can state parties choke off money to DLC candidates?

[yurbud]

If so, we could fix things from that direction.

Dig into who funds candidates a bit, ask some pointed questions like ''Would you pledge that you will never take a job as a corporate lobbyist, lawyer, CEO, or board member after you leave office, and neither will your immediate family members during or after you leave office?''

''Do you pledge to buy your own lunch, plane tickets, and hotel accommodations when you travel, and never accept anything of any value from someone with business before Congress or expected to have business before Congress in the near future?''

''Do you pledge to only meet lobbyists in your office, to have those meetings recorded, and available online within 48 hours?''

''Would you hesitate to regulate an industry out of existence, or pass a law that would put one of your major donors in prison? Would you refrain from making a presently illegal activity legal solely for the benefit of a donor or past or future employer, especially when the change would harm the public good?''

''Do you pledge to take a polygraph or make your financial records available to forensic accountants at random intervals without advance notice?''

In short, do you pledge to behave in no way whatsoever like a DLC member?

[Ozymanithrax]

1. They do have some influence on how much money candidates get...

But I am not sure they could or would "choke of DLC Candidates." State parties will follow the party line for the most part.

[yurbud]

2. who do you suppose sets the party line?

The Republicans were able to force out their moderates even though to a man they are all corporate compliant. I don't see why we couldn't do the same with the DLC.

[bridgit]

3. Get your game on - it's DLXe, pay more attention

:kick: