Why do Senate Dems elect milquetoast leaders like Daschle and Reid?

[WI_DEM]

instead of somebody with a little authority and is able to knock some heads together and actually lead? Say what you will about Lyndon Johnson as president but as Senate Majority Leader he was truly the "master of the Senate" and induced party discipline. We need somebody like that leading the senate democrats.

[mikelgb]

1. don't want to offend the Repubs too much

[BobRossi]

2. DLC

Money talks.

[justinrr1]

3. been wondering the same thing

When you hear Harry Reid speak he looks and sounds like anything but a strong leader.

[wyldwolf]

4. who would you suggest?

[WI_DEM]

6. Barbara Boxer, perhaps, or even Jim Webb

Webb at least had balls to go fact to face with Bush and tell him off. We need somebody strong. Who would you suggest?

[wyldwolf]

8. I think each of those, in a Republican majority, would act the same as Reid...

.. they might make more noise, make the people on DU hoot and holler, but in the end they'd vote the same way.

Just my opinion.

[WI_DEM]

11. who would you suggest?

[wyldwolf]

13. No one. I'm not complaining.

[WI_DEM]

14. fair enough.

[ProSense]

12. The Majority Leader is an administrative position,

floor manager. The person cannot be a committee chair. The majority leader's function is to ensure that both parties, to some extent, are being treated fairly. Democrats are not Republicans, who tend to march in lockstep.

It's not a job everyone wants or is suited for.

[karynnj]

22. I don't get the infatuation with aggressive moves coupled with voting to the right on many issues

There have been a large number of vote threads where after blasting everyone else voting the wrong way - Webb does too - this is followed by shock - Webb ???? or other remarks that make it seem that the poster is stunned. Yet this happens often. The fact is that we need a leader who can push people to take the risks that have a reasonable chance of winning or, if important, putting the bulk of the party on record as a "NO" when it is impossible to win. But, the person also needs to have the ability to make the cases needed for moderate Republicans to get them over on our side.

There are also many people who would not want the task - for many senior Senators chairing an important committee that oversees an area they care about and have the possibility to mold legislation for is a better position. Some of the most outspoken people, loved here, know that they would have to sacrifice the ability to stand alone - and for some, Feingold and Boxer come to mind, this trade off would not be something they want.

Don't forget this is the Democratic caucus - and it involves herding people who do not want to be herded. If Reid were to step down, someone like Durbin might be the choice.

[LittleClarkie]

5. So you want the Dems marching in lockstep.

Yeah, that'll work.

Fascists are okay as long at they are OUR fascists.

[WI_DEM]

10. it's easy for you to say I want a fascist senate

this being a message board on the internet you have to expect stupid broad based attacks like that. No, I want a senate leader who is somebody who can get things done.

[LittleClarkie]

19. We're not very good at being in the majority, are we. We expect everything to get hammered through

right way. We eat our own then. Harry was just spiffy when we were in the minority.

And it's easy to make all SORTS of pronouncements on the internet. Like that our Majority Leader is a spineless wimp who never, ever got anything done.

[blindpig]

7. They are acceptable to the ruling class. n/t

[Jennicut]

9. Because Dems never want to be told what to do while Rethugs like being led around by the nose

[WI_DEM]

15. In your opinion, has Reid been an effective majority leader?

[Jennicut]

17. No. Not at all. He has been terrible. I just think Dems don't like to be led.

The Dem party never marches in lockstep like the Rethugs and I think Reid and Pelosi were purposely chosen because they are weak. Obama is the real leader of the Dem party anyways.

[Occam Bandage]

16. Because head-knockers like DeLay and Frist really worked well for the Republicans, right?

I mean, they were able to stay in power for almost six years before utterly destroying their party's public image! Wow! We should totally do that!

[WI_DEM]

18. We could use a bit of party discipline--and leadership especially during the Bush years.

Reid and Pelosi, in my opinion, didn't provide it. There are ways to provide it without going to extremes as the GOP leaders do. But if you're happy with the way the Democratic leadership operated under Bush that's fine with me.

[Occam Bandage]

20. What does "under Bush" have to do with anything? The incoming Congress

is the ruling party, not the opposition. The Democrats acted like a responsible majority party in the Bush years, and so the Republicans walked all over them. The Republicans acted like a loud, angry opposition party during the Bush years, and so they got thrown out on their asses and back into the opposition.

Reid and Pelosi aren't inspiring by any means--and the Democrats certainly should have had leaders who were capable of doing that during the Bush years--but their current job is not to inspire. Their job is to pull together votes to defeat roadblocks and support the agenda that President Obama will lay out. Reid and Pelosi are decently good at that, despite their utter lack of vision.

[karynnj]

23. i'm not sure we would have liked more party discipline

The party leadership did try to keep the Democrats in line - but their line was often not our line.

It was usually AGAINST what we wanted done. The leadership did make it uncomfortable for Feingold to push a censure movement or Kerry to push Kerry/Feingold or an Alito filibuster. Consider that the Democratic leadership vilified Kerry over those two actions - treating him worse in that time frame than they did Joe Lieberman. I like that they failed to ever get him to stop doing what he (or Feingold) thought right.

[OHdem10]

21. They do not want leaders--each member wants to do things his

own way.

A leader would from time to time hold them accountable to vote
for the good of the party. This is why Reid always comes up
short in getting legislation passed.