Ron Brownstein seems to think so. In an article published on Sunday in the Los Angeles Times, he said:

On one front, a liberal operative at a top think tank has accused the Democratic Leadership Council, the principal organization of party centrists, of pushing the party toward a pro-corporate agenda "that sells out America's working class — the demographic that used to be the party's base."

In equally combative terms, a leading young centrist commentator published a manifesto in the New Republic magazine accusing the Democratic left of slighting the struggle against Islamic terrorism and undermining the party's image on security — an argument instantly embraced and promoted by the Democratic Leadership Council.

In the near-term, the Democratic desire to unify in opposition to almost all of Bush's agenda is likely to take the edge off these disagreements.

But these twin firefights, which have inspired volleys of responses, Web postings and e-mails, reflect enduring divisions over strategy, message and policy that could influence the race for the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee next month and are certain to loom over the contest for the presidential nomination in 2008.

....Democrats have now moved back to the barricades, at least in their intellectual circles. The lines of battle evident in these disputes also could resurface in the race for the DNC chairmanship, which will pit liberals Dean and party operative Harold M. Ickes against centrists such as former Indiana Rep. Tim Roemer and Simon Rosenberg, president of the centrist New Democrat Network.

This "let's you and him fight" kind of analysis seems to really miss the point of a great deal of the discussion and debate inside the Democratic party. Perhaps this is the only lens many observers have to look at intra-Democratic party debate, but I think it is a misleading one and I am frankly surprised that as perceptive an observer as Brownstein would employ it. It is particularly useless for understanding the contest for the DNC chair, as Markos Zuniga forcefully points out over at Daily Kos. Framing Simon Rosenberg's candidacy as a New Democrat taking on the liberals, for example, is exceptionally obtuse, as is the general characterization of Dean as the liberals' candidate. Brownstein should know better.