if Dems turn towards center, I'm outa here....

[garybeck]

It seems like the Democratic party is going to do exactly what Karl Rove has been trying to make them do - move even closer to the middle

that means

more ties to corporations
less dissent with republicans (go ahead, vote yes on Rice and Gonzalez)

I don't know about you but this makes me sick. If this continues to happen I am abandoning the democratic party and I'm going to take everyone I can with me.

[On the Road]

1. That's Why Dean is So Essential as DNC Chair

I will be very disappointed if he loses.

[garybeck]

4. prediction on Dean DNC

he will have widespread support of the people but the democratic leadership will make "executive decision" and he won't get it.

[On the Road]

5. That's Exactly What I'm Afraid Of

I have the same forebodings you do. Voting DNC members have got to revolt against the beltway insiders.

[Walt Starr]

64. Your prediction is my fear

and my solution if your prediction comes true is to jump ship. Plain and simple, executive decisions from the so-called "Demorcatic Party Leadership" on a matter this important to the average Democrat can no longer be tolerated.

[forgethell]

15. I agree.

It is absolutely essential that Dean become chair.

[TexasSissy]

37. Is Dean far left, then?

[justiceischeap]

40. I don't think Dean is the answer to our prayers

I heard on TV or read somewhere that he thinks the Dem party should move towards the center.

I'll try to find a link.

Found it:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A865-2005Jan11.html

<snip>
Dean, who was making calls and conducting interviews from what was labeled the "Kerry Suite" of a local hotel, dismissed that criticism, saying he is less liberal than critics suggest, particularly on fiscal issues. "The Democratic Party is a centrist party, and I'm in the center of the party," he said.



ed. for typo

[Obviousman]

43. Dean is a centrist!!!

[On the Road]

59. I Realize Dean's a Centrist

but his message and attitude are a winning combination nowdays. It's a far cry from the centrism of the Repub lites.

[indianablue]

2. Hello! The Democrats have been center for years now.

They have bee there ever since Labor's Power distengrated in the 1980's they needed new money and corporations was it.

Their economic satnces are very close to the GOP. They love trickle down and huge tax breaks for corporations.

NAFTA , etc

[Eloriel]

11. Yeah, to go to the Center, they'd have to turn LEFT n/t

[annabanana]

30. My response EXACTLY............n/t

[justinsb]

3. Good for you

Try

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EarthU/
http://www.earthlingsunited.info/
http://earthu.proboards38.com/index.cgi

we are building an international coalition of individuals and groups that will move forward regardless of what the democrats do, regardless of what the US does - set an agenda and work for it and the only message to the Dems and other leaders is 'lead, follow or get out of the way'.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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

[Nederland]

7. OK

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Am I the only one who is tired of people that threaten to leave the party unless they get their way?

[garybeck]

10. it's not about getting their way

it's about supporting a dead cause

the election was stolen and they just lied down and let them have it.

the dems will never win another election until the problems with the electronic voting machines are fixed. they seem to not care and be very happy being in the minority.

not to mention, they seem to have no problem endorsing a lying killing sleezeball as secretary of state, or a torturing killing attorney general

[Nederland]

13. Does it even occur to you

...that your post is merely a list of things you want and believe but not necessarily agreed upon by the rest of the party? If the party no longer shares your beliefs, just leave. Don't go threatening and all, just leave. Its not like party leaders are reading DU and saying "gosh, if we don't stop moving to the center we're going to loose garybeck..."

[MoonRiver]

14. And what happened to the idea that the Democratic Party

stands for tolerance and inclusion of different view points? I think it's important for these frustrations to be aired and vetted. Many people are at their wits ends with the state of this wimpy party. It has tried going as far to the center as possible without completely melding into the Republican Party, and look at exactly how far that has gotten us! If we don't talk about these concerns, and try to find solutions for them, we are doomed to repeat our mistakes, and lose even more congressional seats, not to mention presidential elections. Now, that doesn't sound like a plan to me.
:argh:

[Nederland]

18. It died

And what happened to the idea that the Democratic Party stands for tolerance and inclusion of different view points?

It died when we started losing elections across the country. A some point the party needs to stand FOR something, and that means standing AGAINST other things. You can't have a party that stands for everything and agrees with everybody. At some point you have to say this is what we believe and people that belive otherwise need to decide for themselves if this particular difference of opinion is significant enought to make them want to leave the party.

Furthermore, since when does moving to the center mean melding with the Republican party? If you think the center is currently occupied by the Republican party you must be living in a different country...

