Success, DLC-Style

Al From, DLC founder-in-chief:

Since last year's election defeat, some have argued that Democrats should discard Clintonism, the party's most successful formula in presidential elections in six decades.

That's a novel answer to the woes of a party that has lost five of the last seven presidential elections: Blame the guy who won the other two. That's like telling Republicans to disown Ronald Reagan because he brought their party back from the political wilderness.

Clintonism led the Democratic Party out of its wilderness years with presidential victories in 1992 and 1996. Clintonism provides the model for doing that again in 2008. Democrats should embrace and build on it.


Meanwhile, statistics from the Reality-based Community

Democratic/Republican membership ratio, U.S. House of Representatives, 1983-2005


1983 269/166
1985 253/182
1987 258/177
1989 260/175
1991 267/167
1993 258/176
1995 204/230
1997 206/228
1999 211/223
2001 212/221
2003 204/229
2005- 202/232

Democratic/Republican ratio, U.S. Senate, 1983-2005

1983 46/54
1985 43/57
1987 55/45
1989 55/45
1991 56/44
1993 57/43
1995 48/52
1997 45/55
1999 45/55
2001 50/50
2003 48/51
2005 44/55

Democratic/Republican/Split ratio of Legislative Control, 1982-2005

1982 34/10/5
1984 26/11/12
1986 28/9/12
1988 29/8/12
1990 30/6/13
1992 25/8/16
1994 18/19/12
1996 20/18/11
1998 19/17/13
2000 18/17/14
2002 16/21/12
2004 17/21/11
2005 19/20/10


Democratic/Republican ratio of Governorships, 1982-2003

1982 27/23
1984 35/15
1986 34/16
1988 27/23
1990 29/21
1992 28/20
1994 29/19
1996 18/31
1998 17/32
2000 18/30
2001 19/29
2002 21/27
2003 24/26
2004 22/28
2005 22/28


I suppose a lot can be said about these conditions and trends, how did each of the candidates or state parties run their campaigns, did they result from Clinton abandoning his New Democratic stance in his first two years, weren't the trends going towards the Republicans already when Clinton assumed office, etc. So it would be hard to make any broad, sweeping generalizations about Old Democrat, New Democrat from these statistics.

About the only thing that can be said with any certainty is that the Clinton era and its aftermath have not been associated with any Democratic ascendancy for which the DLC should be claiming credit or asking us to bask in the worship of.

About all that can be claimed is that Clinton succeeded in getting himself re-elected. But beyond this, neither he nor his DLC-welfare-"reform" approach did the party any favors, nor is there any significant progressive piece of legislation or change for which Clinton/DLC can be applauded. About all we can take solace in is that Clinton was in office to nominate justices Ginsburg and Breyer or we might all be consigned to Focus on the Family re-education camps by now.

That Clinton was elected and re-elected shouldn't be seen as some monumental pairing of events, given the Republican Party's domination of the White House since the Eisenhower era. Some Democrat was bound to win, and will ultimately do so again, with or without a DLC. The question is, what will be the long term consequences of Democratic governance for progressive ideals and American democracy the next time around? Let's hope its better for progressives than the last twelve years have been.