Disgruntled Moderate Conservatives Should Be Welcomed in the Party

[Robert Murphy]

'Llo All,

OK, let me admit I am not as knowledgeable on this topic as I should be--any and all please feel welcome to set me straight. However...

What the bloody hell is the party establishment thinking as of late? Why should former Republicans who want to join the party not be welcomed? E.g., James Webb--an intelligent, moderate man who was Secretary of the Navy under Reagan--recently announced his candidacy for the Virginia Senate race, as a Democrat. But... I understand he has received a cool reception from the Democratic 'powers that be.' Bloody hell, we are finally beginning to see a few disillusioned Republicans looking for a new party, and we're going to alienate them?!? WTF? Just how much does the party's leadership love losing elections? There are some good people here; this is the key to regaining power! What gives?

Robert

[ck4829]

1. I agree. We need to form a coalition.

[HereSince1628]

3. Democrats are already a coalition. They have been for a generations

And at any rate the professional moderate conservatives are already an organized group in that coalition they are called the DLC.

[SteppingRazor]

2. Given how nastily the DLCers are crucified...

I doubt you'll find many people willing to accept Republicans into the fold. But I do agree with you. The Democrats are supposed to be the party that welcomes a free exchange of ideas, not the one that marches in lockstep to the latest talking points issued from on high. I think there's plenty of room for moderates, and, in fact, this is the one area in which we can reliably grow the party before the 2008 election

[HereSince1628]

9. Some might say it's better that the camel piss out of the tent than

on everyone in the tent, as did Lyndon Johnson, when a discussion of the camal getting its nose in the tent started.

Our tent is not yet camal-proofed. And personally, I think living with a camal in the tent means that every cherished thing that is at all fragile, will be broken to bits. Things like support of civil rights, American labor, health care just are not camal-proof.

[Robert Murphy]

14. I See...

...Your point; do realize I am not talking about turning the Democratic party into 'Republican lite.' But remember, the far-right which now dominates the Republican party has managed to yank the political center or gravity so far rightward--some former Republicans have some surprisingly progressive views.

Robert

[HereSince1628]

24. When you are in a tug of war you pull harder.

It seems by definition that moderate conservatives aren't going to grab the rope and pull left.

Besides which moderate republicans seem to be getting a new home in the Libertarian movement.

The whole idea of a huge moderate middle to American politics is an idea from the last century when the baby boomers were raised to think that being a middle of the road independent was the best way to be. It seems that while the idea has persistence it has become a legacy myth, realpolitik has left it behind.

[Robert Murphy]

33. I Believe That

...The MSM is primarily to blame here. 'Moderation' is the order of the day, but it is a false moderation. The far-right has yanked what is considered the 'center' so far, uhm, rightward, that (as Paul Krugman aptly put it) "today's moderate is yesterday's conservative."

Robert

[SteppingRazor]

29. LBJ also recommended the distinctly Rovian tactic...

of accusing one of his political opponents of having sexual congress with the animals on his pig farm, something that I doubt many political purists would support.

"Back in 1948, during his first race for the U.S. Senate, Lyndon Johnson was running about 10 points behind, with only nine days to go. He was sunk in despair. He was desperate. And it was just before noon on a Monday, they say, when he called his equally depressed campaign manager and instructed him to call a press conference for just before lunch on a slow news day and accuse his high-riding opponent, a pig farmer, of having routine carnal knowledge of his barnyard sows, despite the pleas of his wife and children.

"His campaign manager was shocked. 'We can't say that, Lyndon,' he supposedly said. 'You know it's not true.'

"'Of course it's not true!' Johnson barked at him. 'But let's make the bastard deny it!' "
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20060111/ai_n15985015

In any case, I think the problem is not in having moderates inside the tent. The problem is in making sure they don't take over. The part where I disagree with many of the DLC-cursing crowd is in when such assurances should be made. I would rather we gain control of Congress, and hopefully the White House, before we worry about thinning the heard of the few token DINOs it took to get us there. Others would have us remove any and all DINOs while we are still a minority party. I think that's a mistake.

[Robert Murphy]

35. Are You Sure That...

Did LBJ indeed do that? I knew that Johnson was a morally compromised character, but...

Cripes, the man who was instrumental in passing the landmark civil rights legislation of the '60s, was also a habitual liar and accomplished Machiavellian. Certainly a complex figure.

Robert

[SteppingRazor]

42. I can't say I'm sure. The immediate players are all dead...

and none of them told the story publicly.

The thing with Johnson was, like most good politicians, he could separate politics from policy. When it came to policy, he believed in civil rights and expanded social welfare -- things we on the left generally support. But when it came to politics, he was a relentless, unforgiving monster. The two are not mutually exclusive, and I don't hold it against anyone if they are politically vicious but pure in policy. Our political opponents, for whom policy is only either a matter of politics or a means with which to do business, do not deserve a fair break.

[The Magistrate]

63. That Is One Of My Favorite Stories, Sir

And even if apocryphal, illustrates some important points....

[AndyTiedye]

55. I Have Nothing Against Moderates

But voting for Supreme Court justices who will ban abortion is not moderate.
That is an EXTREME position, compared to the American public, but it has been
sold as the "moderate" position by the right-wing media.

[Robert Murphy]

Couldn't Agree More...

It seems to me that people forget that members of the DLC are of two 'breeds': the Lieberman variety, and the Al Gore variety.


Robert

[Hell Hath No Fury]

22. Al Gore (correctly)...

dumped the DLC bullshit during his 2000 campaign and went populist -- winning him the election. He's been running that way since and has gained tremendous support and credibility because of it.

Point being, Gore isn't DLC anymore.

[Robert Murphy]

27. Good Point(n/t)

.

[wryter2000]

28. I'd love to have more Al Gores

But I don't want any more Liebermans. Disgruntled Republicans need to take their own party back. We've already moved too far to the right.

[RagingInMiami]

26. Just because you're a moderate republican

Doesn't mean you're going to be all cozy with the corporations, which is basically the DLC's downfall.

