Remember the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) that played such a prominent moderating policy role in the Clinton administration? Unfortunately, the DLC has been relegated to second or third fiddle status during the hyper-liberal/left Obama/Reid/Pelosi reign.
Even so, it's interesting to read the DLC's assessment of why the 2010 mid-term congressional election was such a disaster for their party:
Fundamentally, Democrats lost the middle. In 2006, moderates decided the election, voting for Democrats by 22 million to 14 million. This year's Democratic moderate vote probably fell by about 6 million. Doubtless many changed votes or shifted to the conservative camp simply for the sake of change in a bad economy — but many also looked at our agenda and began to worry.
Why? Moderates are aspirational and pragmatic, seeing an important but limited role for government in economic life. For them, the party's apparent lack of interest in a long-term path away from emergency stimulus toward fiscal balance revived a pre-Clinton reputation for carefree attitudes toward public money.
And without a clear route back to growth led by the private sector, moderates wondered whether Democrats were beginning to see government as replacing entrepreneurs and inventors as the driver of growth. Worried that Democrats might be pushing beyond their limits, they looked to the other team.
I'd say that's very much on the money. Don't be surprised if a certain Secretary of State begins to show up more prominently at DLC events in the days ahead.