How can the DLC-wing of Democratic Party, including Rahm Emanuel, continue to claim to know what’s best for the Democratic Party after they’ve been so badly schooled? By other Democrats (italics mine):
It isn’t just Ford who wanted to take us down a different path–it is the entire neoliberal, neocon, triangulate from a point of weakness, liberal-hating, Michael Bloomberg and Joe Lieberman loving, DLC-nexus of Democratic Party aristocracy that wanted Dean out. For example, I think it is pretty clear, at this point, that one of the “top Democrats” who was opposed to Howard Dean continuing on as DNC chair was Rahm Emanuel himself. Many of the post-elections stories about Emanuel reported that he was in close consultation with James Carville in the final weeks of the 2006 election, and it is hard for me to imagine that Carville would be leading such a campaign without Rahm’s knowledge and support. Further, during the supplemental fight, Emanuel consistently proved himself to be the ultimate, backstabbing, anonymous leaker to the press, and anti-Dean stories are always filled with high ranking, but anonymous Democrats. Emanuel must have been behind the old anti-Dean stories somehow. An anecdote to back this up: during the supplemental fight, some Democrats close to the leadership were convinced that Emanuel was behind many of the anonymous leaks that led to the downfall of Murtha’s plan in the press. In order to verify this, they intentionally leaked Rahm–and only Rahm–some false numbers about the new plan, in order to see if those numbers showed up in the press. When, the very next day, those false numbers did indeed show up in the press, Emanuel was immediately smacked down and demoted in his role on the supplemental. I would be very surprised if Rahm and his allies weren’t most of those “top Democrats” giving negative, anonymous quotes about Dean to the media establishment.
I’m sure it is just a coincidence that now Emanuel isn’t at the DCCC, we aren’t seeing those anti-Dean stories anymore, and that once his role in the supplemental fight was reduced, we actually managed to pass a bill with a deadline.
If the DLC had won in the mid 90s and early 2000, then they would be worth listening to, but they are perpetual losers who weakened the party tremendously. Democratic voters are the party, and we are not Emanuel’s serfs.
When people (used to, blessedly) say that “Democrats and Republicans are exactly the same!”, they’re clearly thinking of twits like Emmanuel. We can’t repudiate and marginalise these multiple-time losers enough, if you ask me. They tried their schtick, and people went along because they believed they had to compromise on principle to win elections. But the DLC’s strategy doesn’t win elections, so what’s the point? Why compromise for nothing?
Sorry, they had their chance, but it’s over now.
marginalise these multiple-time losers enough, if you ask me. They tried their schtick, and people went along because they believed they had to compromise on principle to win elections