I'm sure there are plenty of republicans out there who are just as disgusted with the corporization of this country as we are.

[Sparkman]

68. Any "mod Repukes" publically bashed the Fascists? lockstepping=S.O.P.

Taking issue with one RNC talking point is not the sign of a reformed Repuke, it will take MUCH more to get my support. They families involved here, and won't change enough.
Behind every terrorist is a BUSH.

[On the Road]

58. The Party Sure as Hell BETTER Accept Republicans

Democrats have lost tens of millions of voters and party members since the mid-60s. It was for good reason -- civil-rights along lost the entire South. But since Lyndon Johnson, 5 of the last 7 presidents have been GOP and Democrats have lost control over both houses of Congress.

It has nothing to do with appeasement. It has to do with winning and taking back control of the country.

[Sparkman]

70. Let's all meet in the middle? Erect a wall at Mexico, Patriot Act 4 ever

AND Globalize ALL U.S. Corporations? Continue military Gulags in Syria, Afganistan, Iraq, Kuwait?
What the Dems need is to draw from their roots, and DENOUNCE Fascism and cronyism on both sides of the Isle.

[On the Road]

100. I Think Tarring All Moderate Republicans as Fascists and Cronies

without looking at individuals is splinter group thinking of the worst kind. The people we're talking about are the ones UPSET by a lot of the same things we are.

[Sparkman]

102. Let's let the war-mongering war-profiteer supporters of the BUSH CRIMINALS

off the hook?! TORTURE OCCURS EVERY DAY, IN CIA RUN U.S. MILITARY PRISIONs through the process of EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION, without trial, without family contact and with no lawyers. Some "terra" suspects are tortured to death, and any and all war supporters need their due come upence.
Why cut em POLITICAL slack because they called the left anti-warriors, who lost our jobs and our liberty at their friends hands (your either with us or your with the terrorists) while they said nothing!? please re-think the "moderates" timely and frankly inane attempts at POLITICAL salvation.
They allowed the cheating by their party to STEAL Al Gore's 2000 WIN, sat on their hands when they should have PRESSURED their party leaders to do the right thing.
HUNDREDs of thousands of innocent Iraqis were MURDERED by the U.S. military at the neo-cons behest, that's a bit to serious to allow war-mongers off the hook, now that their sons & daughters are dying in a foreign war, against a people that NEVER HURT ONE AMERICAN!
This is POLITICS not sunday school

[On the Road]

105. You Have Demonstrated My Point Wonderfully

[Sparkman]

106. * & his minions have you brainwashed into "forgiveness", Infil-TRAITORS.

[On the Road]

108. People See the World Differently

Clinton understood this, and this is one reason he was able to win. You have to work with people where they are. It does not sound like you have a wide range of experience with people of different political backgrounds.

If your goal is rhetorical, you have plenty of material to work with. If your goal is to improve the country, it's disastrous.

My suggestion would be that you find a party which has principles that they uphold consistently and which excludes people they regard as traitors. Here's a good one run by some very smart, principled people.

[Sparkman]

109. I've gone through dozens of appologists, like you, My goal is anti-Fascism

and I call it like I see it. You play games to win contests. I want the truth, not your approval.

[On the Road]

119. I Don't Play Games to Win Contests

You appear to "play games" so you can get on a soapbox and feel good about yourself. And you're free to do that -- I just hope the party disagrees. I'm glad nobody got to Paul Craig Roberts to tell him he wasn't welcome.

The original post had to do with the fact that Republicans are becoming disgruntled and are switching parties. It raised the question over whether Democrats should accept them or reject them.

People actually do switch parties and allegiances. That's how the Democrats became a minority party -- by millions of voters going Republican. It's an emotional thing. It requires a change in tone more than a change in principles -- those come along the way. And it's completely different from the appeasement being advocated by the DLC, which is completely counterproductive.

Just an example: When the Nazi party was rising, thay made more recruits came from the extreme left than from the center. People do change sides, and it's times like this when it happens. It's not always for the best reasons originally, and they may come over with some bad ideas, but people's positions are malleable. The party should accept them but not cater to their bad ideas.

[Sparkman]

110. Noam Chomsky, Martin Luther King, Ralph Nader, Howard Zinn, Ghandi,

Harry Belafonte, Malcom X, Samuel Clemens, Thomas Paine, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Theodore Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, John Fitzerald Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Crazy Horse, Lenard Peltia, Danny Glover, JESSIE JACKSON...where's your list of humanitarian idols?

[On the Road]

120. What on Earth are You Talking About?

The original post remarked on the fact that some disgruntled Republicans were switching parties, and raised the question over whether they should they should be accepted or rejected. There was nothing about whether leading neocons should be "forgiven," nothing about changing the platform to become more right-wing, nothing that I can see relates to a list of humanitarian idols.

When I linked to the Trotskyists, I was being half-serious. I respect their intelligence and their principles, even if I wouldn't want them running the country. But their political role is confined to a minor activist organization. Nothing about that group is going to have more than a marginal effect on anything that happens in this country.

It's interesting you mention FDR. All the gains of the New Deal were made possible by northern liberals allying themselves with Southern segregationists. I'm glad LBJ rejected that deal with the devil, but I'm also glad the New Deal happened. I would have thought you would consider FDR an appeaser and have omitted him from your list.

[Sparkman]

113. AND I DIDN'T NEED TO GO TO THE WEB, MY LIST, FROM MEMORY.

[SaveElmer]

4. I think probably the reason for this reaction...

Is that for many, existing moderate and conservative Democrats are almost as big an enemy as the Republicans (just do a cursory search on DU to see the number of anti-DLC threads). I suspect they view adding former Republicans to this mix as just adding to their strength.

Pesonally, as a Virginia voter, I am not a fan of Webb. He has harshly criticized John Kerry for his anti-war activities, and even granted that the swift boating that too place was largely Kerry's fault. If he gets the nom I will vote for him, because he certainly cannot be any worse than Allen, and I would like to see Allen knocked out of the Presidential picture.

