> The mainstream of the DP isn't in any sense "liberal"; as Clinton himself
> put it, they're Eisenhower Republicans now.
==========================
In what sense? The few mainstream Dems I know in the US still strongly
support the aims of the various social movements and would rather see
improvements rather reductions to social programs. Of course, they'd also
applaud Eisenhower's famous warning about the military-industrial complex
and whatever expansion of social programs took place under the Republicans
in the booming 50's. They'd certainly be aware of how right-wing the Bush
Republicans appear to be in contrast. But I don't think the mainstream of
the DP would, even today, identify itself with a party which also included
Dulles, McCarthy, Nixon, and Taft. That still makes them "liberal", IMO -
and, apart for the hyper-patriotism which infects the population of any
imperialist power - not too different in terms of their political values and
goals from the NDP'ers I know up here in Canada. Supporters of Harper's
Conservatives and those on the right of the Liberal party, OTOH, do resemble
the old "moderate" Eisenhower Republicans.