In the U$A, the Democrats, despite riding a tide of popular anti-war sentiment, are as lame as Bu$h: too cosy with the corporate lobby, too cowed by the corporate media - but most importantly - don't want to face the reality the the right don't take prisoners, they don't give ground and don't give a shit for anything except winning (link);
[Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House and sort-of current leader of the Democrats] appears to have thought that [the Republicans] had mostly turned against the war in their hearts, and would become allies of the Democrats in ending it....But for all the Caesar-like power that Bush claims for his imperial executive, he could not have steam-rollered the country into war if he had not had enablers in the then Republican-controlled Congress...That might help explain why Pelosi did not initially believe that her Republican colleagues could possibly be so short-sighted or venal as to actively support the war.
But you just have to contrast the way that the Republicans took power in the House in 1994 with a disciplined plan that shifted resources radically to the Right and took no hostages among their foes. They even dared impeach (in the lesser sense) a very popular Democratic president, as a way of making sure Al Gore never became his successor. In other words, they came to town as ravenous as a horde of marauding Mongols and as mean as a canyon full of rattlesnakes....And now a year after the Dems took the House back for the first time in 12 years, the Democratic Speaker suddenly realizes that she is facing a phalanx of determined warmongers.