Reply #7: And the DLC supports Israel because....

[Nicholas_J]

THe majority of the people who elect each member of the DLC supprt Israel. Pure and simple.


You dont like the DLC, well then elect ANTI-ISRAEL candidates to office. They then become members of the DLC. Thats how the DLC works. Its membership is comprised of elected officials.

That is unfortuantely how a democracy works. The people elect candidates based on their platforms. An Anti-Israel Platform is the surest way to not be elected, or get unelected as one can find, short of a candidate who openly promises to end social security, medicare, and raise middle class taxes by fifty percent while giving CEO's a tax holiday. Openly. They are going to do it anyway, but you even hear Bush openly shy away from cutting Medicare and Social Security, evne though Democrts know thats what he has in mind.

I am tottally sure that one of the reasons that Bush remaines so securely in Power is that the Republicans know how far to go when attacking policy. They attack a particular policyy decision BUT NEVER atack the party or its leadership. That is one note that Democrats cannot get voters who lean in its direction to "Get".

Such actions will keep Republicans in power for as long as they wish to retain it.

An example is unfortunately Deans Vermont. Dean maintained his own personal power by attacking and alienating the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, while currying favor with conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans. But this resulted in the creation of a new party in Vermont in reaction to Deans conservatism, the Vermont Progressive Party, and created the Republican Party as a Minority Party that holds a plurality, but not a majority of the vote. Personal desire for power led Dean to destroy his own party in Vermoont, but kept him in officw for as long as he wanted it, because of the natuire of conservatism in Vermont. Most Vermonters Republicans are rather moderate REpublicans. Unfortunately the Republicans who were running against Dean most of the time were either weak candidates, or ne0-cons like Ruth Dwyer. THough the Dmeocrats werre the larger Party, Deans own personla conservatism split the Dems and he was able to pick up the requisite numbers of moderate Democrats as he needed.

When He ran for President, he simply reverted , attempting to run as a Liberal, attacking the democratic party moderates, His record was too unlike his campaign, which resulted in Dick Gephardts beinbg able to tear Dean;s record apart openly. But the damage to Democratic Party cohesion had been done. And most of Bush's anti Kerry rhetoric was taken directly from Deans attacks on the Democratic Party and its candidates, most particularly the DLC. WHich while Governor, Dean hin\mself was a leading force in shaping. Dean leap frogged over a number of governors with more seniority and was given the leadership of the Democratic Governors Association, because he represented the "New Democrat" that the DLC wanted to see shaping the Democratic Party.

Like 1972, a candidate ran on attacking the Democratic Party leadership and platform, and this led to Richard Nixon winning a second term. While such tactics can work for an individual who is working out their opwn personal ambitions, it is bad strategy for the future of party control. The key to keeping one party winning is to keep the party itself in mind. When running for the nomination, attack those you are running against all you want. Never attack the group or any of its ledership organizations. This is a recipe for disaster. And it happened this time just as it did in the 70's