[The Magistrate]

64. As A Matter Of Curiousity, Sir

Of just whom are "existing moderate and conservative Democrats" as much an enemy as the Republicans?

[SaveElmer]

65. Well judging by comments on DU...I would say

FOr many...

Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman, Diane Feinstein, Ben Nelson, and Joe Biden would fall into that category. I didn't say it was rational. None of these people with the exception of Nelson could legitimately be called conservative with an objective look at their record.

[The Magistrate]

69. Fair Enough, Sir

Thank you for the clarification.

[crispini]

5. I agree.

You see this going on at every level, state and local as well. I think it goes back to humans being sort of tribal, kind of clannish, and people tend to dislike those not of their clan. However I think for the greater good we have to overcome this tendency. After all we are supposed to be more intelligent than instinctive these days right? Furthermore I think we need to explicitly say that we welcome moderate Repubs and so on, and I think we need to model this welcoming behavior to the old-line dems who might want to muscle people out.

We need to clearly, repeatedly make the point to our fellow party members, especially those who have been involved for awhile and may be a bit hidebound: We want to welcome former Republicans to our ranks so that the party can GROW and WIN!

[Robert Murphy]

17. Amen!(n/t)

.

[wryter2000]

31. Oh, great

There goes progressive stands on affirmative action, a living minimum wage, and a host of other issues where we're right and moderate Republicans are wrong.

I don't want to be a Nixon Republican, and I don't want my candidates to be one, either.

[crispini]

39. Please point out in my post

where I said we should change our stances on the issues.

[wryter2000]

60. Republicans have traditionally opposed affirmative action

If they want to move to our positions, fine. The more the merrier. I'd love to have them. But if they expect us to change to accommodate them, I say let them take their own party back.

[...of J.Temperance]

53. I'm sure that there are moderate Republicans who

Are pro-Affirmative Action. Again I mention Chaffee, Snowe and Collins, I'm not aware that they're anti-Affirmative Action. They're also not Nixon Republican's, I think they're Liberal Republican's.

My favorite Senator, Mary Landrieu....I mean Chaffee for example is a lot more Liberal than she is on many issues.

On Edit: Dammit spelling error.

[sandyd921]

103. Not liberal

Can't speak for Chaffee, but as a Mainer I can comment on Snowe and Collins. Take a look at their votes on things like minimum wage, class action lawsuits, bankruptcy, Patriot Act, support for the war, Anwar, etc., etc. and you will find that they are far from liberal. They are in fact prototypical moderate suck ups to * repiglicans. And that's what you get with most moderate repiglicans. Sorry, if I'm less than enthusiastic about making room for them. We're having a hard enough time getting the Democratic party to stand up for progressive ideals. We don't need more repiglicans in the party. We already have enough.

[JeffR]

6. Disgruntled liberals should be welcomed in the party too

Just sayin...

[Armstead]

10. LOL

[FSogol]

7. I'll vote for James Webb. He'll do a great job.

And exactly how does his switch to our side differ from Wes Clark's switch?

[karynnj]

52. Major differences I can see is that:

Clark had NOT slimed Al Gore in the prior election. People complained that Clark voted for Nixon and Reagan (and possibly Bush I) - this was years before. I wouldn't know if Webb simply voted for Bush. Webb sided with BUSH (No matter what he said) when he wrote several articles that smeared John Kerry. That was slightly more than a year ago.

Weighing Bush's disasterous polices vs 30 plus year old Kerry remarks, Webb chose to put his voice against Kerry. This is the man people want to trust with a vote in the Senate?

Second difference was that Clark articulated a set of views and policies on many issues that refected Democratic values.

[Catchawave]

72. Kerry is so 2004, and this is Virginia 2006

very moderate conservative.

[karynnj]

82. I gues you can't refute either difference

The difference in year does not change that it is highly unlikely that he genuinely believes in any of the Democratic agenda. If he did he wouldn't have implicitly backed Bush in the most important election in our life time.

[Catchawave]

91. Webb didn't lose, Kerry did.....

A lot of veterans voted against Kerry rather than for Bush. Millions of them :( I let go of this 35 year old Kerry war a long time ago. He hurt many veterans aligning himself with a really radical left wing organization that called those troops "baby killers". Webb was one of those veterans, and yes, had every right to speak out against Kerry in '04. Webb also spoke out against the Swifties and Bush's chickenhawkin'.

Please don't blame Webb for all of Kerry's problems, otherwise, you might support Allen :shrug:

[karynnj]

101. I'm not blaming Webb for all Kerry's problems

What I am blaming him for are articles that distorted the truth. When Kerry was in VVAW it had 2 components, one very moderate for the time and the other pretty radical. Kerry and people like Bobby Mueller were pretty moderate - I know they were more radical than about 95% of the population at a large midwest University in a red state. They ended up leaving VVAW as it started to become more radical to form VVA which lobbied to help veterans.

As a baby boomer, I know some veterans - but none who hate Kerry.

Also, what did Webb think of illegally funding the Contras, or allowing the Contras to brink drugs into this country?

As to Allen, Webb is not yet the candidate - it's possible Miller could win.

[Jai4WKC08]

73. Clark didn't "switch"

Clark was NEVER a Republican. As a military officer, he held to the tradition of remaining non-partisan. He retired in 2000, but it wasn't until the 2002 mid-terms that he got involved in partisan politics and it was by supporting Democrats.

Webb was a Repub, not just a Dem who served in a Republican administration. He is switching parties. There is a difference.

That said, I think we should welcome Repubs to the party. And independents, Greens, socialists, libertarians... whoever want to join us for whatever reason. I have enough faith in my liberal principles to believe they will win out within the party in the long run.

I also think we should let the Democrats in VA decide whether they'd rather have a moderate new (little "n") Democrat or a liberal long-time Democrat to represent them.

[xultar]

8. Why would we so we could beat the shit out of them and get them

against us too.

I wouldn't invite anyone to this party. We do to much fighting amongst ourselves that we never succeed.

