Friday, December 10, 2004

Please Elect This Man

His name is Howard Dean, and he's running for Democratic National Committee Chairman.

Now when conservative like for example, Sean Hannity, says, "Please elect Howard Dean..." he's obviously being facetious. Hannity and many others believe that Dean is the kind of candidate that scares Middle America and thus will always lose elections. However, it's guys like Hannity whom can't see the forest for the trees. If the Democratic Party ever figures out that it is the party of progressive economic policies, that guy will be the last to figure out why the DNC is sweeping elections.

I've said many times before, for progressives, they lost the election in January of 2004. They lost when the pretender, John Kerry, beat the true progressive candidate. If you listened to people in Iowa and New Hampshire state why they voted for Kerry instead of Dean, they all pretty much said the same thing. "We like Dean but he can't win in a national election." They said the same thing about Nader. You know, if all of the people in this country actually voted for the candidate they liked instead of employing some weird marketing strategy, one party wouldn't have a monopoly over all the houses of government right now. There was a bumper sticker I saw which summed this all up and was once funny and sad: "Dated Dean, Married Kerry".

The rate of divorce is rather high in this country wouldn't you say?

The DNC has a chance to redefine itself in the eyes of America. They're not going to accomplish anything by putting forth mealy-mouthed centrists with no real agenda other than seeking power...like Kerry. There are fine economic progressive policies out there that are just screaming for someone to champion them. I think Dean in the guy. At least you know where he stands.

Finally, the marriage between Move.Org and the DNC has become most interesting of late. I read this morning that, "Liberal powerhouse MoveOn has a message for the "professional election losers" who run the Democratic Party: "We bought it, we own it, we're going to take it back." Whether you're a staunch conservative or a bleeding heart liberal, I think we can all agree, for the sake of our democracy, there needs to be strong opposition party. If MoveOn is the catalyst for that change then God Bless.

22 Comments:

At 10:31 AM, Blogger Christiana said...

I voted for Bush twice, (the second time with deep reservations,) but I think I would have been far more willing to vote for Dean than I was for Kerry. For me, Bush supports some things I like, (tax cuts, education reform,) and some things I really don't (the war, unnecessary constitutional ammendments,) but I voted for him because I felt that, at least, he would be able to get things done. A decidedly mixed bag, but not stagnation. On the other hand, I supported a lot of what Kerry said he would do, but frankly, I don't know if he even believed it, and I definitely don't think he would have been able to actually accomplish any of it.

With Dean, at least, we would have been able to have an actual national debate. Instead of dickering and splitting hairs over the war, we might have had an actual discussion about the direction the country needs to go.

So much was made of 'the scream.' I liked it. Whatever else you can say about him, the man knew what he believed and he was passionate about it. I really admire that, even if I don't always agree with him.

 
At 10:59 AM, Blogger GauRag said...

Agreed. I voted for Kerry, but with a lot of reservations. If it weren't for the Supreme Court issue, I might have been swayed to vote for David Cobb (a fantastic and intelligent Green candidate) instead. If we've learned anything from this election, it's that a candidate's actual policy positions matter less than (a) the conviction with which he defends his positions and (b) the underlying theme/message which he uses to justify his ideas.

I am a huge Dean supporter, and had the chance to talk to him and shake his hand after his recent speech at GWU. In policy terms, Dean wasn't my ideal candidate... he's for state decisions re: civil unions; he's not strong on federal gun control; he's for the death penalty. But at least he was consistent in saying that all of these decisions should be left to the states, a position that I think would have had huge national appeal. Kerry was, perhaps, closer to my policy positions, but I didn't find him appealing because he didn't seem able to connect the dots between his ideas to come up with a strong message. We Dems need a strong message, one that's easy to sum up-- something like "responsibility," which is what Dean is now touting as a party message. Fiscal, social, foreign policy responsibility.

 
At 11:52 AM, Blogger dorothyblueeyes said...

I HATE LIBERALS,AND I HATE REPUBLICANS,TOO.
Sorry, had it with both parties; they both stink. The Liberals are rotten,secular,and hate religion,while supporting the Extreme Left;and the republicans are going nuts in the White House,getting us huge deficets,breaking our govt. with costly war,and involving us in unwinable foriegn wars,and lying to us,at every turn,as bad as the Liberals!!! SCREW THEM BOTH!!!!!
GET A NEW PARTY!!! THESE OTHER 2 ARE ROTTEN!!!!

 
At 12:47 PM, Blogger Greg Gasper said...

It all depends if you want power back or not. The American mainstream has far to go before they see Dean as appealing. He's very far left and this is still a center-right nation.

