Do you trust the DLC? In your opinion, are they they right group...

[UpsideDownFlag]

to lead democrats into the future? It seems to me like the time has come for some changes in our leadership. We need more Deans and Kucinich's, and Less Liebermans. We need to send a clear, concise message of progressive values to the American electorate.

and, it would be nice to have some leaders with the testicular fortitude to go after the damn voting machines.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. No, a sign of inasitny is to do the same repeatedely

and the DLC is doingthe same repetadly and failing

We Need REAL PROGRESIVES, real POPULISTS

I think that is US

[Fovea]

2. The DLC has a brilliant record

of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
The third way was killed by the pugs. Let it,
and the DLC rest in peace.

[TwentyFive]

3. No! They are a Virus planted by corporate America

The Democratic Party's greatest victories happened when we went the furthest left. We were anti-corporate, held Wall Street's feet to the fire and regulated these companies - how they treat consumers, employees, competitors and the environment.

When we set things up as people vs big business....the people will always vote with us. We are all people, from the street person to the doctor or small business owner.

[bahrbearian]

4. The DLC defeated Dean and Promoted Kerry.

[greenohio]

5. Lets not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

The DLC brought us the presidency after a long drought. They stand with us on the social issues. Yes they moderate on the economic issues, but SO DOES DEAN.

Many of them supported the Iraq war, but the DLC, as far as I know, have no official position on the war.

I really do not understand the DLC hatered. This "the DLC fixed the primaries so Dean couldn't win." attitude just amazes me. Everytime I ask for some proof of that, I get snippy remarks.

[charlie]

10. They do have an official position on the war

Never question its legitimacy, only critique its prosecution. Dubya's ambitions dovetailed nicely with their visions of "transnational progressivism" and advocacy for a "muscular" foreign policy. For them, the Iraq invasion was a good idea, somewhat badly done.

Blueprint Editor Peter Ross Range - Why the Iraq War Was Right

PPI President Will Marshall - Stay and Win in Iraq - The administration has rightly made the democratic transformation of the greater Middle East the grand American project of the 21st century. That job starts in Iraq. If we fail here, our hopes for liberalizing the region will be stillborn.

Editors - Democrats and The War

[greenohio]

12. Thanks I didn't know that. Man that sucks.

So basically, THE core issue difference between dean and the DLC is the war. Because of that, the DLC 'fixed' the primiaries to kill dean. So the deaniacs hate the DLC and have promoting its demise ever since.

Fascinating.

[charlie]

15. Can't say

I'm not a Deanite. But for whatever reason, the DLC was horrified at Dean's ascendancy in the primaries and didn't hesitate to show it.

[greenohio]

17. Probably because all of their candidates

voted FOR the war resolution. Dean's whole campaign energy came from the anti-war movement.

[UpsideDownFlag]

37. the war resolution was the deciding factor in my decision to reject them.

nt

[demokatgurrl]

11. The DLC did NOT bring us the Clinton presidency-

Clinton won because of who he was, and the times. He put the DLC on the map, not the other way around. He was a DLC member for years but I personally never heard of it until his 1992 campaign.

[greenohio]

14. Tell that to Clinton...

Did you read MY LIFE or the posts threads I put out showing exerpts. Clinton credits large portions of his vision and success to the DLC and his chairmanship.

[UpsideDownFlag]

38. exactly- Clinton succeeded because of his own brilliant campaign

ny

[greenohio]

41. A campaign based on a DLC vision and New Democrat label

[OldLeftieLawyer]

16. Thank you

Dean is a good guy, and I like him, but I'd never support him for President. He lacks the requisite experience, no matter how pure his goals. I think he'd make a hell of a cabinet member, though.

And Kucinich, face it, is nuts. A loser with some great ideas, but a loser.

Yeah, they're the ones I want in charge. They've done so well on their own. (That's sarcasm.)

I want pros, but I want pros with backbone. Like John Kerry.

Don't forget - the election's not over, and all the naysaying in the world from those peeved that they weren't personally consulted as to what JK would do after November 3 isn't going to change that fact. Let's not forget the felonies that were committed in the last two Presidential elections. Do you really think the DLC did such a bad job, when you consider that bit of history?

Have faith. But, the DLC is fine. We just need strong candidates and a set of policy objectives that are solid, realistic, and marketable.

[eridani]

44. What's nuts about Kucinich?

Universal health care? Right, really crazy.

[proud_Kucitizen]

51. I wouldn't have even voted for war loving

Kerry if it had not been that I hated Bush so much.

I would have voted for Cobb so how would you then get my vote. Kerry and the DLC ran an absolutely atrocious campaign. You can ask my republican husband who voted for Kerry but most of the time during the campaign he asked where in the hell is he and why doesn't he even try and tell people what he stands for. He only voted for Kerry because he hates Bush so much. Our party might not get that lucky next time to get voters to cross the aisle as many did this time and he still lost.

So be more specific about what was so great about him and why he kept letting them put those stupid labels on him like flip flopper without even a whimper to defend against them. Actually, even I couldn't help but be taken in by that label because he did quite a flip flop between the days of his protesting the Vietnam war and his voting for the war resolution. It made me angry whenever I did hear the media running this phrase in the ground but I couldn't even deny that he actually did do that.

[sandnsea]

6. No, but neither does the far left

Unless they start dealing with the realities we face in a mature and workable fashion. Dean could lead, as long as he doesn't make the mistake of ranting far left ideas to appease what he thought was the base.

[biscotti]

7. DLC

needs to shut up and sit down. Lieberman makes me so angry and Bayh is so whooshy washy. We need strong voices.

[sandnsea]

8. They aren't the voice of Dems

They're a minority in the party and don't have the power some people think they do. The problem is the left is such an anti-everything group, that there's no solutions for anybody to listen to. Complaining isn't a party platform, it really isn't.

[JohnKleeb]

33. we need something in between those I think

thats what Ive been saying.

[UpsideDownFlag]

35. I agree, but i dont see it happening.

it seems more and more like the 'far left' members of the dems are the only ones with the gumption to stand up to BushCo.

[JohnKleeb]

39. I dunno really

Jim Moran, a moderate virginia democrat has stood up to them plenty of times, he's not my favorite congressman but he does stand up to Bush. We do need to be a progressive party but we need something in between this just move to the left idea and the DLC, the third way is wrong to me but so is the black and white way of many of us, we can't purge our moderates because they don't always agree with us, that's why jeffords left them, we should listen and remember we are and are meant to be a big tent party. I am no fan of the DLC but people assume wrongily that all their members voted for the war resolution, thats not true, and the fact is more house dems voted against than for the war resolution, contrary to attiudes.

[wiggs]

52. You don't need to move left

You don't need to move left to oppose lying, dishonesty, secrecy, corporatism, cronyism, power grabs, arrogance, recklessness, and imperialism.

[Deb]

9. No, not after the way they treated Al Gore n/t

Cripes, I'm so angry at them that it's difficult to type one freaking sentence correctly.

[Shopaholic]

13. Let me answer this as simply as I know how to---

HELL FUCKING NO I DON'T TRUST THEM. They might as well call themselves Republicans and be done with it. Any more questions?

[greenohio]

18. Are they republicans because

of their economic stances?

[Zhade]

19. Absolutely not. See my signature for why.

'Nuff said.

[greenohio]

20. Are we supposed to go somewhere

to see your signature?

[Zhade]

22. D'oh! Sigs are off.

:P

[ScreamingMeemie]

21. Goodbye DLC. I'm not listening to you and yours anymore. The symbol

of the Democratic Party became a champagne glass during the DNC. That's not where I want my party, our party to be. :hi:

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

23. I give up.

Fine...let's nominate Kucinich and let him run featuring his "Department of Peace". See where that gets us.

And then, when our party is reduced to about 100 congresspeople and 20 senator, can we head back down the road President Clinton was taking us???

[greenohio]

25. Don't give up.

I believe in the silent majority. If DU reflected reality, Dean would have been the nominee. Some are just listening. Just keep posting reason.

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

27. Don't let me avatar of Govenor Dean fool you.

I LOVE the man...He's a man of passion and vision...EXACTLY what we need.

But...

He's a poor candidate...He has a problem controlling his "Passion". He would have gotten slaughtered by the repuke machine. Kerry was the best choice by far.

Now...If you want to talk who should lead the DNC? Well...DEAN, DEAN, DEAN!!!

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

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

[Sandra_Deaniac2]

54. greenohio

I am thanking you in advance for ceasing to refer to Dean supporters as "rabid".

Thank you! :toast:

[Sandra_Deaniac2]

55. I love Dean too

I've always thought he would make the most phenomonal Senator in history :P

If he doesn't go for the DNC thing, of course.

[Hippo_Tron]

59. Dean would've done fine with the right advisors...

And Kerry would've probably won if he had gotten Clinton's old guys on right away. Defeating the Repuke smear machine is ALL about knowing who to hire and who to listen to.

[ScreamingMeemie]

29. If it's the route of the DLC, I'm on another bus.

This is another time. Clinton was fighting what borders upon religious fanatacism. Watch what happens this next election cycle for Governor Jennifer Granholm. We cannot go that route. It's not working.

[greenohio]

30. You saying Granholm is going down?

[ScreamingMeemie]

31. I'm saying the GOP is going to pull out the same stops they did with

Kerry in an effort to bring her down. It has started with negative press coverage...and will move on to "Catholics" wanting to excommunicate her...to pushing her Canadian birth. I'm sick over it.

[greenohio]

32. Kerry carried MI 'big time' didn't he?

Tell me this isn't so. When is the MI gov election...06?

[ScreamingMeemie]

34. 51% By 2006 that's not going to matter. If we don't get moving.

[sandnsea]

36. Both are the wrong road

Without enforceable environmental, labor and human rights regulations in trade agreements; free trade is the absolute wrong road. A horrible road. Clinton and the DLC Third Way is corporatism with an umbrella. Eventually, the rain will get so bad the umbrella won't help.

The left is too reactionary and anti-everything, or too idealistic in the way they present their platform.

The left is more right than the DLC, but they've got to understand the other 80% of America if they're ever going to move the ideas forward. A grown up face speaking to the real economic damage caused by corporatism, and they could easily take over the Democratic Party.

[JohnKleeb]

40. I am glad to see someone agrees with my 2.5 theory

thank god.

[eridani]

45. What if he featured universal health care and an end to outsourcing?

Think those positions would get any votes?

[Ken Burch]

47. Hell Yes!

They have majority support now, as do many other "left" positions.
We need to be a populist party representing and defending the powerless.

We've gained nothing from being "pro-business" and getting huge business donations. All that has done has been to make us leave our base out in the cold.

a "Pro-Business" Democrat IS A REPUBLICAN. Clinton proved, especially when he signed the racist and vindictive "welfare reform" bill. "Ending welfare as we know it" was supposed to mean pushing for jobs programs, not throwing the poor to the wolves and cheerleading for the handful of them that weren't eaten by said wolves.

If we aren't about standing up for those the Republicans and the capitalists attack and oppress, why the hell should we even exist?

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

48. Yes and no...Depends on what voters we're talking about.

But regardless...I GUARANTEE he would lose all 50 states and maybe D.C.

Sorry...That's just reality.

[eridani]

57. You know this how?

Or you just passively accepting the fact that the Rethug Noise Machine is invincible?

[CAcyclist]

24. I trust that most of them have their heart in the right place BUT

it is not possible to free ourselves of malignant corporate influence if our leaders are feeding from that trough.

It's too big a conflict of interest.

Tell me how the DLC is any different from fascism.

It's still government hand in hand with corporations. That's the definition of fascism.

There's no such thing as a better or nobler form of fascism.

[Hippo_Tron]

60. I doubt that most politicians have their heart in the right place

I think Clinton and Kerry were about half way there. I think that they genuinely wanted to help people but they were willing to use corporate interests to get their power. Some democrats I believe are the same, some I believe are very good, some I believe are just purely in it for power.

[lojasmo]

26. No and NO! N/T

[Cheswick2.0]

42. good god no

They want to get corporate donors so Democrats don't have to be beholden to special interest groups like unions and women.
They represent what is wrong with the republican party...they just slapped some donkey's tail on an elephant's butt.

[Dangerman]

43. Some Democrats I don't trust...

Like Patty Murray or John Edwards. We need someone like Howard Dean to slap the face of the Democratic Party and renew our agenda in stopping Bushco.

[Zorra]

46. No. I trust the DLC as much as I trust the republicans. Less than zero.

[Edgewater_Joe]

49. Without Bill Clinton, Their Strategy Doesn't Work

That and they still seem to refuse to accept the reality that they're facing an opponent who doesn't want to beat them -- they want to destroy them, eradicate them from all power and do it while pissing on their face and laughing at the same time.

In short, they're wimps.

Buh-bye.

[Arkana]

50. The DLC is a touchy subject for a lot of people here...

I personally don't like their wishy-washy style...I think that they're too compromising of Democratic ideals all in the name of kowtowing to His Chimperial Majesty.

[killbotfactory]

53. No.

The leaders of the DLC basically called anybody who didn't support those stupid, insane, illegal war in Iraq, a niave hippie. We didn't need that shit coming from our own party. They were so afraid of being seen as weak on national security that they went along with Bush on a stupid shortsighted war that has undermined our national security and pissed off nearly the entire world.

They care more about giving people the right image than doing the right thing. There stupid bullshit politicking neutered us when the war went predictably sour. We could have had the position that his war was wrong for several reasons and here they are... to this war was the right thing to do, but I would have done it a lot better!

Their bullshit hysterics probably cost us the election.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

56. No, I do not

They persist in their delusion that being pro corporate business is somehow appealing to voters who are already predisposed to distrust the Dems on cultural grounds.

The answer is not to go all Abbie Hoffman but to figure out what the real problems of blue collar and rural voters are and address them in a compelling but non-threatening way.

[Hippo_Tron]

58. The DLC is a necessary evil

Lieberman, Bayh, Nelson, Reid, etc. may be far less than ideal senators, but without them, the Republicans would have a fillibuster proof majority in the senate. Instead of shunning the DLC entirely, we just need to work to get the progressives to take a more dominant role in the party. I'm way to the left of the DLCers but I realize that this is the real world, and in the real world you need to appeal to people that you may not like that much if you want to win elections.