[...of J.Temperance]

11. I agree 100% with this

There are many moderate Republicans out there, they're pro-Choice, they're pro-Gay Rights, they're against all of this incredible deficit spending, they're pro-Minimum Wage, pro-Civil Rights, amongst other things.

The Democratic Party should have a structure, whereby we send people to communicate with these moderate Republicans and say to them why not think about joining our side. There are people in my party that would make these moderate Republicans feel extremely welcome.

I'd also like us to have a structure, whereby we send people to communicate with Independents as well.

Our party would benefit enormously from such an exercise.

On Edit: This is how you win, by expanding and pulling these groups of people into your party structure.

[wryter2000]

32. Excuse me

Moderate Republicans always scream "lost jobs!" when you attempt to raise the minimum wage. A moderate Republican -- Richard Nixon -- invented the southern strategy.

[...of J.Temperance]

47. I can't say that I've heard Lincoln Chaffee or Olympia Snowe

Scream "lost jobs!" when we've attempted to raise the minimum wage.

The thing is, Chaffee, Snowe, Susan Collins are scared not to vote in lockstep with Bush Inc. We need to tell these sort of people to get on over to our side. I often cannot see, in particular on social issues how these people can remain in today's Republican Party. This isn't the Republican Party of Dwight Eisenhower anymore. If James Webb can run as a Democrat in Virginia against George Allen, then more James Webb's need to get the guts to come over to our side.

Richard Nixon invented the Southern strategy, yes he did and it was a quasi-racist strategy and it was appalling.

As a Democrat it upsets me to have to even comment this, but for a long while, the Ku Klux Klan was considered almost like a vile paramilitary wing of MY party. George Wallace was a Democrat, Ross Barnett was a Democrat, Lester Maddox was a Democrat, Orval Faubus was a Democrat, Theodore Bilbo was a Democrat, James Eastman was a Democrat, William Fulbright was a Democrat and Bull Connor was a Democrat.

So my party at one point had their own Southern Strategy.

Give me a Lincoln Chaffee or an Olympia Snowe over a George Wallace or a James Eastman any day of the week.

Give me a Lincoln Chaffee or an Olympia Snowe as well over a Ben Nelson or Zell Miller any day of the week.

On Edit: Moderators is this post in inappropriate in any way, then please feel free to delete it and I'll completely understand.

[wryter2000]

59. Nothing inappropriate

:hi:

Our party has changed since the Dixiecrat days.

I guess it depends on what you mean by moderate Republican. As I don't know the man who's the subject of the OP, I can't comment on him. However, our party has moved to Republican-lite, with help by real Dems like Joe Biden (who voted for that horrid bankruptcy bill). I don't want to move it any further in that direction. I'm very much afraid that we're appealing to Republicans who can't stand Bush because we're now hovering around the policies of Richard Nixon (minus the southern strategy and the disastrous personality).

If we get to where we're Nixon, then my party has truly left me behind. I want us to be the party of Barbara Boxer and Barbara Lee.

On edit: I'm not an absolutist in any way. I just don't want the liberal voice lost.

[mike_c]

12. sure, if they want to become liberals....

I mean, I agree with the big tent in principle, but it's hard to imagine how it really works in practice. I want a LIBERAL party-- one that's not ashamed of the label-- and if moderate conservatives want to become liberal and join such a party, then more power to 'em. On the other hand, if they want the party to become moderate conservative to accomdate them, then they can pollute the libertarians instead.

[BootinUp]

13. No question about it sir.

To those reading, do you want to have another 48% - 49% cliffhanger in 2008 or shall we regain the majority? And yes some kind of creative compromise to make the coalition possible will be necessary.

wheres my fire fighting gear. I may not be around much so have at it.

[Bridget Burke]

43. What sort of "creative compromise" would you consider?

That is--whose rights do you want to give away?

[BootinUp]

62. Something to consider would be

Taking federalism stance on some of these social issues deferring to the Supreme court and State legislatures on parental consent for abortion, probably civil unions and gay marriage. We would be better off doing what is necessary now to keep the Supreme Court from going any further to the right and further jeopardizing Roe v. Wade and other rights already established by the Court.

So support for National Democrats to use that type of strategy without getting kneecapped in the primaries by our own party. The strategy would be ineffective of course unless a clear majority of Dems supported it.

[Bridget Burke]

74. OK. Jettison Choice & Gay Rights to begin with....

South Dakota is about to make almost all abortion illegal; do States Rights make that OK?

Do anyone else's rights mean nothing to you?

Any Dem who adopts your plan deserves kneecapping.

[BootinUp]

78. As you noted

its happening without any change in strategy.

[Orangepeel]

15. depends on why they are disgruntled

some republicans are disgruntled because they think that bush isn't mean enough to the poor and minorities.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

16. Define "moderate conservatives" please...

Does that mean Republicans who are anti-choice? Anti-gay rights? Pro corporation over workers and the environment? Pro tax cuts for the wealthy while killing Medicare? Just what are they "moderate" on and "conservative" on?

The reason I am not too keen on inviting the GOP into my party is because I fear their inclusion will change the Democratic Party into something I no longer recognize or care to support. Let the GOP take back their own damn party instead of trying to infilitrate and fundementally change the Democratic Party into GOP Lite.

[Robert Murphy]

23. In a Word...

"Does that mean Republicans who are anti-choice? Anti-gay rights? Pro corporation over workers and the environment? Pro tax cuts for the wealthy while killing Medicare? Just what are they 'moderate' on and 'conservative' on?"

NO!

You're describing the all too-typical breed of today's Republican. Such men and women are obviously not moderates. Even if we wanted such types in the party, they wouldn't join even if we offered them candy. ;-) I am talking about the likes of (e.g.) the Lincoln Chafees of the world. (This man is more liberal than some conservative Democrats.)

[Armstead]

37. I'd call Chaffee a Displaced Liberal rather than Moderate Repub

He seems to be a Republican because of genetics more than anything else.

Were it not for that, he'd be a classic Democratic moderate liberal.

So IMO he's more a displaced liberal than a moderate Republican.

