Rallying behind their hero Senator Lieberman, the DLC today attacked "liberal fundamentalism" represented by DailyKos and Moveon.org.

One of the major reasons for the DLC's founding in 1985 was to resist what we called "liberal fundamentalism," a conformist tendency to stifle dissent among Democrats and require adherence to litmus tests devised by interest groups and ideological advocates. The Democratic Party today is far more unified in its basic values and policy positions than it was two decades ago, and also urgently needs to expand its electoral and geographical base. There's less of an excuse than ever to indulge in liberal fundamentalism, litmus tests, intimidation of dissenters, and purges, and much more to lose from shrinking the party's big tent.

I am including the link to their new report, Growing the Vote, because I think it's a wonderful work of political insight and commentary. I look forward to the follow up which will focus on specific issue proposal. There is another recent report worth looking at as well, Winning the West. I start off by pointing out these two excellent works because it illustrates my deep frustration with the confusing behavior of the DLC. It is as if they wanted to loose!

This is not to say that the DLC wants to loose the general election. Far from it, they seem as desperate as any Democratic faction to defeat Republicans. In many ways the DLC has the best strategy of how to accomplish this goal, with some exceptions. However, their understanding of the American public as a whole cannot make up for the fact that they don't seem to understand the nature of their opponents in the Democratic Party.

My "tribal" approach to politics shouldn't be new to regular readers. A large block of the base of each party is determined by social, cultural, ethnic, and religious characteristics. What this means is that you will start off in the primaries with a sizeable group of voters that will react very negatively to any candidate that is trying to move the party toward the center on social issues. They might not be enough to block the candidate's road to victory, but they shouldn't be underestimated or ignored.

On top of this base, each party has a history of favoring certain economic policies. This has wedded certain industries, professions, and groups to the major parties. Through their support of big government, the Democratic Party appeals to union members who may be more socially conservative than the 'tribal' base of the party. The Republican Party, at least until Bush, managed to appeal to the affluent through economic appeals.

Tangent to this current discussion, it is worth noting that the economically liberal faction of the Democratic Party is better organized than the economically conservative faction of the Republican Party. Unions, even while on the decline, are a powerful force in getting out the vote, especially during low turnout primaries. Affluent Americans are not involved in associations that would make it easier to mobilize them as a force. This may be one reason why they are having a difficult time in stopping the shift toward big government conservatism. It also means that while the Republican Party may drift toward authoritarianism, the task of libertarian Democrats may be made difficult by the strength of economically liberal factions.

We've identified two factions in the Democratic Party. There are those who affiliate with the party because of 'tribal' politics and then those who affiliate with the party out of economic self-interest. While there may be some overlap, we shouldn't assume that these two groups will work together. In the Republican Party, the 'tribal' faction is in the process of purging the 'economic' faction. The DLC has a political philosophy that manages to offend both of these groups.

First, the DLC believes that the Democratic Party must moderate itself on social issues despite the cultural and demographic changes over the last two decades. Tied into this recently has been advice to Democrats to "get tough" on national security. This advice, which I strongly disagree with, offends the "tribal" faction of the Democratic Party. And in my own opinion it's where the DLC is wrong. Shifting toward the center on these issues isn't going to pick up voters, the people that care passionately about social issues and foreign policy are already partisans.

On top of offending the socially liberal voters, the DLC preaches a modern economic platform that can certainly be seen as a break from the big government liberalism of the New Deal and the Great Society. At times the DLC buys into false free market ideas like so-called "free trade." But on the whole they make a strong case for ways to modernize our government and appreciate the importance of markets. Their willingness to support a host of issues from globalization to vouchers wins them the opposition and hatred of unions and the rest of the economically liberal faction.

And here is the frustrating incompetence of the DLC. If they were to pick a fight with only one faction, they would have a good chance at winning. But by picking a fight with both factions, they encourage the factions to work together and block out the DLC’s entire message. Social liberals may be open to a more free market approach, but because they already have a negative opinion of the DLC they have a knee-jerk reaction to oppose any proposal. Good proposals from the DLC are judged guilty by association.

Just imagine if a darling of the DLC, someone like Governor Vilsack or Governor Warner, came out with a proposal on pulling out of Iraq. They present it within the context of a broader message on national security and foreign policy. Their race for the nomination continues onward with the new respect and admiration of many social liberals, but they are also free to continue to hold true to their market-oriented approach to economic issues. Suddenly, they are able to attack Hillary Clinton from both the left (Iraq) and the right (economic issues). Winning the nomination just became a hell of a lot easier.

Are you listening Warner? Vilsack? Hello?