[MoonRiver]

21. Moving to the center hasn't worked too well, now has it?

And if the Democratic Party is no longer a place of tolerance and acceptance I definitely want NOTHING to do with it. Really, what is the point of belonging to a group which simply reflects the image of our opposition?

[Nederland]

44. Tolerance and Acceptance of what?

I'm just wondering what positions you think the Democratic party should be more tolerant of? Pro-life? Capital Punishment? Pro Iraq war? Anti gay? When you say the Democratic party should be more "tolerant and accepting", what are you referring to?

[MoonRiver]

56. ALL opinions.

That does not mean we endorse them on our national platform.

But in terms of my post, I was specifically referring to dissenting voices about which direction, e.g. left or right, the party should be moving in.

[The Gigmeister]

31. Oh BULLSHIT!!!

"The election was stolen" is a fucking EXCUSE! It's the fucking BOOGIE MAN!!

"OH FUCK NO!! NOT THE BOOGIE MAN!!! EVERYONE KNOWS THE BOOGIE MAN CAN'T BE BEAT!!!! WHY EVEN TRY?????

Buck the fuck-up, get out there are start beating the pukes at their own game...

ORGANIZATION AND PARTY LOYALTY!!

Or leave. I personally don't give a fuck which one you chose. Just stop bashing the party that has worked for me, my dad, and my dad's dad!!

[QC]

20. Yes, these dramatic exit threads got old a long time ago.

They're nothing more than an opportunity for people to posture and preen and declare how wonderfully brave and noble and principled they are.

[The Gigmeister]

28. No, you're not the only one.

There is a simple reason why the Greens have NEVER won any kind of national election, and why we came within a whisker of winning an election we shouldn't have even been CLOSE in after 9-11...

Because we're part of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY!! With all its worts.

Fuck 'em if they don't want to be a part of a winner!

[garybeck]

8. what really did it for me was...

I've had hundreds of conversations with friends about 3rd parties. Even though I'm an eco freak I've never wanted to waste my vote on the green party.

I'm going to eat my words I guess.

And it all started with the dismal and depressing job that the dems did in failing to do anything or raise awareness about the stolen election.

Only the Green party and Libertarian party were able to look at the situation and had the guts to speak out and try to do something about it.

That my have been the last straw for me. Many thanks to Barbara Boxer for standing up on 1/6 but that wasn't enough to keep me a democrat.

They are just playing into the hands of Karl Rove and they'll never win another election until they fix the problems with the electronic voting machines anyway.

Every day I tune in and hear about just one or two senators voting against Condo-sleeza Rice, the warmonger lying killer, it makes me sick. These people have no guts and they do not stand up for what is right.

[jonnyblitz]

9. the DEMs are already there, look at Hillary...

I would say stick around and fight them . If we only have to viable political parties lets not have them both be right wing.

[maxsolomon]

12. moving to the Center would be a LEFTWARD move

since they are currently corporate whore lite.

[happyjack27]

16. i would love for the democrats to move to the center,

they have been moving way too much to the right lately.

[Deep13]

17. Cry me a river!

Waaaaah!!! I don't want to move to the center!

If you think the Ds are in the center, you are mistaken. I know because I live in the goddamn center, suburban-to-rural Ohio. There are three reasons why the Ds have not won a state-wide election here since 1996 (Even longer if you don't count Clinton or John Glenn). Here they are:
1. abortion
2. gay rights
3. gun control
All three of these issues are based on irrational fears. Nevertheless, that is how "the center" thinks: with its gut, not with its head. The same time that Bush carried Ohio by 51% last year, the same voters approved a ban on gay marriage and any relationship approximating marriage three-to-one. This was inspite of the opposition by the R governor, both R U.S. Senators and the Chamber of Commerce. Do you think that those two election results are related? The gays rights people have not only cost the Ds the Federal government and most of the country, they have set their own agenda back ten years. There will not be gay marriage in this country until mid-century at this point. We cannot win in the Midwest or the Southwest with these cultural albatrosses around our necks. Jesus! even Blacks and married women have gone over to the other side to some degree!

Abandoning these three issues is purely strategic and not a move to the center. In fact, getting these matters off the table will a allow us to move to the left on social, economic and environmental matters where most people agree with us. I am all for reproductive choice, gay rights and reasonable gun control, but I am not will to sacrifice all hope of success on those altars. Goddamnit, how much longer will we go without national healthcare, greenhouse gas control or a sane foreign policy?

