The DLC is all-powerful, their candidate did so well!!!

[ShaneGR]

Well, that meme doesn't go over so well when you look at the facts. Joe Lieberman was the candidate of choice of the DLC. Or are people confusing the DLC with the DNC, who never endorsed anyone and who's sole function is to help elect the parties nominee.

[Freddie Stubbs]

1. The DLC never made an endorsement

[IndianaGreen]

3. From, Reid , and Bayh attacked the antiwar candidates

they did their share of damage.

[Freddie Stubbs]

5. And many DLCers endorsed antiwar candidates

[AP]

6. They helped Dean establish a sorely needed liberal persona which

helped him grow a passionate base.

And then they invited Dean, Kerry, and Lieberman (all members, or former members) to give presentations at their summer soiree.

They didn't invite anti-NAFTA presidential candidate John Edwards to the meeting.

[IndianaGreen]

2. Kerried away!

William Saletan article in Slate has a plausible explanation for what is going on.

It is posted here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=310341

[mmonk]

4. I also think you should know

John Edwards is a DLC member.

[ShaneGR]

7. Interesting, considering they don't invite him to speak to their members

Didn't you know? His opinions on free-trade put him on the outs with them.

[mmonk]

9. maybe

somewhat on the outs. He's still listed as one of them though.

[AP]

11. So was Dean. They don't really care who joins. But you can tell who they

like and who they don't.

They didn't invite Edwards to present at their summer meeting, and they haven't done anything to help him during the primaries.

Is he getting endorsements from other DLC'ers? No -- they've gone with Dean and Kerry, who are/were also members, and who have been much friendlier to business. Has the DLC said anything nice about Edwards? No.

I don't think being a member is enough to say that Edwards is down with the DLC project. Especially when he clearly isn't. He's not down with the idea that corporations should be even more powerful. In fact, it's quite the opposite.

[mmonk]

13. Facts are facts

need a link? I get some of their mailings. I can assure you they don't support Dean as an organization in the least.

[AP]

15. They helped Dean raise money by framing him as a liberal when Dean...

...needed liberal bona fides.

Your logic is also guilt by association, and Dean was a very obedient DLC'er as Governor -- he helped transfer lots of power up the ladder to energy companies and to rich property owners (with a very regressive property tax).

[AP]

10. Dan Schorr says E's one of their least favorite members. Anti-NAFTA.

Didn't you know?

[mmonk]

12. But

he won't challenge bush on the precepts of the war which is part of the DLC playbook.

[AP]

14. Why does DLC exist? War? Nope. Profits? Yes. They exist to make corps...

...wealthier.

They aren't as stupid as those who think that at Yes vote on the IWR means that a candidate is a war monger. They know that Edwards's entire campaign is organized around the principle that political, economic and cultural power needs to flow from the top down to people who work for a living. That's what Edwards did as a lawyer. It's the principle on which he ran his senate campaign, it's how he voted in the Senate, and it's how he's running his presidential campaign.

The DLC isn't stupid. They know that Edwards is only going to war to protect the security of America, and not ever to make profits for corporations, and they know which way the power would flow in an Edwards presidency.

You know what the care about? Not the IWR vote. They care about jacking up the tax on capital gains for people with AGI over 350K. That's how corporations deliver their wealth unfairly to people at the top. In addition to NAFTA, that's why they fear Edwards and don't like him and don't support him.

[mmonk]

16. They exist

to co-op ideas repubs have sometimes run on which may be popular with a slightly different twist in order to try to win elections.

[AP]

18. Which republican ideas do they coopt? The ones that make corporations...

...wealthier.

That's why they're objectionable.

That's why they don't like Edwards.

[mmonk]

22. note the word popular

And they do like Edwards (or at least aren't voicing misgivings). I haven't seen mailings from them asking voters not to consider him like I've seen them do with Dean. What I'm telling you is real. How you want to digest it is up to you. They might like free trade but its the only issue they have that's different from Edwards and as long as he is sufficiently popular, they won't take issue with him.

[AP]

24. Do you realize that makes no logical sense. They like him because you've

never seen anything saying the do or don't.

Set Dean aside. What evidence do you have that they do like him.

Dan Schorr said the don't like him because of NAFTA.

[Democrats unite]

17. And no matter how you try to spin it

Edwards is part of the DLC! Has he renounced his membership? No. Has he dropped out? no.

