Faced with the growing irrelevance of the DLC, it's chairman Harold Ford, Jr. wants to reassure us that the DLC is anything but irrelevant. How counterintuitive!
Comments
The DLC needs to exist as the kennel of the Democratic Blue Dogs (see my comment to your post "Against Impeachment" for the impact of the BDs on key legislation), since they have no apparent policy/ideology/philosophic homes.
There is some irony (or dissonance) in the DLC whineing about how important they are for success when the contenders for flag bearer of the party ignore them in their campaigns. The DLC repeatedly saying 'we're important' is the tell.
While there seems to be little doubt that the election-to-election swings of 'independents' determine outcomes, it is very unclear that the DLC actually speaks for any substantial part of the independent electorate. But they do speak, apparently, for the Blue Dogs in Congress. My sense is that independents and DLCers are not congruent entitites, but evidence of that is mixed, at best.
The DLC needs to exist as the kennel of the Democratic Blue Dogs (see my comment to your post "Against Impeachment" for the impact of the BDs on key legislation), since they have no apparent policy/ideology/philosophic homes.
There is some irony (or dissonance) in the DLC whineing about how important they are for success when the contenders for flag bearer of the party ignore them in their campaigns. The DLC repeatedly saying 'we're important' is the tell.
While there seems to be little doubt that the election-to-election swings of 'independents' determine outcomes, it is very unclear that the DLC actually speaks for any substantial part of the independent electorate. But they do speak, apparently, for the Blue Dogs in Congress. My sense is that independents and DLCers are not congruent entitites, but evidence of that is mixed, at best.
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | August 07, 2007 at 10:26 AM
DLC = Joe Lieberman
'Nuf said.
Posted by: jm | August 07, 2007 at 01:50 PM