I will be for the "DLC Dem" if that's all there is available

[brentspeak]

(this is repost of a post I made on someone else's thread)

(You) make it sound like the DLC is the Great Satan. Give us a break. There's a ton I don't like about the DLC, but the Democratic Party needs all the seats it can get. When the party holds the majority in Congress, the rest of the Democrats can actually get things done for the American people.

If you don't like the DLC, what you should do is support quality Dems in Blue States who could supplant the DINO incumbents in the primaries. The true-blue Dems you support would have to be politicians strong enough to have a good chance at defeating their Republican opponents. THEN you would have actually done something positive for America (and the party) rather than mindlessly urge others to endorse a scorched-earth policy.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. I'm not a DLC fan, but you're absolutely right.

The bottom line is seats. It's the Liebermans and Landrieus that will allow the Kennedys and Boxers to rule the day.

[expatriot]

2. my thoughts exactly, man... well said.

(this is an exact repost of my reply to your original post that you have reposted... :) )

it is easier for people to hold the DLC up as a whippingboy for all that's wrong with the Democratic Party and our collective butt-effing we have received from the Republicans as of late in national elections.... when the problem is much more complex and needs to be addressed.

I agree with you totally. If you want to change the party you take on DLCers in the primary but you do not call for Stalinesque or Maoist purges of them from the Party because they do not adhere to a particular political ideological test or political strategy.

Yes, I want a Democratic Party that has backbone and confronts BushCo at every turn and yes I think the DLC is a weak link in the party right now but to just think of them as the Great Evil in our party and how things would be better if we just "drove them out" of the party is naive at best.

----I am off to work. all responses will come later...

[CWebster]

4. When does it end?

When does it start?

[brainshrub]

3. So you'd be willing to vote for a conservate pro-corporate candidate?

I'm done supporting candidates just because they have a "D" after their name. Frankly, I'd rather vote for a Republican who is up-front with his pro-corporate agenda, than support a person who will pretend to support my interests, but sell out when the cookies are on the table.

If a DLCer wins the presidential nomination, I can't vote for them. I'll probably go green.

And before anyone complains about me "wasting" my vote, I'd like to point out that voting for a conservative Democrat is the only way to waste your vote: DLCers are not fighters, they are surrender-monkeys.

[MadHound]

5. Hear hear, I couldn't have stated it better myself.

I'm tired of being derided for not voting party line when it comes to DLC candidates, though it has been shown time and again that those candidates are nothing but corporate whores who will vote in lockstep with the 'Pugs. Continuing to tow the party line, voting for the lesser of two evils is what got us into this mess, and it certainly won't get us out. It is time for real change in this country, and if I have to go Green to get it, I will.

[marions ghost]

10. I've come to this point too

if we keep supporting the DLC, nothing will ever change.

[stray cat]

6. If we can't unite to beat radical republicans we deserve to lose

I will certainly vote for whoever is the least of two evils. I won't throw my vote away like I did in 2000 when I didn't think there was a difference between Al Gore and Bush.

[stubertmcfly]

7. The lesser of two evils...

...is still evil.

Personally, I am trying to discourage the Democratic Party from being Republican Lite. We need to support strong alternatives, not just watered down conservatives in some attempt to solicit the centrists. Given the choice of voting for a Republican or a Republican in Democrat clothing, they'll select the Repuke. Give the people some real choice for once!

[Q]

8. I can see that the campaign for the 2008 version of ABB...

...has already started.

This is no surprise. What else can the DLCers do to get Democrats to vote against their own interests?

On edit: The DLC could help the party by stopping their smear campaigns against liberals, progressives and those against the Iraq slaughter (sponsored in part by the DLC).

The DLC must allow progressive Democrats to run on an even playing field without being character assassinated with the DLC's corporate money.

[wli]

9. my vote is also still party-line

However, I vastly prefer Democrats who actually stand for something I believe in, hence urging action in primaries against those who voted for CAFTA etc.

[lateo]

11. I am not voting for a DLC Dem.

Flame me if you want but the DLC is destroying our party. A vote for one of them is a vote for a Republican. If I am going to vote for a Republican I will vote for a REAL Republican.

[Armstead]

12. The problem with that

On the local (regional) level, candidates have a better feel for the dynamics of their constituents. And a lot of their electability depends on their personal skills and relationships.

But the problem is that on the national level, the DLC tries to set a straightjacket for what "the Democrats" should be. And, they have the access and the visibility to enforce it and/or tar anyone they disapprove of as the reincarnation of Karl Marx.

Dean was a perfect example. Rather than letting him rise and/or fall on his own qualities as a candidate, the DLC joined the GOP in portraying him as a far-left madman who represents the "dangerous Move On, Michael Moore" wing who were stupid enough to challenge the war in Iraq..

They did a lot to set a framework where we got stuck with a bland and uninspiring presidential candidate, because they joined the media and the GOP in portraying Dean -- who is basically a moderate -- as a "fringe" candidate.