[Robert Murphy]

38. If Only...

...The man would switch parties. (Sigh.)

Robert

[Armstead]

40. I guess that last name is hard to overcome

[...of J.Temperance]

50. It can't just be Chaffee's last name....why won't Snowe and Collins

Switch parties as well? Jim Jeffords did, well he sits as an Independent. So they don't have to switch to our party, I'd be just as happy if they'd sit as Independents.

[Armstead]

51. His Dad was a power Republican in RI

[...of J.Temperance]

54. Senator John Chaffee, yes?

Of course it's an absurd excuse for Lincoln Chaffee to use. As I said in this thread already this isn't Dwight Eisenhower's Republican Party, so it's not John Chaffee's Republican Party.

They've been taken over by the Far Right and the Fundies, both I think are totally alien to Chaffee, Snowe and Collins....so they need to switch parties, they've got pretty much nothing in common with today's Republican's.

[Armstead]

57. I'd agree with you -- but he probably thinks it's esdiwer said than done

He kind of inherited his seat in the Senate. I would guess that he feels a misplaced loyalty and the need to stay in the GOP because of that.

I wish he'd break away and at lest become an independent. But it's his call to make.

[Armstead]

18. They should be welcomed -- But it should be a liberal Democratic menu

they should be welcomed on the basis that they'd have to accomodate the concept of Democratic liberalism, rather than expect Democrats to accomodate conservatives.

I don't know enough about Webb to mke a comment on that.

But in general, IMO, the Democrats should bolster its own identification with liberalism as priority number one. For too many years it has been bending over backward to be bland and/or conservative, which has hurt both its' own political potency and has been bad for the country by eroding the opposition and alternative to coerporate conservatism.

If the GOP continues it's current flameout, it is likely that a number of moderate Republicans will be driven out of that party by the mix of incompetance, corruption and whcky right-wing and Neo-Con ideology. A lot will also beome estranged from the GOP because they will perceive that it has abandoned true conservative principles.

Any Republicans who decide to cross the street should be welcome. However, that should not mean that the Democratic Party should become even more tame and accomodationist and water down basic liberal and progressive principles to curry favor with them.

[wryter2000]

34. Exactly

they should be welcomed on the basis that they'd have to accomodate the concept of Democratic liberalism, rather than expect Democrats to accomodate conservatives.

I'll happily welcome anyone like this.

[NMDemDist2]

19. agreed. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

20. The problem is the 'absolutists' .... on both sides, actually .....

An absolutist is one who would apply a whole panoply of attributes to someone because of a label.

True enough, the Republicans in power today are just plain evil.

But there are also many who self-identify as 'Republican' who bear little resemblence to the cabal and its camp followers. In many ways, these people are further out in the desert than we are. Abandoned by their own party and rejected by ours.

No one is a pure fit in any stated category. Even Bill Clinton has been vilified from time to time as the 'best Republican president of the last generation' .... or some such.

When we speak in absolute terms and about pure ideology, we are, in my view, no better than the American Taliban/PNAC crowd we so strongly oppose.

[slor]

21. I will be cool with them...

cool with them just sitting out the next few elections, that is. Where has their "moderation" been for the past few years? They are the ones that voted in lockstep, with this administration. The fact that some of us complain about the DLC, clearly shows the range of Democratic Party, so we can certainly welcome them. But they need to get off their stupid causes, and focus on the proper concerns of the country, and when they truly do that, well I say come aboard!. And another thing, I have seen quite a few posts, complaining about some of us showing our disdain for the DLC, that we are too "Liberal" for our own good. Well when was the last time our views were fully represented by the American govt? Have those of us in that camp not been correct about many of the issues facing the country? From the environment, peak oil, outsourcing of jobs, the Iraq war, and a whole range of other issues, our views have been proven correct, and those in opposition to us, have been flat-out wrong. With that record, my belief is to stick with what I am doing.

[Robert Murphy]

25. The Irony is...

...Poll after poll has shown that a majority of the American populace supports liberal views!

People vote Rebuplican without bothering to check as to what they are getting.

Robert

[RagingInMiami]

30. Yes, but then there is that gay marriage issue

Which instantly divides the American populace. And that is the issue the republicans never fail to bring up.

[Robert Murphy]

36. Surely It...

...Can't work forever.

To return to power, the party must regain the white working class vote. While the white working class tends to be conservative on social issues, all studies show that they will vote Democrat if they think their jobs are on the line. The Democrats made a fundamental, idiotic mistake several years ago, by thinking they could snub working class votes and win elections by winning over the yuppie crowd. (Who might slap a "Help the Homeless" sticker on their SUV and identify themselves as Democrats, but usually find an excuse to vote Republican...)

Robert

[RagingInMiami]

41. I have no doubt that most Americans are going to vote democrat in 2006

I'm just not sure if their votes will be accurately recorded.

[mdmc]

44. nah. the dems don't have anything for mod. cons

really. we don't have enough for moderates, let alone conservatives. Let the cons hang with the gop, let them mold the shape of the gop. The dems don't have a big tent, really.

[SteppingRazor]

45. But in poll after poll, the majority of Americans are left of center...

most Americans support well-funded public education, broader health coverage, and even an end to the Iraq War. They may not identify themselves as being liberal or even left of center, but by definition, they are! The problem comes in convincing people that their views are better served by the Democratic Party. There are so many people who call themselves conservatives or moderates who, when polled on specific issues, actually lean to the left.

[mdmc]

49. people are only "conservative" when the bill comes

everyone wants education, health care, sane public policy... but when the bill comes (the tax bill), everyone looks out for number one! Also, everyone is a libertarian, conservative until they need help.

I took the OP as looking to entice true con mods into our party (which I oppose). You are suggesting calling home democrats that the M$M have lulled away.

[Sparkman]

86. Workplace costumes...no boozing, no smoking, no LIBS. Job hypocracy

is just what the RW media uses to further the message that AVERAGE citizens think like conservative Republicans...instead of Liberal Minded, Tolerant Dems. Ever hear your plant manager admit his kid smoked pot and got a drunk driving arrest?! Or that they were promiscuous in high school or college? Its a JOB FACE world, like the Japanese tradition of saving face.