The way I see it is this: we can have no abortion rights, no gay rights and no gun control and be out of power with no say over anything OR we can have none of those things and be in power protecting families with minimum wage hikes, national health care, tax equity and a clean environment. We need to decide if the Democratic Party is going to be an elitist institution of the Northeast and California or whether we want to be back in business.

[Sapphocrat]

22. Self-delete

It's just so not worth the inevitable flame war.

[foreigncorrespondent]

35. ROFLMAO!

This has to be the funniest fucking gay bashing post I have ever seen on DU. Thanks for the laugh, mate!

Ohhhh! You wanna know what I find so amusing? Simple:

If you think the Ds are in the center, you are mistaken. I know because I live in the goddamn center, suburban-to-rural Ohio. There are three reasons why the Ds have not won a state-wide election here since 1996 (Even longer if you don't count Clinton or John Glenn). Here they are:
1. abortion
2. gay rights
3. gun control
All three of these issues are based on irrational fears. Nevertheless, that is how "the center" thinks: with its gut, not with its head.

If you truly believe it is the fucking center of the political spectrum that is against all the above issues, then I wanna know what planet you have been living on.

If you think it is the center that votes with its gut on not with its head, then again, I wanna know what planet you have been living on.

Yes I will grant you that the majority of those in the center are against abortion, and gun control, but I beg to differ in respect to gay rights. Most are actually against gay marriage, but would like to see some form of recognition given to same sex relationships.

From where I have been sitting all these years, I can see that it is the far right that thinks with it guts. Especially when they hang out in fundamentalist churches listing to "preachers" dishing a sermon of intolerance, rather than "love thy neighbour."

You may live there, mate, but it is painfully obvious that you have no idea in hell of what is happening around you.

Have a nice day. :)

[Redneck Socialist]

55. Yes and no

I do think that the reason we have fared so poorly of late is because of the social issues Deep13 listed, but I think he is mistaken about where the center lies. The center is by-and-large pro-choice (though they may be uncomfortable with public funding of some abortions) and as you noted the center may not favor gay marriage, but given the option they do support some sort of legal recognition of same sex partnerships. Democrats are on the correct side of those issues and running away from them would be a mistake. Gun control is a loser for Democrats but that is a discussion for another time.

Deep13 is spot on about people voting with their guts. People vote based on how they feel about issues. Very few give the issues the amount of consideration we here at DU do.

[Redneck Socialist]

57. You have an odd idea of where the center is.

I agree that the pubs have successfully used social issues against us, but the Democratic positions on abortion and gay rights are in the center. More people support abortion rights than not (though they may be uncomfortable with public funding of some abortions) and while I suspect most folks would say no if asked if they support gay marriage, most do support some form of legal recognition of same sex partnerships. Dropping those issues or running away from them will cost us votes not gain them. Gun control is another matter and one that has been beaten to death here at DU.

People do vote with their gut, I'll agree with you there, though I would state it less strongly. People vote based on how they feel about issues. Few spend as much time analyzing the nuances of policy position as those of us here at DU do.

[nickinSTL]

65. Not gay, are you? or close to anyone who is?

If you were, you wouldn't say...give up on gay rights.

Gay rights are fundamental human rights, and any party that won't stand up for them doesn't deserve one f*ing vote. period.

[Lexus Liberal]

66. Best Post all year

I'm a long-time lurker n00b poster and I just have to commend this poster for saying some things that REALLY REALLY needed to be said. Flame wars are unproductive. Everybody needs to re-read this post and learn something. I am originally from Ohio and I know just what the poster is saying. If it wasn't for these 3 issues, the D's would be at least in power in the congress, maybe the White House and maybe both.

[Lexingtonian]

19. Good luck

more ties to corporations

You've lost the distinction between 'corporation' and 'corporate management'. You even elide the fact that most charitable organizations are corporations. Most small businesses are corporations.

less dissent with republicans (go ahead, vote yes on Rice and Gonzalez)

You seem to think that Rice and Gonzalez matter in the scheme of things. They don't. This Administration is a triumvirate of Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Bush (while Bush is just a suit, he represents the interests of the Christian Right oligarchy). The rest of the Administration is just a bunch of interchangeable lever-pulling monkeys, by design.

The truth is probably that you want the Democratic Party to be the moralistic high horse Party. You want it to be Righteousness Incarnate. The problem with that is that in politics righteousness is always a source of dysfunction, an inability to govern.

Righteousness is a latent conservatism. Anti-corporationism is a latent conservatism. An inability to let go of power in the name of principle, that's also a latent conservatism. It all assumes your Divine Electedness That All Those People Just Don't Get.

It's a disorder present throughout the American Left at the moment, which is why all its activists seem to think it's a sign of health rather than diseasedness. Not that I disagree with you on the specific wrongs to those people and situations, or suggest that one should give up the moral high ground.

It's time to be wiser and more pragmatic than that.

[txaslftist]

23. SSSSnore.

[jswordy]

24. I don't see how the party moves...

..."even closer to the middle." I think we are at the middle, and moving to the right of it, should some of these potential DNC chair candidates win.

Should Dean win, I don't likewise see a "move to the left." Dean has said time and again that his goal is to unite the party again with its roots. Those roots are not leftist, they are mainstream American values. To me, that is the center.

Our problem is, we have totally forgotten about those mainstream people in a surge of self-aggrandizing and mushy fat-cat politics where we lurched to wherever the money was and pandered to whatever group might bring a few more votes to our patchwork quilt.

And the mainstream folks aren't voting for us again til they think we represent them again. Case in point: The national union vote was 66 percent Democratic.

Pretty good, you say? Historically, it has been above 85 percent! If the red lights and bells aren't going off -- and for many, many cushed-out party "leaders" they are not -- something is terribly wrong. We are losing our old base, with nothing new to replace it, and smugly marching ourselves off to irrelevance.

That is what happens when you try to be all things to all people. We cannot do that anymore. We must stand as a party for something, steadfast and firm. Our traditional party values would be a great place to start. These convictions must be distilled to where they are easily grasped by the public, then we must fight for them.

Because I don't care if you are a "left Democrat" or a "center Democrat" or a "right Democrat," you are ABSOLUTELY powerless across the spectrum if you cannot move legislation and advance your cause.

[The Gigmeister]

25. Bye.

We'll win, you'll lose. Enjoy it.

[newsguyatl]

29. no, you, nor the democratic party

will EVER win if they shift even further right. period.

[The Gigmeister]

32. Oh Bull Fucking SHIT!!

We've got to stop writing-off the South. You know, what we DIDN'T do the last time we won...

WITH PRESIDENT CLINTON!!!

It's not too hard to figure-out!! And the answer has NOTHING to do with pandering to the Greens and the rest of the loons on the far left.

Once apon a time, the DEMOCRATIC PARTY consisted of hard working, God fearing, gun toting, union Democrats. And it needs to AGAIN!

God forbid one of those good, loyal Dems post here. They would get branded a Freeper and a disruptor and ran-off the boards.

[newsguyatl]

33. a disruptor?

gee i wonder why they'd get branded that :eyes:

the less god fearing, gun toting democrats we have, the better.

[The Gigmeister]

34. "the less god fearing, gun toting democrats we have, the better."

Ladies and Gentlemen...

I give you THE reason why we're on a losing streak.

[QC]

38. Yes, the Teeny Tiny Tent Democrats don't help matters.

By the time they get through purging all those who are unworthy of being Democrats (non-atheists, rural people, working-class voters, gun-owners, Southerners, etc.) they could hold the Democratic National Convention around someone's dining room table.

[The Gigmeister]

41. Or just change the party name to Green and get on with losing like always.

[lojasmo]

54. Or change the party name and philosophy to republican and win?

No thanks.

[QC]

60. Are you one of those "the two parties are identical" people?

I find them fascinating, much like people who claim that the ghost of Elvis healed their gallstones and the like.

It's puzzling that so many people on a site where everyone claims to be knowledgeable and shrewd about politics think of everything in such simplistic terms as "moving right" or "moving to the center." Politics is not quite the same thing as giving someone directions to the post office.

[lojasmo]

61. No, I'm one of those "we're certainly headed that direction" people.

And it's not about "moving right" or "moving center" as those terms are so general as to be meaningless.

I am of a mind that the democratic apparatus is trying to adopt the policies of the republican party because they seem to be working to elect republicans. Indeed, there are many on this board who are advocating just that.

I think the democratic party should stand for ideals which both benefit their constituents, and are important to them.

Affordable and available health care for all.
A livable working wage.
Freedom from tyrany imposed by our government.

We need to differentiate ourselves from the republicans. If we try to win by being republican light, we will certainly lose. We will lose the left (perhaps 10% of the democratic base) and we will lose the right, who are essentially republicans anyway.

We can't afford to lose 20% of our votes by trying to emulate the republicans.

[lojasmo]

53. You are indeed the reason. N/T

[The Gigmeister]

58. No. I welcome anyone into the party.

It's those like you and your puritan counterparts who are leading us to losses from the fringe.

[Lexus Liberal]

68. The EXACT Reason!!!!! n/t

[AntiCoup2K4]

45. "They would get branded a Freeper and a disruptor"

Anyone further to the right than yourself WOULD be a Freeper and disruptor.

You sure like to rant and rave about the party of your dad and your dad's dad, but I seriously doubt that your dad's dad's party, who elected FDR 4 times, would be even remotely considering the confirmation of a torture loving war criminal or a lying incompetent bitch who deliberately ignored a bulletin entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US".

The corporatist appeasers currently dominating the national party would have your dad's dad's party (not to mention Tom Jefferson and FDR himself) doing triple somersaults in their grave.

And this poor excuse of a party will be joining them in that grave if they don't get their shit together.

Electing Howard Dean as DNC chair is only the first step, but it's a huge one against the pandering pussies of the DLC.

[The Gigmeister]

46. Anyone further to the right than yourself WOULD be a Freeper and disruptor

You don't know a damned thing about me. Here's a start...

1) I like to WIN!

[newsguyatl]

47. LMAO!!

good one anticoup!!!

[Warren Stupidity]

48. clinton wouldn't have won without perot (nt)

[paulk]

50. that's not true

and has been debunked many times on this board.

Do some research.

[Warren Stupidity]

52. ok -

"wouldn't have won" is a bit harsh.

Claims that Clinton trounced bush and dole with his rethuglican-lite DLC southern strategy are equally dubious, which is what I was responding to.

The rethug take-over of the house was '94. That was in the middle of the Clintonista DLC supremacy. How that correlates to a winning strategy escapes me.

[LittleClarkie]

26. 'Kay. Bye.

Looks to me like they're girding themselves to fight the RW agenda, myself, including Reid, who's looking like a bulldog all by himself.

[LoZoccolo]

27. Letting the Republicans win is the least dissent you can show.

Something weird is going on. No, it's not a FReeper attack, but I'm at a loss why people can't learn to get what they want. It makes no sense.

[TexasSissy]

36. We need to look to the past and duplicate whatever made us

the leading party for years.

Jack Kennedy
LBJ
Carter
Clinton

Whatever they had in common, that is apparently the winning ticket. I'm behind whatever duplicates the prior success. Whatever the Dem. Party had that beckoned to the average American, that's what the party needs to stress now.

I don't know what that is. But whatever it is, I'll vote for it.

[AntiCoup2K4]

69. What they had in common was...

A media that did their job, and a voting system which allowed the people to do theirs. Actually the media even turned on Carter & Clinton, for that matter. They turned on LBJ as well, but he deserved it for fucking up badly in Vietnam.

[DaveinMD]

39. if I don't get everything I want

I'm leaving and I won't share my dinner with you.

[jonnyblitz]

42. no, we would just settle for an actual opposition party. n/t

[Vinnie From Indy]

49. Settle Down Francis!

There are as many issues as there are grains of sand and Dem's should take positions on each issue individually. There is no template formula for Dem's to follow. It is easily conceivable that Democrats could forsake a complete and TOTAL sell out to corporate lobbies, as the GOP has done, and forge a coalition of unions, socially conscious corporations, environmental groups and, most importantly, continue to incubate the emerging power of the Internet as a vehicle for donations. Hysterical reactions to problems and challenges is rarely effective.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

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

[count_alucard]

62. center?

don't make me laugh. They are turning reactionary. Dems turned center with Carter, conservative with Clinton.

Dean is our only hope, I am praying that voters don't get fooled again in 2008 by this fraud called John Kerry.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

63. The Center

The center is pro choice, pro gay rights, and pro gun control limitations.....

Though folks are a bit spooked by gay marriage a plurality support civil unions....


The problem is there are a sizeable minority of folks who oppose all three and they are more passionate in their opposition than those who favor them .....


That's our dilemma....

[ClassWarrior]

67. Rephrase: I WILL NOT LET THE DEMS TURN TOWARDS THE CENTER.

You act like this is something that happens in a vacuum! Join your county party and start changing things from inside!! I can't understand how some people act like they just have to surrender their fate to some unknown entity.

NGU.