Why has the DLC declared war on us?

[poskonig]

The DLC has recently been on the warpath with the concern that the party has been presenting itself as "far left." While much of the ammo is aimed at moderate Democrat Howard Dean, they are generally angry at anything from Gephardt's healthcare plan to those who did not support the Iraq war.

The attacks on Dean are especially confusing. Dean has balanced budgets through not one but two Bush recessions and cut taxes a few times, an 'A' rating from the NRA, a moderate support of capital punishment, a pro-Israel pro-interventionist stance on foreign policy, et cetera. And given Graham has also spoken out against Bush's Iraq behavior, why is Dean singled out for special treatment?

None of this makes sense, unless we look at the way Dean is financed. For if they are worried about Dean's perception, why peddle lies about him being a ultra-leftist? Because Dean receives all of his support from regular people like you and me. Dean is not bankrolled by the superbanks, pharmaceuticals, defense contractors, et cetera that own the DLC. Dean not sharing the party's addiction to corporate money has singled him out for Pigbaugh-style attacks from our own party leadership.

There is no excuse for this. I want my country back; I also want my party back.

[DUreader]

1. They are corporate whores

[Walt Starr]

2. The DLC has changed my thinking in this election

DEAN OR GREEN!!!

Fuck the DLC.

[w13rd0]

17. Don't go that far...

...we ARE making a difference, regardless who is the nominee (although the whole process will be highly suspect if some no charisma-no chance bozo ends up with the nod)...

The campaign is changing the way politics and fundraising are looked at. We don't have to kowtow to special interests or corporate lobbyists. We CAN influence the nominee, regardless who it is. If they don't want to learn from experience, and make use of the tools of democracy, well, they don't deserve to be called democratic...

[Walt Starr]

20. I am Dean or Green until the DLC apologizes to Dean

Plain and simple.

They've gone too far and pushed me out.

[lastliberalintexas]

3. B/c the DLC leadership

supports Lieberman, and their man isn't doing as well as they'd hoped. The DLC leadership has shown that they don't care what the membership of the DLC want, so long as they can bash other Dems in an attempt to bolster their guy.

I don't have a problem with the DLC per se- moderate Dems should be able to have their own organization within the party without being attacked for it. But they better do something to get rid of Al From fast. Given everything that he has done to undercut and undermine other Dems (and I think even hurt Lieberman in the process), I have to wonder whether he truly is a Dem. And I don't say that lightly, and I don't direct my irritation with him at the members of the DLC. But by golly, he goes out of his way to bash Dems while making love to Shrub. Why why why is he still in charge there?

[HFishbine]

6. Not to be forgotten

Al From is Lieberman's pollster.

[Le Taz Hot]

10. Woah!

I haven't heard this before. I'm not doubting your word but it sure as hell would explain a LOT.

[webDude]

4. fear of loss of control

nt

[LawDem]

5. They're scared.

No mystery here. They're scared. They've been top dogs in the Democratic Party for 10 years and now, suddenly, they are starting to realize that the jig is up. The progressive candidates are the ones catching fire with the rank and file, not their Republican lite offerings.

[bloom]

7. I think if Lieberman is the candidate...

the only thing to do would be to demonstate against it and try to put a real democrat on the ballot.

[bearfartinthewoods]

8. Read all about it.........

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&subid=269&contentid=251929

the full poll results, and maybe you don't want to read it, is a PDF
http://www.ppionline.org/documents/PennPoll_0703.pdf

This information was gathered from a poll conducted by Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates between June 29 and July 1, 2003 with 1,225 likely 2004 voters. The margin of error is 2.8 percent.

The highlights of the survey include:

Democrats will have to neutralize the "security gap" -- the wide chasm between the parties on the threshold issue for the presidency. Many of society's most vulnerable voters, including seniors, place high importance on security. Swing voters are unlikely to vote for a Democrat unless he can offer a vision to compete with Republicans when it comes to national defense and homeland security. In the past, Democrats like President Clinton had to neutralize the Republicans on crime and welfare reform to be heard on other issues. Today, Democrats must be strong on security to be heard on the economy.

Voters on the whole have mixed impressions of the Democratic Party. The ability of the Democratic Party to reach the growing segments of the electorate, and particularly married voters with kids at home, is hurt by current perceptions that Democrats stand for big government, want to raise taxes too high, are too liberal, and are beholden to special interest groups. These perceptions, which relegated Democrats to the sidelines in the 1980s, once again put the party at a disadvantage as it attempts to woo swing men and married men who currently lean heavily toward the Republican column.

Key general election voters and even Democratic primary voters show a higher level of confidence in moderate Democrats than in liberal Democrats. This is true on a favorability scale and on trust in handling domestic issues like the economy, health care, and education; fiscal issues like taxes and government spending; and national security and homeland defense.

The underlying values of the New Democrat agenda draw even stronger support in post-9/11 America. The New Democrat agenda remains central to expanding the party's appeal to moderates, especially among male swing voters. The agenda is also received positively by liberals.

[CWebster]

14. Here is the amazing thing

these are the same talking points that the Repugs use, but if given the opportunity to counter, the Democrats could mop up the floor with the Republicans on the issues of security and fiscal responsibility. But that isn't the tact the DLC wants to pursue, they want the issues to revolve around the deceptive illusions the Repugs use to frame the debate, including the use of "liberal" as a slur when the target doesn't even reflect liberal policy.

Something to chew on.

[Rose Siding]

9. I was considering a similar post.

It just seems stupid and counter productive. I heard Bayh say yesterday that it was a choice between "venting or governing". Isn't that a false choice? We have no power now to govern anything.

Anger is a four letter word to them! But anger can be a healthy and powerful catalyst. It must be harnessed and given constructive direction but who doesn't know this? Yet the DLC totally dismisses it.

I think it was Bayh who also told of a woman in a grocery who came up to him and said that Bush should be impeached. He said to her that we should have an election instead! He told this story and it made her seem a little mad. Why not appreciate the frustration of one of his constituents? Why not recognize that some of these "elections" lately haven't been working quite right?

And the MOST distressing- to a one, they perpetuate the myth- the MYTH- that this admin and those Dems who support it are "strong on national security". That just baffles me. How can anyone who pays enough attention believe that?

They tout Clinton and feel that they were completely responsible for his successes. Aren't these the same ones who sat in Congress and let him be shredded by political opponents?

The only excuse I can come up with is that they are actually angling for a third party.

[bloom]

11. unfortunately they are taking over OUR party

:mad:

[tjdee]

12. Uh, yes Dean IS financed by corporate money.

His top donor is AOL/Time Warner, according to OpenSecrets. Microsoft is #4, also Goldman Sachs, Citigroups, etc. have given Dean money.
http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/contrib.asp?id=N00025663&cycle=2004

I don't think he is OWNED by corporate money though, that's obviously ridiculous--but he doesn't get "all" his money from "regular people" like you and me. No one does. Dean gets a LOT, probably the majority of his money, from regular people, but that isn't to say he doesn't depend on AOL's 46K as well.

I think the DLC (in particular Al From) targets him because they are plumb crazy.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

13. Fair enough.

But when your average donation is under $100 it doesn't take much to be the top donor.

[w13rd0]

18. Yes, a number of corporations...

...are listed among the aggregate for his top contributors. But look at the companies. Now put two and two together. AOL, Microsoft...employees of these companies...techs... Dean has 'caught on' with a lot of ppl in the tech industry. It's no surprise that some of the largest employers of tech related workers show some of the greatest support of the Dean campaign.

[tjdee]

23. A lot of universities as well.

I thought that was interesting.

[quinnox]

19. Whoa, I thought he was Mr. Grassroots

I wonder if this will stop the posts saying, "Dean doesn't take corporate money!" Somehow I doubt it...

[quinnox]

15. "There is no excuse for this."

What does this mean? Are you saying there is no excuse for criticizing Dean, or there is no excuse for the DLC to state their views? I know free speech can be troubling at times, but heck, this is America.

[poskonig]

16. "Bush is too conservative to be elected."

Do you see the RNC and their friends doing this to their top candidate?

[tjdee]

22. Dean is not the top candidate, nor the nominee.

Oooh, he's polling high in NH and Iowa! He raised the most money in the second quarter! He's the top candidate!

Uh, no.

Dean is a first tier candidate, but he is NOT the top candidate. Using your criteria, the top candidate at this time would be John Kerry.

The DLC does not want Dean to be the nominee (depending on whom you ask). So, like any other think tank, they say so. Much like the NAACP told Kucinich, Gephardt, and Lieberman that their money is like confederate dollars. And, according to national polls, Lieberman is the top candidate.

I don't think I'm getting why anyone gives that much weight to what the DLC thinks.

[haymaker]

21. Because the are Republicans

Duh!