[tulip]

99. Yep!

I consider myself left of moderate but not to far left. Yet every time I take an Internet test.......I'm a liberal. I'm from a red state so maybe I just assume I'm more of a left leaning moderate.

[Sparkman]

112. A moderate becomes a liberal when they loose a soldier-up close & personal

THEN the lies can no longer be IGNORED. The house is in need of spring cleaning.

[Bridget Burke]

46. Disgrunted Moderate Conservatives can surely vote Democratic!

I'll be glad to welcome them.

But I've got some reservations about James Webb. He is against the Iraqi Adventure. But, as of 2004, he couldn't decide between Bush & Kerry. Perhaps he needs to be a Democrat for a year or two before he runs for office as a Democrat. (He's never run for office before.)

Then, there's this:


www.jameswebb.com/index.html

[karynnj]

48. I'm GLAD he got a cool reception

He wants to run for as a Democrat against Allen - likely because he won't win as a Republican.

He endorsered Allen 6 years ago - wlthough Allen is very conservative

and

he chose to smear Kerry in 2004. It would be fine if he didn't endorse Kerry or even if he said he couldn't endorse Kerry, but he chose to right several article that went beyond being fair and into swiftboat realm. The election was close - did he have an impact?

If yes, remember he chose Bolton at the UN, Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court AND BUSH'S WAR POLICIES instead of looking into his heart and forgiving Kerry for actions 30 plus years ago. (Also he might want to read the entire transcript - I have a pro-VN war WWII vet relative who did and came away understanding where Kerry was coming from, and impressed with his intelligence and morality as a young man - and this relative was a moderate Republican.)

[Ino]

56. I'd suspect anyone switching parties now

Is this a true conversion or are his fingers crossed? A life-long Repug suddenly calling himself a Democrat is no more good to us than Lieberman. Would he be switching parties if his own wasn't so reviled and likely to lose? I doubt it. Let him clean up his own nest instead of polluting ours.

[Sparkman]

67. What hasl Watt brought to the table? GET SOME MEDIA AIR-BASH FASCISM 1ST!

[Jai4WKC08]

76. Allen is NOT likely to lose

I wish he were. But he isn't. He has a 51% approval rating, is running in a right-leaning state, and has all the advantages of incumbency, doubly so because the people of VA will not want to derail his presidential ambitions.

So I don't buy your assertion that Webb is only switching parties to take advantage of Allen's vulnerability. It may be true elsewhere--there are some very vulnerable Republican incumbents. But Allen isn't one of 'em. Whichever Democrat wins the VA Senate nomination has a long hard battle ahead of him.

The way I see it, moderate Republicans are beginning to realize that they cannot change their own party, that the wingnut and religious right are far too powerful for any Repub to win national office or power within their party without far-right support. We either welcome them to our party, even go out of our way to attract them, or they will eventually join with centrist and conservative Dems to form a third party in the middle. Almost every day I hear moderates of both parties wishing someone would.

It won't happen this year, maybe not in 2008. But I would not be surprised that if McCain gets the same treatment as 2000, he may very well try to form that third party or run as an independent. He might even win, altho I wouldn't expect it. But if he pulls enough support, the party with the biggest base wins in the electoral college. It won't be us.

[radio4progressives]

61. Moderate Republicans should either Reclaim their Own party or

Form a New Republcian party. It would be a healthy for the party and America - if the Republican Party was actually a Moderatly Conservative Party, instead of a radical extremist fascists party.

But this is not a new issue.

The Democratic Party should be about Liberalism not Conservatism. This same argument came up in the early 80's and that's why we have a co-opted Party now - and why there will continue to be more and more new "third parties", because the "moderate conservatives" have been allowed to become leaders in the Democratic Party already.

That's a huge issue and the reasons should be obvious, imo.

[Sparkman]

66. EXACTLY...Joe Liberman, Dianne Feinstein, are Republicans in Donkey Suits

James Watt needs to go wild, denounce the Repukes unabashedly. Call them Fascists and radical corporate LACKIES! Bash the media pundits and gain some access...BRING SOMETHING TO THE TABLE. Who needs another Judas? When will Ralph Nader, Dennis Kucinich, George Clooney find broad party support for ideas that are YEARS AHEAD OF THEIR TIME?
Fascism in Amerika is rampant, right?

[...of J.Temperance]

71. I hope that you're being sarcastic with your comments?

James Watt needs to go wild, denounce the Repukes unabashedly. Call them Fascists and radical corporate LACKIES! Bash the media pundits and gain some access...BRING SOMETHING TO THE TABLE.

James Webb is running against the Bushbot George Allen, isn't that enough?

If James Webb started ranting and screeching, as you suggest, I think perhaps he'd get 10% of the vote in Virginia. Political candidates have to appear in public not as ranting banshees, but as people who the voters think are fit to hold elected office. I don't think that James Webb would be deemed as fit to hold elected office, if he went about Virginia screeching and ranting and banging pots and pans.

Who needs another Judas? When will Ralph Nader, Dennis Kucinich, George Clooney find broad party support for ideas that are YEARS AHEAD OF THEIR TIME?
Fascism in Amerika is rampant, right?

I like George Clooney, he's very articulate, intelligent and politically aware. I can't say the same for either Ralph Nader nor Dennis Kucinich, who are both in the mainstreams opinion people of the fringe.

Joe Liberman, Dianne Feinstein, are Republicans in Donkey Suits

Well this is just a completely absurd accusation. Check their voting records on social issues and you'll see that Senator Lieberman and Senator Feinstein are darn good DEMOCRATS.

Darn good DEMOCRATS, unlike the people who'd like to scalp them and give Connecticut and California 100% Repuke Senators, be those people Ned Lamont or Cindy Sheehan.

On Edit: Added sentence.

[Bridget Burke]

75. Since when is Nader a Democrat?

Of course, since when is James Webb a Democrat? Did he even vote for Kerry last year?

