the next DLC compromise with those that are destroying our country more and more each day. All actions begin with ideas.

[Union Thug]

19. I think you are dead on!

You are right, the level of participatory action from population is going to be necessary. But what do you think will motivate this? Americans seem to have become so brainwashed by the teeeeeveeee that they elected one of the worst presidents in the history of this nation for a second term in office?

This is the difficulty I'm having with Unionism. People don't seem to want to fight for their own interests. They'd rather robotically work/drink shitty beer/go to bed/dream of being rich/work/drink shitty beer/go to bed/dream of being rich.....

It's very frustrating.

[JeffInRick]

57. Things aren't bad enough yet.

I'm not saying things aren't bad, just that most people can still get their job/beer/tv fix and so they don't see the danger and need for change.
We almost never fix anything until it hurts so bad that the pain can no longer be ignored.
Social, mental, moral inertia.

[goodhue]

20. I'm all for we the people

but there are 9 DNC officers and 440 DNC members. They will not necessarily follow unless they are bird dogged in an organized fashion. It is extremely important to contact the DNC members from your state and tell them how you feel and ask them to make a stand. I agree with your sentiment, I simply believe the conversion you trumpet has yet to transpire. This is the moment. It is possible. But no consensus yet.

http://www.democrats.org/about/leadership.html

Current DNC Leadership
While anyone who is registered to vote as a Democrat is a member of the Party, there are 440 members of the Democratic National Committee.

The National Committee has 9 elected officers: The Chair, five Vice Chairs, Treasurer, Secretary, and National Finance Chair. Three Deputy Chairs are appointed by the Chair.

[kentuck]

22. It's moving slowly but it is inevitable, in my opinion....

Because we must change out of necessity. That is the reality we have not yet reached a consensus on but is coming.

[m berst]

46. I support you Kentuck

Don't let them wear you down with all of these practical "the way things are" arguments and tell you what you have to do and what you can't do. We have too many experts who are too ready to discourage new voices, and we have too little input from the people.

I too sense a new consensus on its way, and I too think that the people will be taking the lead.

A lot of Democrats are so out of touch that they will even question what you mean by "the people." - "Prove to me that there are people out there. All I see are demographic analyses, and here is how they behave."

They have politics down to a science. Everything that you are thinking or doing, or ever could think or do has already been analyzed and predicted, see? :-)

[Union Thug]

12. If this is true, it will keep me in the Dem party...

but will you please provide some background on what leads you to this conclusion?

I was a Kucinich supporter that dutifully supported Kerry once he had become the Democratic nominee. Kucinich represents my views, but do you think the Democratic party will ever again move to what was once considered fairly mainstream leftie politics (such as those Dennis talks about)?

I'm beginning to wonder. My father is an old school, trade union liberal and lifelong Democrat. What I'm seeing from today's Democratic party is closer to Nixon conservatism than what we considered liberal growing up.

Again, I hope you're right.

[Telly Savalas]

27. Please stay

do you think the Democratic party will ever again move to what was once considered fairly mainstream leftie politics (such as those Dennis talks about)?

It won't if people like us abandon it. Get active in the party. The party belongs to the DLC if our only involvement is to show up at the voting booth every other November. Taking our country backs starts with taking our party back.

[eridani]

44. By today's standards, Nixon was a liberal

Favored universal health care, started the EPA and OSHA.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

14. I think you might be right and that is the source of the desperate

press releases calling for more appeals to corporate sponsorship.

[robbedvoter]

15. Congratulations. centuries for now, when elections will return

you'll be able to use this knolwdge. But for now, it's for the birds.

[Peace Patriot]

17. Furious

I am furious at the Dem Party leadership for their catastrophic failure to insure--or at least scream loud about--a secure, non-partisan, verifiable, public election process. I think they need to apologize for their lack of vigilance--clear the air--and challenge the election.

Look what they permitted to be put in place (with no loud objections and no warnings to us, the people who helped put their 2004 presidential election victory together, and stood out in the rain for ten hours to vote them into the White House):

1. Bush Republicans owning and controlling the source code for central vote tabulators throughout the country. No public review--not even by state election officials.

2. Voting with no paper trail in one third of the country--no verifiable vote, audits difficult, Republican-owned voting machine companies arguing that that's okay, don't worry. (Faith-based voting!)

3. Highly insecure, extremely hackable software.

4. Partisan Republican Secy's of State engaged in widespread vote suppression of Democratic and minority voters.

This election system is patently absurd. It was an open door to fraud. Where was the Dem leadership when this was being concocted (funneling porkbarrel HAVA money to the states?).

I think this is the broom to clean house with.

But I am willing to forgive and forget--really and truly--IF, and only if, they fight it NOW. Call fraud (not just in the vote, but an entire fraudulent election system--this wasn't an election, it was a used car deal!). Back us up. Challenge it all over the map--everywhere there are suspicious results or paperless voting. Un-concede. Sue their asses. Raise hell. Save our democracy!

[merh]

21. I sure hope you are right

how profound your words "the best way to oppose the Republicans is to "oppose" them" - How true!

