Why has the Democratic party gone so limp all of a sudden?

[Traum]

My parents are Democrats because in a pretty much two-party system they have no other choice, or at least believe such.

The Democrats have been moving right since the Clinton presidency, as evidenced by the cuts in Welfare and the fact that "minority-friendly" Clinton still passed less civil rights laws while in office than did notorious Republican president Richard Nixon (marinate on that).

Joe Lieberman can only be expected to do far worst, as he has rolled over for any and every major blow to democracy as we know it (most of us don't under the Bush Administration--from the war abroad to the war at home. True, the Democrats co-opted much of the struggles of the 20's (New Deal) and the 60's (Civil Rights) from popular, non-capitalist movements in labor and grassroots organizations, but now they're not even able to do that. It's all about offices and nothing about the people.

A lot of folks need to pick up The People's History and Economics in the Madhouse and decide whether they want to actually help people or just talk BS.

[spyderman77]

simple fact is clinton was an appeaser not someone who strived to greatly affect in a good way or bad way what happened in our way of life. Economical he was GREAT, but politically he just appeased people. its the Dollar Diplomacy all over again.

www.outwar.com/page.php?x=537516

[Roads]

Traum makes some good points. The Democrats are going through a real identity crisis. In their efforts to be "centrist" and mainstream they moved so far over to right, it is difficult to distinguish then from the Republicans. It is hard to be the party of the common people and call for social equity when the Democrats take big contributions from the big corporate interests.
As of now, progressive reform has been replaced with the Democratic Leadership Council's ideas of cooperation
with corporate power.
Clinton was the master of political fundraising. He would take contributions from all directions. And he had a poll driven Presidency. He followed the polls instead of bringing public opinion to his positions.
But take a look @ Howard Dean. His campaign is interesting so far. He calls it the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party. He calls for the party to reassert its progressive tradition. So many of us are disappointed at the direction of the party going over to big money. I hope it is not to late for it to get back its soul.

[reasons]

The Democratic party cannot be "progressive" and win election.
Is simple - surburban voters call the shots. Between NIMYism and "F*** you, I go mine, now screw you; progressive politics are dead. Instead of Roosevelt, money goes to monster SUVs and McMansions.

[Roads]

Reasons takes his point about suburban alientation muc to far. In fact much of the progressive movement's energy comes from the suburbs. This is especially true on the environment. On the East End where I live, environmental preservation is the dominant
political issue. Affordable housing is another isuue that gets support especially with young families.
Suburban soccer Moms form the heart of the pro-choice
movement. In general, Women are much more supportive of goverment action because they are more
economically vulnerable(eg. divorced with children and no child support.)
Suburban voters are often politically liberal and economically conservative. They do not mind spending to improve quality of life but want know that their tax dollars are not bieng wasted. Clinton and John McCain(on the Republican side) used this fomula in their election efforts.