[...of J.Temperance]

77. Of course Ralph Nader isn't a Democrat

I was responding to Sparkman's comment and he lumped Nader in with Clooney and Kucinich....because heck you know Nader ALWAYS has to be included.

James Webb has been a Democrat since he got disillusioned with the GOP and thought he'd run against George Howdy Doody Allen in Virginia.

Of course, since when has that Green Party fellow been a Democrat, you know the one that's wanting Senator Clinton not to be re-elected? I'm not going to type his name, as I don't believe in giving him any publicity. He's a Green Party member, who then announced that he was a "Democrat" so he could attempt to allow New York to have a Republican Senator, because Senator Clinton, who is actually a proper DEMOCRAT isn't Democratic enough for the Green Party. Oh the irony!

On Edit: Dammit spelling error.

[Sparkman]

83. EVER hear of denouncing the corporate $$ feed'g trough! Trick the Dems

into accepting the ultra conservatives THAT NEVER DENOUNCED A MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL WAR!
We need new-deal Dems with principals that benefit the AVERAGE CITIZEN, not the 6-figure defense industry managers that WAIT UNTIL WARS LIKE VIETNAM DRAGGED ON FOR 10 YEARS. IRAQ is the proof, your either a pro-war profiteer from the start, or a defender of the victims of the U.S. MIC.
You want to accept Republicans in Donkey Suits, go ahead. Don't try to dress Diane F. into a liberal sweat shirt, she's a war hawk, and never saw a WAR CONTRACT SHE DIDN'T LOVE.

[...of J.Temperance]

85. You're entitled to your opinion....I happen to think it's wrong but

I respect your right to hold your opinion.

[Sparkman]

89. Movie suggestion: SUNSHINE from Istvan Szabo. Social cycles in spades.

Just a Q, name some Dems that you consider CONSERVATIVE or Ultra-Conservative.
The trick question is to ask 1) name a conservative Dem 2)any Ultra-Conservative Dems?
This self-evaluation of our biases reveals that we think we are more liberal than we really are.
ALL conservatives think of themselves as FAIR, Tolerant and GOOD for the country. That's where the battle for the minds of America begins. Changing our perceptions BEGINS at pointing out falacies of others, then applying them to ourselves, and it should be the other way around.

[...of J.Temperance]

92. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and John Murtha of Pennsylvania

Both are ultra-Conservative with a capital C. I completely dislike both of them.

[Sparkman]

80. Sure, if you like a military running our economy! Or Patriot ACT Fascism!

[...of J.Temperance]

84. self-deleted

n/t

[Sparkman]

81. Great Dems, like those of that elected Reagan, and Bush 41. Donkey Suits.

[...of J.Temperance]

87. Who would you like to see be the Democratic nominee in 2008? n/t

[Sparkman]

90. IF the candidate turns out to be the Trojan Horse Bush43 was, what's the

point? The goal is to FIRST DO NO HARM. That's an ethics premise, not a political premise.
Whoever gets the nod, He/She will be essential in slowing the Fascist Slide in W.D.C.
The winner will have all of the traditional requirements:
1) Big business funding
2) Party Ties
3) Military Allegiance
4) Republican-like outer garments
5) The "lessor of two evils" personna

[...of J.Temperance]

94. Yes but, who would YOU like to get the Democratic nomination in 2008?

If YOU could chose the Democratic nominee, who would you choose?

[Sparkman]

95. The guy who deserved a fair shake, and was cheated and then abandoned...

[...of J.Temperance]

98. Is that Al Gore? n/t

[radio4progressives]

104. Thom We the People Hartmann for President...

:applause:

Al Gore would be great... naturally.

Feingold would be great too..

[AtomicKitten]

97. I have an idea.

Why don't we purge the whiny lefties who seek to purge others that don't conform to their narrow ideology?

Fair is fair.

There would actually be harmony in the Democratic Party if we enforced the 'big tent' notion and did not allow others to discriminate against other Democrats because of their beliefs.

It's about time people take a stand for the Democratic Party as a whole and stop taking in stride these incessant calls from the far left to purge all that don't conform to their narrow beliefs. We should seek to grow the party, not confine, restrict, and narrow it.

The world is a hell of a lot bigger than they are capable of grasping and good ideas for success don't come exclusively from one camp.

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

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

[AtomicKitten]

117. Why, that's screaming hypocrisy

When you incessantly call to purge the DLC, that's perfectly fine and reasonable in your book.
But when others suggest purging the far left (tit for tat), that's a Republican notion.

A rationalization a day keeps the truth away.

[Name removed]

118. Deleted message

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

[kenny blankenship]

79. They're quite welcome to join, but not to make us Republicans

Let's be honest: they're disgruntled because their Golden Boy Emperor is discredited. But his failure is their failure. Bush is discredited because he is disastrously wrong--but he simply did what they've ALWAYS spoken of doing. Bush seized the moment of GOP hegemony and put ALL their bad ideas into action at once; and since the ideas were CRAP, and had always been crap, and in their crappiness the GOP's ideas always contained a multitude of fatal contradictions, everything the Emperor touched turned to shit. Now that the failure of everything the Republicans have "stood for" since Reagan tried to take the GOP away from Ford in 1976 is finally exposed for the whole world to witness in horror and loathing, and naturally there are a few "disgruntled" Bush voters who are looking for a new home.

They can come in AFTER they wipe their feet.

[Gregorian]

88. If you were pregnant, you might not want just anybody joining.

I say that a grown man trying to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her own body, doesn't belong in our party.

However, I am most open and happy about the idea that converts who believe in our core values be wholeheartedly accepted.

But since I'm a man, I would have to defer my vote to the women of the party for their decision on the matter.

[TygrBright]

93. Well, because the GOPpies are gonna need their moderates...

...to mop up the dried puke, empty the ashtrays, and throw out the pizza cartons when the party's over, and try and get their house into some kind of shape before the 'rents come home, as it were.

