too collusive and contributor-driven

The Blogging of the President: Kevin Phillips:

"In my view, hitherto dominant U.S. national coalitions usually show signs of coming unglued even before the putative opposition develops a coherent program -- in 1856-1860, for example, and in 1930-32 and 1966-1968. Much of my interest is in that direction: to identify and encourage the Republicans and Republican-minded independents moving away from support of George W. Bush and his politics and programs. Many establishment Democrats have very little sense of these dynamics, partly because they have been complicit in many of the policy failures. . . .

"If the Democrats are to win, they have to turn their bases in the Northeast, upper Midwest and Pacific into a slightly larger bloc that takes more of the Midwest and expands into the southwest. My assumption is that centrist Northern Catholics and main line Protestants are becoming GOP weak links; and that if a major debate begins over George Bush's apparent belief that he speaks foir God, considerable numbers of evangelicals, fundamentalists and Pentecostals will become disillusioned and stay home.

"Thus, the challenge for Democrats during what should be tumultuous times in the next 6-8 years is to identify the issues that matter and hammer away at their mishandling. The outsider, progressive and populist Democrats can do this, whereas much of the Democratic establishment let itself become too collusive and contributor-driven to criticize. They remind me of the Rockefeller Republicans in the 1960s who did not want to seriously challenge the existing Democratic policies but rather to make the GOP much the same with a few caveats. Upheaval came only as they were pushed aside."

"too collusive and contributor-driven to criticize" Boy, he's got that right.