So where do DLC apologists on DU come from?!

[Terran1212]

I see a phenomenon on DU.

This isn't about a poster here or there supporting a Green or Independent or some other third party to take down a right wing or centrist Dem (although I'd argue that's a good idea in some places).

No, I'm referring to those on DU who say it's a bad idea for lefty Dems to challenge the DLC pawns in the primaries.

Why?

Why is it so wrong for them to do that?

It's not as if if Tasini wins the Primary that he will make the Democrats lose. NY is strongly blue; the chance of that is almost nill.

It's not as if getting an actual antiwar Democrat in Lieberman's chair will have a lot of negative consequences and plunge us into Republicandom (his Independent run will be dealt with by smart voters).

Yet again and again I see people attack Lamont and Tasini and other strong, progressive, antiwar people for joining the primary fight. They're called Naders and fringe lefties and all this nonsense -- for taking the position of the majority of the Democratic voters.

Is it that you secretly support the war or much of what Bush is doing? Is that it? Or do you just not like lefties or progressives and the very "aura" they bring to the Party? Do you prefer having people in office that don't listen to the voters, that follow corporate dollars, that brush up to the far-right wing President?

I really want to know.

[killbotfactory]

1. "Why is it so wrong for them to do that?"

It's wrong, because the democratic party is not about democracy!

Oh wait...

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. Where do they come from?

Some strange place where I will never be. LOL

[Crazy Guggenheim]

3. I think the question should be what makes them think the DLCers are

the only ones who win? Do these apologists understand the DLC has ruined the Democratic Party and they're the reason why the Demos are seen as weak?

[readmoreoften]

4. I vote progressive in the primaries, and for the chosen dem beyond that.

Isn't that the SENSIBLE thing to do if you're a progressive dem? Especially if you're in the top 5 bluest states. Imagine having another Wellstone or Conyers! What a difference!

[jsamuel]

5. I think it used to be based on the idea of a third candidate taking away

votes. But, primaries are explicitly made not to do that. So, I think people are threatened. I imagine they have some fear of a Democratic party without "moderation". The problem is that "moderation" has changed to mean politically agile rather than having certain views.

[Terran1212]

8. Exactly

I mean there will most likely be actual moderates in the party even if progressives win a state or two. It's not like if Tasini and Lamont take it that everyone but the socialists/Marxists will leave the Democrats and stop endorsing the Party.

[texasleo]

6. NY has never had a republican senator or governor

:eyes:

[Viva_La_Revolution]

10. yup

governor
Republicans Thomas Dewey and Nelson Rockefeller, who was elected four times

The current Governor of New York is a Republican, George Pataki

Republican Senator Alfonse D'Amato served until he was defeated in 1998 and before him longtime Senator Jacob Javits also served and was also a Republican, although he ran as a Liberal in 1980.

Republican Congressmen William E. Miller and Jack Kemp were both from New York and were running mates for Barry Goldwater in 1964 and Bob Dole in 1996 respectively. Despite the strong Democratic presence in New York City, Republican Rudolph Giuliani served two terms as mayor, and Michael Bloomberg was elected as a Republican twice, the first time being in 2001 and then again in 2005.


NY is not safe

[Greyhound]

7. Or is it that this would threaten their livelihood? Don't forget that

these politiwhores that hold office have very large staffs that also find themselves out of work when their horse loses the race. The politiwhores very rarely take care of their minions when they go into the lobbying business, so the minions have to fend for themselves and, as the rest of us know, it's rough out there.

[Blue_Tires]

9. over/under on the number of total posts before this thread is done:

330

[Moderator]

11. locking

flamebait and a group attack against people who disagree with the OP