America needs the Republican Party of Teddy Roosevelt, of Dwight Eisenhower, of many other thoughtful conservatives.

The fact that the Party was hijacked by the equivalent of a far-right biker gang, and the adults locked down the basement while the gang trashed the joint in a frenzied orgy of excess, doesn't change the essential value of REAL conservatism in our political/social system.

If all the moderates run for cover in the Democratic Party, that creates two undesirable results:

1. The Democratic Party becomes less liberal (and God knows, it's already tilted far enough off the leftward track); and

2. The Republican Party is left to the extremist nutjobs, and devolves into even worse chaos and fascism.

While #2 may be fun to watch, for a while, it really contributes to the inability of America as a whole to recover and reconsitute democracy on the domestic front.

I wish moderate Republicans well, and they have my wholehearted encouragement to reclaim their own party from the claws of the neocon vampires who have been running it into the ground. THEIR Party. Not ours. We have enough trouble dealing with those who would turn us into Repub-lites as it is.

adamantly,
Bright

[klook]

96. Agree. So should Liberals, Progressives, Greens, and other voters.

And that can be a tall order, finding commonality among the various threads that make up the Democratic Party fabric.

I think one of the Dems' major goals for the next few years should be to woo NON-VOTERS to the party. I've met a lot of disaffected potential Democratic voters in recent months, citizens so fed up that, as much as they despise the Republicans, can't bring themselves to vote for Democrats they perceive as "Republican Lite."

Maybe the Dems will never become Left enough for some of these people, but if they can be motivated to vote, most of them will vote Democratic. This group wants to see real change, real vision, not just lip service. Democrats who can give that to them will win their votes. But Democrats who assume they've got these votes in the bag--because, as Bulworth said, "what're you gonna do, vote Republican?"--will inspire them to stay home or vote Green.

The perennial question is, where are the greatest gains to be made? Do the Dems stand to gain more by courting moderate conservatives, or progressives and liberals?

[Sparkman]

107. What the Dems can do for us on the left, is to combat Fascists.

[sendero]

111. It really depends...

... on their hearts and stances on the issues. Not every Republican that wants to run as a Dem should be welcomed. Some are merely there to co-opt us, to take advantage of us, etc.

Probably not many, but some.

[Hidden Stillness]

114. Another "D"LC Attack on the Democratic Party

I don't know what the purpose of this thread is, other than to launch yet another anti-Democratic thread from "D"LC, Inc., again, about how "intolerant" all the Democrats are, because we are not Republicans, or something. I am sick of reading these coordinated "D"LC staff attacks on Democrats (please attack Republicans once--please?), for things that do not even exist. There are conservative Democrats, and Democrats with all ranges of opinion on the issues, unlike "your Republican friends." We have people like Sen. Robert Byrd, highly respected, who will then vote on something that makes you want to tear your hair out, and then stand up against Bush, Cheney and the rest of them and be brave and brilliant again. Get off this pre-scripted routine where you claim we are all "intolerant" against everyone--conservatives, "centrists," whatever that means, Republicans--and try to get along with the moderately liberal, anti-corporate majority.

There is a huge difference between a moderate or conservative, which we all try to get along with every day because you have to or even sometimes agree--I, for example, like stricter laws against crime--and, on the other hand, the corporate lobbyists of "D"LC, Inc., who are anti-government extremists, who only advance the interests of their sponsors at the expense of the country and society, and who have poisoned the public discourse on issues by slandering and demonizing liberals and Democrats as much as their Republican friends do. Long-time, common sense, middle class positions on the issues, such as that we need to help the poor with programs and regulate business or they will exploit us all, have been transformed by the Republican/"D"LC propaganda machine, to an "extreme liberal, unreal, whiny" blah blah, complete recasting. The slander Republicans attack non-corporate Good Government-type thinking with, is exactly the same as yours.

The claim that only the "D"LC is popular, and everybody hates us--although charming on your part--is also false, especially after Clinton lost the Congress by not addressing middle class people's concerns until their reliable votes dropped off, and recalling also that the Al Gore who dumped the corporate "D"LC spiel won the 2000 election. Quick Quiz: After Kerry and Bush, who got the most votes during the 2004 election? Answer: Sen. Barbara Boxer of California. Note also that Sen. Ted Kennedy is still so popular that next time, there will not even be an opponent; nobody is even going to try to face the unbeatable Kennedy. Quit pretending we are not the American people.

Last December, there was a thread called "DLC and Diminishing Returns." This was what I posted there:

7. They Destroyed Party Structure, and Left Us in Shambles
The "D"LC started to unravel and destroy the Democratic Party as soon as they infiltrated it, and to sow the seeds of future defeat, because as soon as they got there, they dismantled the structure of State Party organizations, cutting staff, not addressing the concerns of different parts of the country, not contacting State and local officials of the Party, not financing their campaigns, etc., etc. Instead, they just poured all attention into the personality campaign of Bill Clinton, basically, running away from everything that Democrats had ever stood for, and turning all of it to a totally isolated Clinton personality campaign. Their tactics have spelled losing campaigns ever since, as they still do not refer to issues, fund local races and candidates, and fight back against Republican attacks. Get rid of them, and be Democrats again.

Also, they are not "moderates," of course. They are corporate lobbyists. There is nothing moderate about them.

It still applies. Also, notice the exchange on this thread where they slander Democrats who help the poor. They repeat an unverified story viciously attacking Lyndon Johnson (originally from this Hunter Thompson junkie, who was of course, not there), then one asks if the story is even true. The answer? I don't know, but it makes a great attack, doesn't it? Then they tell you never to go against Bush. They are not moderates or conservatives, the "D"LC; they are extremists.

[Doctor_J]

115. Agree to a point, but anyone who voted for * in 2004

is really, really in bad shape, reality-wise. If they believed in November 2004 that we were headed in the right direction, they're probably not coming over.

[JNelson6563]

121. Welcome, yes.

But we do not need to become Rethug-lite so they feel at home. They are making a change by breaking with the party fo neo-cons and joining us. It is up to us to remain different than what they left.

Julie