[AP]

19. Has Dean? Nope. And worse for Dean (and Kerry) is that they have a set

of policies which the DLC doesn't really mind. (Thus, they get invited to the DLC summer soiree to give presentations.)

Edwards actually has a set of policies which threaten corporate wealth accumulation. (Thus, he doesn't get invited, and doesn't get DLC endorsements.)

[Democrats unite]

20. Maytags are great aren't they!

[AP]

23. The spin is that Edwards is liked by the DLC (when he clearly isn't)

NAFTA. Power flowing from corporation to consumer and employee.

[mmonk]

25. sheeesh

http://www.ndol.org/new_dem_dir_action.cfm?viewAll=1

[AP]

26. If membership is sin qua non, why isn't Dean their friend?

[AP]

27. ...furthermore, can you find ONE sign of support of Edwards?

And, since they, according to you, turned on Dean even though he was a member when he elligible, appearing on the membership rolls is clearly not evidence of that.

[mmonk]

34. I have been sent mail

assailing Dean concerning primarily his stand on the Iraq war. The anti-Dean literature (which was mainly editorials they found around the country from the nation's newspapers) pretty much tells me they don't want him. I have been sent absolutely zero in any criticism of John Edwards from them (and they still send the Dean stuff even after his support has declined). The premise of this thread is that the DLC candidate is out and that Edwards is not liked by the DLC. Yet, I've been given no indication from the DLC or it's spokespeople or From that they are against the possibilty of an Edwards nomination. This is getting tiring because nothing has discredited that fact. I don't particularly feel to carry this on. I was interjecting facts that I've been exposed to.

[Democrats unite]

28. Thanks

I don't see Deans name on that list, But I do see Edwards!

Some people just don't get it. Looks to me to be a Bush tactic, if you say it enough it must be true!

[AP]

Only elected officials can be members. Dean was member when gov.

And, clearly you believe they don't like him, so obvioulsy your argument falls in on itself. Membership alone isn't a sign that the DLC supports you.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

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

[AP]

32. Sorry. It's the truth. Dean was a member when Governor, and he actually

behaved like a DLC'er -- he deregulated the utilities, built roads for IBM (both of which he apologized for as a presidential candidate), and he shifted the tax burden off weealthy property owners (for which he didn't apologize).

Now, for whatever reason, you think that Dean is hated by DLC despite his former membership, and his invitation last summer to present at the DLC summer conference.

Therefore, membership can't be the sin qua non of DLC-ness, right?

Yest, you say the person the DLC actually doesn't like (because of NAFTA) is too DLC merely because his name appears on a membership list and despite the fact that they gave Dean, Lievberman and Kerry a chance to meet, greet, and persuade their members last summer, but not Edwards.

Whatever.

[Democrats unite]

35. Your trying to beat a dead horse to death thats already dead.

You started this thread to smear the DLC, Your candidate is part of the DLC. But yet you try to defend your candidates actions in the DLC. Makes no sense? If what you say about Edwards can be said about any DLC member including Lieberman. If your Candidate did not support the majority of the DLC he would drop out, is that so hard to understand?

On edit: your also trying to say that Lieberman the DLC supported Lieberman as The DLC candidate which is untrue and you know it, that is a false accusation. This is why some people have a problem believing anything that you post. Accuracy can do wonders for one's ability to bring people to their side of the disscussion

[AP]

29. ....furthermore, why do you think Shcorr said DLC d/n like Edwards b/c

of NAFTA if they did like him?

What weight do you give Schorr's reporting?

[liberalnurse]

8. I totally disagree.......

Joe was too far right to be reasonable in light of the *bush abuse but has garnered protection by the DLC/DNC for time served and was enven well backed by the insiders. They anointed Kerry......I'm not stupid.

[HereSince1628]

21. Why couldn't the DLC have many candidates in the race?

I don't accept that Lieberman was the only person pushing the DLC ticket.

[DU GrovelBot]

30. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##

RUN C:\GROVELBOT.EXE
 
This week is our first quarter 2004 fund drive.
Please take a moment to donate to DU. Thank you
for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.

[Zech Marquis]

33. so you're calling the voters DLC members? because i voted for Kerry?

if you have any proof of ME being with the DLC, please enlighten me. Otherwise you're making quite an immature, sad excuse for posting this tread :(