Dems are going to have to make a decision; do they want to stand on principle or do they want a chance at power? If they want power they'll have to run to the banner of people like Evan Bayh. If principle is what Dems crave then it's Howard Dean they should gravitate to. The Dems will not gain power again until they can win over the middle again. Howard Dean is not the answer to this. Any Republican will be able to take Dean out to the woodshed just like Mondale and Dukakis.

You have a nice blog and I appreciate that your comments are always very well thought out, even though I do not agree with you.

 
At 12:59 PM, Blogger GauRag said...

In truth, Dean is not as far-left as he has been portrayed, as I mentioned in my earlier comment. As Governor, Dean was a deficit hawk and balanced the budget for 11 years (the ability to handle money responsibly makes him representative of Democrats, given the inability of Republicans to really live up to their claims of fiscal sanity). Of course, he's been portrayed by the media as a left-wing wacko, largely thanks to his signing the civil unions bill in VT and his opposition to the war. Funny thing is that now, a year later and after lots of debate on both those issues, most Americans support some form of civil unions and are unhappy with the direction the war has taken. If anything, he certainly reframed the agenda.

In terms of winning, I don't think it has to come down to a decision of power or principle. We can have both, and I honestly don't think the American people will vote someone into power if they don't believe they have principles. Even though I disagree with most of what he has done, I do think President Bush is a man of principle and strong conviction. I can see the appeal there, even if I disagree with his policies. Whether it's Bayh, Vilsack, Dean, or Hillary, as long as they are able to back up their campaign plans with a strong sense of conviction and belief, I think they will play well to all regions of the nation.

And I don't think the power lies with the middle/swing vote. The Bush campaign widely ignored the swing vote and concentrated on their base, and this proved very successful. Their eCampaign targeted specific demographics that they were already strong with, and their ability to reach out to the church had a huge effect in GOTV.

Without making any predictions about how a Bush vs. Dean race would have ended, I do think Dean would have gotten Democrats energized in a way that Kerry could not, and which many centrist Democrats will not.

 
At 4:13 PM, Blogger FarFromFound said...

Well,

I'm a Republican but I love debate and discussion that's truly polarized, I'd love if collaboration existed but in this day and age it's all about meeting halfway.

With that said, the article Slate ran on why dean would've been a better candidate still rings clear. I think Bush would've still been elected, but at least the Dems would've had a united front.

The folks at MoveOn chanting the lastest war cry is amusing because they were unified on one real front fund raising. The message they came out with was pretty fragmented and did SOME good, but they never got the full use of their money because they didn't line up with the Kerry machine on every overly-nuanced and pin cushioned point.

If you think MoveOn is a cure-all you will be very upset in 4 years, they will polarize it too far to the left. There has to be a meeting halfway in between, and the "beltway talk" of the current DNC folks needs to be regionalized and applied ASAP. That's one method MoveOn COULD help with.

I'm trying to be fair here, but the Dems are in a shouting match that will most likely go no where as long as they are the pet to unions. Look down the road the path splits and the Reeps base stays in tact more and more, while the Dems splinter into a thousand pieces.

http://leftcoastsense.blogspot.com/

 
At 9:33 AM, Blogger quinn monehan said...

it is unfortunate that so many of us allow the demogaguery of the left and right to shape our intellectual decisions. The emotional manipulations that humans are subject to (so relied upon by power bases for thousands of years) should be overcome at some point by education. but no.
democrats are historically the internationally adventurous party (WWI, WWII, KOREA, VIETNAM, Bosnia, Haiti) and the term "quagmire" reflect more the 150,000 American military personnel on Europe since 1945, the 125,000 American military personnel in Japan since 1945, the 34,000 american military personnel in Korea since 1954, the thousands of American military personnel in Bosnia, and the American naval presence around the world. As a country we are (and should be) proud of what these committments did for the world. It doesn't take much of an imagination to see what the world would be like without it. Yet in the face of the growth of the international cancer of islamic fundamentalism (the middle east, the pacific rim, europe, africa), with no country really capable of standing against it alone, and so many suffering from it, and international waters under constant threat from it, democrats turn from their traditional, historical positions, and oppose a valiant effort to avoid a very real WWIII, because a republican is in the white house, and the republican party might benefit from success !!! wow.....
Most of us have no love for republicans because they are very simply wealthy Americans, who have theirs and want to keep it, to hell with everybody else. Pretty simple philosophy. Should be pretty easy to beat in a democracy. Little things like fiscal irresponsibility (our government size, mentallity, etc is a result of democratic control of congress for about 60 years), out of control unions ( it takes little to understand that the improved American way of life is a direct result of unions. it takes little more to recognize that union corruption, and greed is destroying them, and taking our way of life with them), environmental excesses (water and air are vastly improved since 1960...but at some point you have to re-evaluate), homosexual rights ( all americans should be treated the same....none should be treated special), blacks ( there are 3 times as many whites living in poverty than blacks. yet blacks are responsible for most of the crime, take the least advantage of educational opportunities, and have educators, employers, political leaders, etc fearing for their careers should they say or do something to "offend" someone) and liberals blatant, vocal, non-ending, un-apologetic, total disdain for lower and middle income whites. Hey....they make up most of the population !
So, in your little self absorbed minds, where you know what's right and we're all stupid, you have aligned yourelf with groups that have narrow goals, usually very valid, that have mostly been achieved, and that have taken on a new, parasitic life beyond the original intent or need. Worse, you have let them take over the leadership roles in the party ! In come the Clintonites with their questionable sources of money (don't ask, don't care) and you people are off the map. you have NO alignment with mainstream American needs or values. And you can't figure it out......DUH ! Too bad, we could use a viable alternative. But, as the democratic party exists, they aren't it.
By the way, it's not a question of changing your marketing strategy. it's about changing your party....