Thank you for the encouragement! I don't believe the old adage, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. I want to beat 'em.

[kentuck]

23. Thoughts beget ideas and ideas beget actions...

If you believe in the idea, we can put it into action. Throw your pebble into the water. Watch it ripple toward the shore. Watch the fish jump. See the sunset of the fascism.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

24. No shit

we aren't even just an opposition party anymore (we should have been one all along) but we need to be BOTH an opposition party and one step further, a resistance party, since the right seems to want to tear down this democratic insitution and put in a Christian Theocracy (which no Christian I know, even fundies, would enjoy living in in the LEAST! Check out Old Testament law!).

[Bush was AWOL]

28. The problem isn't being to the left or in the center

it is proudly standing up for democratic ideals. Kerry, and to many other Democrats have been to wishy washy. It's not that people want Republican lite, but they want a candidate who'll strongly stand up for what he believes in. So, if Democrats want to support controversial issues like abortion and gay marriage/civil unions then they need to strongly stand up for them and tell the people why abortion-although an ugly practice-is necessary, and go into detail what things were like for women pre Roe, and tell people why gays should have the same rights as all other Americans. It's not so much what they stand for, but that they MUST strongly stand for something.

We honestly need a Bobby Kennedy who will go through the poor and oppressed neighborhoods and promise to be a man that stands for the poor.

[joelogan]

30. You gonna pass that thing around? Or are you gonna Bogart it all night?

Not only is the party leadership not gonna turn left, most of the Democratic activists (such as those you see online here) are not turning left (please look up the word "MOST" in dictionary before you tell me YOU personally are turning left).)

The majority of activists and almost ALL of the leaders in the party both locally and nationally appear to be socially liberal and economically conservative. What I mean by that is that they support gay rights, affirmative action for minorities and women, support the arts, and are against the war. They also support high immigration (gotta have that cheap maid); they support low taxes (they have good jobs and are well connected, so they make out pretty well with the regressive taxes); they support free trade (gotta have their electronics and their Honda/Lexus etc.) They are NOT turning left.

However, there is a possible path. You can see that the online activists have forced the mass media to report somewhat on the vote fraud issue, even though the evidence for it is rather scanty. THe online activists and writers at DU, Kos, bartcop, salon, alternet, The Nation, et al, did this, all by themselves. If we want to turn the party left, we could force that issue into the mass media, too. But only if we really bent our minds to it, and concentrated on ONE MAIN ISSUE--raising taxes on the rich (really raising them, not just rolling back the tax cuts), and using that money to provide universal healthcare and Social Security.

Or we could just go on gossiping. Take your choice....

[kentuck]

31. I say it's time to get on the train....

If you don't want go, you can stay behind with the light horses...
to continue to cling to the hope that the people will reject the radical right-wing agenda is killing us. We have to oppose them vehemently. If you wnat to join the side of Joe Lieberman, good luck.

[joelogan]

32. what exactly are you saying?

please elaborate. I do not understand what you are saying.

[kentuck]

33. We are saying to the Party....

Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

[joelogan]

34. I am already here. I am here on DU showing the path Left

Few people seems to give a damn, and then there are some people who see the leadership taking a left turn.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but in my post above, where I exhorted DUers to make a push to promote progressive taxation, THAT was a plea for a turn to the left by online activists.

I am already here on the Left, the REAL left, the economic left. Everything else is of secondary import.

[kentuck]

35. I was not personalizing it joelogan...

I'm saying that it's time fo our Party to change. The indecision will only lead back to the same predicament in 2006 and 2008. We have to offer a clear alternative. The DLC and moderates are not capable of doing that. They have proven that, if nothing else. We have no choice. We have to lead the Party.

[PAdem2]

40. I hear what you are saying

about already being on the left. I also sincerely believe that as long as you stay an official democrat you'll be left there, wandering in the wilderness and taken for granted. Face it, the DNC knows you're not going to vote republican, so the leadership takes you for granted. Just like the black voting block mentioned earlier in this string. Taken for granted by the DNC.

As part of a viable third party that can command at least 10% of the vote....NOW you've got some clout. If you can deliver more than 10% of the vote in local or state elections...they will come crawling to you by 2007.

[joelogan]

41. The party is making a big mistake

I promise you that if the Democrats nominate a candidate in 2008 who is anything like Clinton or Kerry or dean or edwards or lieberman or gore (i.e., Republicrats), I will vote GOP, just in the hope that if the Democratic party is put out of power completely, it will wither and blow away. In fact, if I do not see any sign that the Dems have NOT turned to the left (economically) by 2006, I will vote GOP in all close races in 2006, and vote 3rd party (Green if available) if a particular race is not close.

It looks like the only way to make the Democratic party turn to the left, economically, may be to put them out of power all together. I hope I am wrong. But why not take this path? We have faced the worst possibility, and it came to pass. And yet we still survive. Time to get real. Vote strategically.

[greenohio]

53. Voting repuke to fix our little red wagon huh?

I cannot believe that everybody here hates Bill Clinton. What have we become?

