Reply #26: I don't know whether Gephardt left the organization

[CTLawGuy]

but I do know he followed the cautious party strategy, how else do you explain the House Dems' caving to the Bush agenda.

Dean was a member, but the DLC made it obvious what they thought of him.

They also remained notably silent on the candidacy of the supposedly liberal Gephardt. This implied they had no objection to him, which in turn implies that he at least partially, agrees with their views and strategy. They called Dean "unelectable", they didn't call Gephardt that.

How do you explain the DLC's acceptance of Gephardt if he is estranged from them strategically?


Also, my point in this is not to bash Dems. Its obvious I favor the strong party strategy because I'm a Dean supporter. However, I don't believe the DLC or Gephardt/Daschle had any bad intentions. I don't believe many Dems who voted for IWR, including Kerry, really wanted the war, but I think they were just too concerned about being "electable" in the minds of the DLC. Others, like Lieberman, really wanted the war.

Essentially, the DLC is misguided about strategy, they have good intentions though. They don't want repugs in power.