 
At 9:33 AM, Blogger quinn monehan said...

it is unfortunate that so many of us allow the demogaguery of the left and right to shape our intellectual decisions. The emotional manipulations that humans are subject to (so relied upon by power bases for thousands of years) should be overcome at some point by education. but no.
democrats are historically the internationally adventurous party (WWI, WWII, KOREA, VIETNAM, Bosnia, Haiti) and the term "quagmire" reflect more the 150,000 American military personnel on Europe since 1945, the 125,000 American military personnel in Japan since 1945, the 34,000 american military personnel in Korea since 1954, the thousands of American military personnel in Bosnia, and the American naval presence around the world. As a country we are (and should be) proud of what these committments did for the world. It doesn't take much of an imagination to see what the world would be like without it. Yet in the face of the growth of the international cancer of islamic fundamentalism (the middle east, the pacific rim, europe, africa), with no country really capable of standing against it alone, and so many suffering from it, and international waters under constant threat from it, democrats turn from their traditional, historical positions, and oppose a valiant effort to avoid a very real WWIII, because a republican is in the white house, and the republican party might benefit from success !!! wow.....
Most of us have no love for republicans because they are very simply wealthy Americans, who have theirs and want to keep it, to hell with everybody else. Pretty simple philosophy. Should be pretty easy to beat in a democracy. Little things like fiscal irresponsibility (our government size, mentallity, etc is a result of democratic control of congress for about 60 years), out of control unions ( it takes little to understand that the improved American way of life is a direct result of unions. it takes little more to recognize that union corruption, and greed is destroying them, and taking our way of life with them), environmental excesses (water and air are vastly improved since 1960...but at some point you have to re-evaluate), homosexual rights ( all americans should be treated the same....none should be treated special), blacks ( there are 3 times as many whites living in poverty than blacks. yet blacks are responsible for most of the crime, take the least advantage of educational opportunities, and have educators, employers, political leaders, etc fearing for their careers should they say or do something to "offend" someone) and liberals blatant, vocal, non-ending, un-apologetic, total disdain for lower and middle income whites. Hey....they make up most of the population !
So, in your little self absorbed minds, where you know what's right and we're all stupid, you have aligned yourelf with groups that have narrow goals, usually very valid, that have mostly been achieved, and that have taken on a new, parasitic life beyond the original intent or need. Worse, you have let them take over the leadership roles in the party ! In come the Clintonites with their questionable sources of money (don't ask, don't care) and you people are off the map. you have NO alignment with mainstream American needs or values. And you can't figure it out......DUH ! Too bad, we could use a viable alternative. But, as the democratic party exists, they aren't it.
By the way, it's not a question of changing your marketing strategy. it's about changing your party....

 
At 11:10 AM, Blogger quinn monehan said...

