Has the DLC gained or lost influence in the waning of GOP power?

[jpgray]

[OzarkDem]

1. Their power is derived from the corporate money spigot they control

Their power waxes and wanes depending on how much money the corporations are providing and the willingness of Dems to sell their soul for it.

Their legislative agenda is derived from those of their corporate sponsors, they are merely the handmaiden's, the water carriers for their corporate leaders.

Those Dems who wish to exchange their votes and loyalty to their constituents for this money are the ones controlled and if they choose to says a lot about their character and the cheap price they put on letting someone control their vote.

[DJ13]

2. Unfortunately they've gained influence

Why unfortunately?

The DLC is the conservative wing of the Democrat Party.

As the neocon's influence has diminished, the lobby money (and influence) of corporations has migrated over to the DLC in an effort to try and contain the liberal side of the Democrat Party from gaining power.

[Me.]

5. I Consider It The Republican Wing Of The Dem Party

Ever trying to move us right, especially with DLC bigmouths like Carville, Emmanuel and Ford who have tried to topple Dean and his 50 state strategy.

[Dogmudgeon]

3. The DLC never had a whole lot

I wonder why so many DUers wail and gnash their teeth over them.

The DLC is a social club that's about 15 years out of fashion at this point. Time to give Al From a gold-plated watch and move on.

--p!

[peacetalksforall]

7. I don't believe it. I believe they have been in total control. They have

been the only ones who corporate war networks invite on their shows (until recently with they ahve had a few alternative radio guests) - they are milquetoast in their absence of defense or promotion of the needs of Democrats. They are Republican lite to medium to h e a v y. There is no difference in relationships between the predatory lobbyists Republican Party and predatory lobbysists-DLC and DLC sponsored favorites. The DLC is WAR FRIENDLY. They have not raised their voices about vote theft or torture and invasion/nation building and plundering/pillage atrocities. They are afraid to go against Republicans. My opinion. I hold to it.

[Dogmudgeon]

8. I hear you ...

My own opinion isn't that the DLC is a wonderful thing, but that politicians are a fickle breed that follow what they think are dominant trends. The "DLC Controls Washington" narrative works well with this fickleness, but I've always thought that jelly-spine explained a lot more. After all, Bill Clinton and Al Gore were the DLC's stars, and they usually did what they wanted to.

No matter what social clique is dominant, our goal should be that the only clique that matters is the voters. And I really do think we are making progress in that.

--p!

[peacetalksforall]

10. Good points. It took me 15 years to acquire my opinions of the DLC. I started

to become anti and vocal in the last seven years. In all that time I don't remember anyone saying I was wrong and making a case against my opinion. Never. They probably don't bother with places like DU - they have a lot on their personal agendas to take care of. My frustration focuses on them not doing anything for us. Their agenda seems more Republican. The word Centrist makes my blood pressure rise. I associate Centrist with Clintons, McAuliffe, Rahm and the rest and they are linked to the not-so-peace loving corporations.

You are right tha the only clique that matters is the voters. I hope they wake up and notice.

[davidwparker]

4. Other: They have lost influence due to the outpouring of youth and first

time voters for Obama. All bets are off now.

[OHdem10]

6. You still have to be DLC or run as DLC in Presidential Races

That is power.

[jpgray]

9. DLC in terms of membership and direct From support? Or in terms of a "centrist" platform?

Let's define what we mean by DLC here. Because the candidate with the most direct ties to the actual group would probably be Clinton, whereas both she and Obama have platforms that aren't overly combative with DLC views. They aren't exactly parroting the DLC line exactly either, however, are they?

[B Calm]

11. Good question for Lieberman...

[Alexander]

12. Thankfully they have lost influence.

Unfortunately a lot of their disgruntled supporters choose to post anti-Obama screeds here.

[jpgray]

13. Obama and Clinton to me represent rhetoric and policies the DLC won't find too abhorrent

In other words they can get along with either, though Clinton has more direct ties to the org. Edwards voted in a way they would appreciate while in the Senate, whereas his rhetoric now is anathema to them. Kucinich and Dodd were never candidates they could support in terms of both rhetoric -and- voting history. That's how I see the field in terms of DLC accommodation.