Sunday, December 21, 2003
Bill & the DLC
By his pounding away at the DLC message, Sen. Joe Lieberman—unwittingly, I'm sure—brings up an intriguing issue:0 comments
Which is the chicken and which is the egg in the relationship between President Bill Clinton and the Democratic Leadership Council?
Just what caused the successes of the Clinton administration?
Was it:
a.) People just wanted a Democratic president;
b.) The soaring, powerful personal charisma of Bill Clinton;
c.) The moderately conservative policies of the Democratic Leaders Conference;
d.) Some combination of b. & c.;
e.) Just the right time and place for all the factors above to combine and succeed—a phenomenon of this particular set of unrepeatable circumstances?
Is the centrist Dem view of "Republican Lite" appealing to the American people on its own merits, without Clinton's sizable charm, extreme hands-on wonkiness and personal empathy behind it?
Is it a successful philisophy all by itself, which any other Democrat can easily run on and expect to win with?
Aren't DLC Dems what used to be referred to as "Moderate Republicans"? Is that where the country is, politically? Or, is that where the country was, politically?
Just how utterly has the philosophical self-image of the country evolved during three years of a Bush administration?
And considering his personal popularity, could Bill Clinton have been as successful had he stayed further to the left? Was his ability to connect viscerally with the public strong enough to support a more traditional Democratic view and philosophy?
I have a strong hunch that centrist Dems will find to their dismay that large chunks of the national Democratic party were fairly unsatisfied with much of what Clinton did during his two terms, while giving its support and allegiance to him personally.
The party's base was tossed over as being passe. The new love was the great expanse of the Middle, as Clinton and the DLC slowly slid the country to the right.
In 2000, it wasn't all that much of a stretch—it seemed at the time—for folks in the Middle to merely slide over to the next handsome, charming guy with a sweet, goofy smile and moderately conservative views in George W. Bush. Besides, Al Gore seemed a stick compared to either Clinton or Bush, so, since times were good, people just stayed with the charm they were used to.
But the world is utterly different now. We have learned that George Bush was a Trojan Horse, and that America finds itself in a fight for its very soul.
Engaging that fight, the core liberal base of the Democratic party is now awake, angry, motivated and, most importantly, financed.
It is lashing out at DLC positions and proponents—positioning the DLC as mere coatholders and toadies for the administration. Recent votes on an array of bills in the Congress seem to give this argument credence and emotional fuel.
The centrist Dems may follow Clinton's lead, but without Clinton's massive presence at its core, do they do so at their peril? Is it as moribund a world view as liberalism seemed in 2000?
Can the DLC go it alone? We'll see. It may be they who are passe.
posted by Gotham 2:51 PM
0 Comments:
