There's no such thing as "the DLC line" that a DLCer votes

My exchange in the Harold Ford Thread prompted this, because many of the "pure" democrats can't seem to get there heads around what the DLC is.

The DLC is a think tank and it's ideologically DIVERSE members don't vote or govern according to what the powerless chairman tells them to.

They range from people who get scores of 50 out of a 100 from both lib and conservative groups like Nelson of Nebraska to people who get 5's from conservative groups and 95's from lib groups like Kerry.

The DLC isn't a powerbroker and it never has been. It's a think tank that also has a PR conceptual component to it that certainly is founded on appealing to the independant middle as while as bussiness, and as an entity is to the right of the progressive caucus. But the progressive caucus only consists of one quarter of house dems, and no senators to my knowledge. So everyone who isn't part of it, as while as many if not most DLC members don't automatically deserve scorn because of their exclusion from the progressive caucus, or inclusion of the DLC

.

But it is just a handy term to throw around for a conservative Democrat. It is misused in that way, but so are a lot of terms these days.

From the NDOL homepage...

"... the DLC seeks to define and galvanize popular support for a new public philosophy built on progressive ideals, mainstream values, and innovative, non bureaucratic, market-based solutions."

Considering most of this sentence only God knows what they mean by progressive...but then some of them have trouble defining "is."

By mainsteam they mean populist...the underlying political philosophy is one of mere pragamatic vote getting based on the evaluation of popular sentiment. One can only wonder how you get leadership from a group whose positions are tied to shifting popular opinion about current events. This approach has neither stars nor compass to steer by.

It is certainly innovative for a democratic movement to adopt republican talking points--reducing government and promoting laissez-faire solutions to social problems.

The founders of the DLC are well educated, leaving one to wonder why the DLC/New Democrats adopt the meme "Third Way" when it has a history of association with Falangist movements (falangism is the name of the movement given to Franco's Fascism)?

With our recent experience with the Neoconservative practice of hiding their most scary ideas in public, we can only wonder if the adoption of labels from discredited foreign movements betrays other scary suggestions for the post-industrial, post nation state corporation led globalized world.

just curious

but your post isn't directed at my comments...GD has moved the primary pitching to its own forum. We hope to return to ideas here.

The DLC is just promoting Republican business philosophy and trying to turn the Democratic party into that by throwing a lot of money around. Great idea, get both parties to be controlled by big business so there's no one to vote for.

I consider myself to be a worker, just a plain worker of the world, rather than an American with an ideological bent. As things like the Iraq war (or Kyoto) demonstrate to me, the US is not in tune with the rest of the world. So being part of some party that can be 51% of the American electorate is not important to me. If the Democrats move too far right, I will just vote Green. In fact, with the shenanigans revolving around the San Francisco election, which I find revolting, I am much more likely to vote Green next year.

I think that's about as simplistic and exageratory as the the right calling the EPA the gestapo of government