[joelogan]

42. The party is making a big mistake

I promise you that if the Democrats nominate a candidate in 2008 who is anything like Clinton or Kerry or dean or edwards or lieberman or gore (i.e., Republicrats), I will vote GOP, just in the hope that if the Democratic party is put out of power completely, it will wither and blow away. In fact, if I do not see any sign that the Dems have NOT turned to the left (economically) by 2006, I will vote GOP in all close races in 2006, and vote 3rd party (Green if available) if a particular race is not close.

It looks like the only way to make the Democratic party turn to the left, economically, may be to put them out of power all together. I hope I am wrong. But why not take this path? We have faced the worst possibility, and it came to pass. And yet we still survive. Time to get real. Vote strategically.

[geek tragedy]

36. Tom Vilsack getting chosen DNC chair will not help this happen.

Sorry, but I think the Donkeysaurs have a firm grip on the party.

[Q]

39. Anyway...I think you're right about the consensus...

...For example. Blacks hate the corporate DLC. They want a party that will fight for them AND oppose the GOP fraud/corruption machine. Same goes with independents and Greens...who will vote Democratic IF they know the party is fighting the good fight.

[willysnout]

43. Screw the Greens

They elected Bush in '00 and they deserted the Democratic Party in '04. We owe them precisely nothing. Let them hold their next convention in a phone booth for all I care.

[Forkboy]

48. why do you expect a different party to vote for Dems?

Why do you feel Greens owe you their votes? Every Green I know sucked it up and voted for Kerry.How is that deserting? Do you really have a clue at all?

We owe them precisely nothing.

Correct,and they owe you nothing.So quit whining about them "deserting" the Dems.

[Q]

50. We don't need the Greens to win...

...but many Greens said they were voting against Bush* during this election. So the question becomes: why discourage someone, anyone from voting for your candidate?

- It's not a matter of 'owing' them anything. But it's exactly this type of snobbery (post 43) that keeps many Americans from becoming Democrats...to help reestablish the party of the people.

[greenohio]

52. We don't inch to the center, you only help the greens.

By losing over and over again. Hey, I'd love it, but I can not stand the repukes running everything. What happened to wanting to win. We either run a Clinton campaign, or face permanent minority status.

[Guaranteed]

47. I got the WEIRDEST forwarded email...something Brazile wrote (seriously,

folks, you gotta read this)...

http://www.rollcall.com/pub/brazile/

<snip>

"As Democrats, we cannot give in to our frequent temptation to overinterpret the election as a mandate to become “Republican Lite.” Instead, we need to stay sharply focused on this central truth: Most Americans prefer the Democratic worldview.

Throughout the election, a majority of Americans believed that President Bush has put the nation on the wrong track. Voters, according to exit polls, actually preferred us to our Republican counterparts on most key issues: health care, the economy, education, the environment and so on. And yet a president with his approval ratings mired below 50 percent, who misled us into an Iraqi quagmire and lost jobs, managed to persuade a majority that he was the better man.

The president plainly did not win this election because more Americans felt good about the direction in which he would take us. He won because voters did not understand where we would lead.

More importantly, he did it — brace yourselves, fellow Democrats — by showing stronger leadership than we have managed in a while.

In order to win future elections at the federal level, we have to find the music — the language, the words that clearly spell out who we are, where we stand and why we fight for the values we hold dear. And we need to understand that we could use a little more of the leadership qualities Bush has demonstrated so well, albeit for the wrong ideas."

<more>
----------------------

Freaking twilight zone shit. It's like she's been reading my posts.

And- I coulda sworn she didn't feel this way. ???????

You gotta login to get the whole thing...I'll forward the email to anyone who wants it.

[ElectroPrincess]

49. IMO Brazille's nothing more than a "DLC tool" ...

She sits on CNN across from Bay Buchanan and plays the "perfect straight woman" as ole' Bay trashes the left. Brazille NEVER challenges - NOT once. Brazille is player not a Democratic advocate.

[greenohio]

51. Does everybody here HATE Bill Clinton

Remember, the last guy to get elected. The Chair of the DLC?

"Going to the Democratic Leadership Council. In 1985, I got involved in the newly formed Democratic Leadership Council, a group dedicated to forging a winning message for the Democrats based on fiscal responsibility, creative new ideas on social policy, and a commitment to a strong national defense. ...

In March 1990 I went to New Orleans to accept the chairmanship of the DLC. I was convinced the group's ideas on welfare reform, criminal justice, education, and economic growth were crucial to the future of the Democratic Party and the nation....

I opened the convention with a keynote address designed to make the case that America needed to change course and that the DLC could and should lead the way....

...I was amazed by some of the criticisms of the DLC from the Democratic left, who accused us of being closet Republicans, and from some members of the political press, who had comfortable little boxes marked "Democrat" and "Republican." Bill Clinton MY LIFE

[robcon]

55. I don't think the Democratic Party is moving anywhere.

THere is confusion, differing strategies (some different objectives, too) and waffling.

Issues matter very, very little, IMO. It is personalities and charismatic leaders that we need. Obama or Clinton is what we need.

DUers, I think, are too focused on issues and programs. I'm focused on leaders.