The fact remains that even if there are far more Democratic "progressives" than there are conservatives, the conservatives still have the advantage in being promoted as the pivotable "swing vote" in Congress; especially considering that the congressional Republicans are much more united in matters of economic and social policy than the Dems are. In addition, the present financial situation also favors more the more conservative Dem candidates due to the decreasing clout of unions (thanks partly to the GOP/Bush blitzkrieg against union organization done with tacit DLC support), the front-loading of the primaries toward the more conservative states (especially the Southern primaries), and the loss of some soft-money campaigning (due to the current campaign finance law). And any increase in the profile of the "favorite son" candidates will simply bring out the charges within the predominantly conservative media of "pandering to the old 'losing' Democratic strategy", never mind
t he wrath of the white "swing voters" whom have mostly accepted FBOW Dubya's mindset of throwing tax cuts, missiles, and Bibles at our problems.
I might have been wrong about grouping Kerry with the DLC; but since we know next to nothing about his policy positions (outside of his war record), it's premature in my view to place him on the spectrum. John Edwards may differ from some New Dem positions on trade (being a former trial lawyer), but his foreign policy positions on the Middle East is pure DLC; 100% pro-Israel; generally pro-military spending, pro-subsidy for high tech. The fact remains that the predominant money and party machinery remains strongly in the hands of the DLC/Blue Dog coalition; and they will use it to ultimately control the Democratic nomination. My guess is that it is still Lieberman's nomination to lose. (Remember also that none other than Al Gore came out for single-payer health care, and look what happened to him with the Dem moneybags.)
BTW, I have something to say about Mr. Rangel's newest idea of restarting a military draft as a means of opposing war in Iraq (which I tend to believe to be the most stupid and sheer sophistic nonsense I have ever seen)....but I will hold my tongue for now.
Anthony
--
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 10:49:38
Nathan Newman wrote:
>Um-- how about John Lewis in Georgia? Or Jesse Jackson Jr. in Illinois? Or
>Major Owens or Charlie Rangel in New York? Or Maxine Waters in California?
>
>Again we have the silliness of picking out the handful of the most
>conservative folks out of 250 elected Dems in Congress and acting like
>you've described the whole party.
>
>I actually don't dislike Sharpton, but I see him having the same problem as
>Jackson's run, but more so, in that his run will be all about him, not about
>building a real mass movement. And favorite son Congressional black caucus
>members are far more representative of the black (and many non-black
>progressives) than Sharpton, so I'm all for Brazile mounting her campaign if
>she can pull it off. It would actually be a far more interesting challenge
>and have more effect than Reverend Al picking off the 5-10% of the primary
>vote he might get.
>
>BTW how do you develop the thesis that Kerry or Edwards are DLC-backed?
>Edwards especially has voted against the DLC on trade issues repeatedly.
>
>-- Nathan
_____________________________________________________________ Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus&ref=lmtplus