it is unfortunate that so many of us allow the demogaguery of the left and right to shape our intellectual decisions. The emotional manipulations that humans are subject to (so relied upon by power bases for thousands of years) should be overcome at some point by education. but no.
democrats are historically the internationally adventurous party (WWI, WWII, KOREA, VIETNAM, Bosnia, Haiti) and the term "quagmire" reflect more the 150,000 American military personnel on Europe since 1945, the 125,000 American military personnel in Japan since 1945, the 34,000 american military personnel in Korea since 1954, the thousands of American military personnel in Bosnia, and the American naval presence around the world. As a country we are (and should be) proud of what these committments did for the world. It doesn't take much of an imagination to see what the world would be like without it. Yet in the face of the growth of the international cancer of islamic fundamentalism (the middle east, the pacific rim, europe, africa), with no country really capable of standing against it alone, and so many suffering from it, and international waters under constant threat from it, democrats turn from their traditional, historical positions, and oppose a valiant effort to avoid a very real WWIII, because a republican is in the white house, and the republican party might benefit from success !!! wow.....
Most of us have no love for republicans because they are very simply wealthy Americans, who have theirs and want to keep it, to hell with everybody else. Pretty simple philosophy. Should be pretty easy to beat in a democracy. Little things like fiscal irresponsibility (our government size, mentallity, etc is a result of democratic control of congress for about 60 years), out of control unions ( it takes little to understand that the improved American way of life is a direct result of unions. it takes little more to recognize that union corruption, and greed is destroying them, and taking our way of life with them), environmental excesses (water and air are vastly improved since 1960...but at some point you have to re-evaluate), homosexual rights ( all americans should be treated the same....none should be treated special), blacks ( there are 3 times as many whites living in poverty than blacks. yet blacks are responsible for most of the crime, take the least advantage of educational opportunities, and have educators, employers, political leaders, etc fearing for their careers should they say or do something to "offend" someone) and liberals blatant, vocal, non-ending, un-apologetic, total disdain for lower and middle income whites. Hey....they make up most of the population !
So, in your little self absorbed minds, where you know what's right and we're all stupid, you have aligned yourelf with groups that have narrow goals, usually very valid, that have mostly been achieved, and that have taken on a new, parasitic life beyond the original intent or need. Worse, you have let them take over the leadership roles in the party ! In come the Clintonites with their questionable sources of money (don't ask, don't care) and you people are off the map. you have NO alignment with mainstream American needs or values. And you can't figure it out......DUH ! Too bad, we could use a viable alternative. But, as the democratic party exists, they aren't it.
By the way, it's not a question of changing your marketing strategy. it's about changing your party....

 
At 11:10 AM, Blogger quinn monehan said...

it is unfortunate that so many of us allow the demogaguery of the left and right to shape our intellectual decisions. The emotional manipulations that humans are subject to (so relied upon by power bases for thousands of years) should be overcome at some point by education. but no.
democrats are historically the internationally adventurous party (WWI, WWII, KOREA, VIETNAM, Bosnia, Haiti) and the term "quagmire" reflect more the 150,000 American military personnel on Europe since 1945, the 125,000 American military personnel in Japan since 1945, the 34,000 american military personnel in Korea since 1954, the thousands of American military personnel in Bosnia, and the American naval presence around the world. As a country we are (and should be) proud of what these committments did for the world. It doesn't take much of an imagination to see what the world would be like without it. Yet in the face of the growth of the international cancer of islamic fundamentalism (the middle east, the pacific rim, europe, africa), with no country really capable of standing against it alone, and so many suffering from it, and international waters under constant threat from it, democrats turn from their traditional, historical positions, and oppose a valiant effort to avoid a very real WWIII, because a republican is in the white house, and the republican party might benefit from success !!! wow.....
Most of us have no love for republicans because they are very simply wealthy Americans, who have theirs and want to keep it, to hell with everybody else. Pretty simple philosophy. Should be pretty easy to beat in a democracy. Little things like fiscal irresponsibility (our government size, mentallity, etc is a result of democratic control of congress for about 60 years), out of control unions ( it takes little to understand that the improved American way of life is a direct result of unions. it takes little more to recognize that union corruption, and greed is destroying them, and taking our way of life with them), environmental excesses (water and air are vastly improved since 1960...but at some point you have to re-evaluate), homosexual rights ( all americans should be treated the same....none should be treated special), blacks ( there are 3 times as many whites living in poverty than blacks. yet blacks are responsible for most of the crime, take the least advantage of educational opportunities, and have educators, employers, political leaders, etc fearing for their careers should they say or do something to "offend" someone) and liberals blatant, vocal, non-ending, un-apologetic, total disdain for lower and middle income whites. Hey....they make up most of the population !
So, in your little self absorbed minds, where you know what's right and we're all stupid, you have aligned yourelf with groups that have narrow goals, usually very valid, that have mostly been achieved, and that have taken on a new, parasitic life beyond the original intent or need. Worse, you have let them take over the leadership roles in the party ! In come the Clintonites with their questionable sources of money (don't ask, don't care) and you people are off the map. you have NO alignment with mainstream American needs or values. And you can't figure it out......DUH ! Too bad, we could use a viable alternative. But, as the democratic party exists, they aren't it.
By the way, it's not a question of changing your marketing strategy. it's about changing your party....

 
At 11:10 AM, Blogger quinn monehan said...

it is unfortunate that so many of us allow the demogaguery of the left and right to shape our intellectual decisions. The emotional manipulations that humans are subject to (so relied upon by power bases for thousands of years) should be overcome at some point by education. but no.
democrats are historically the internationally adventurous party (WWI, WWII, KOREA, VIETNAM, Bosnia, Haiti) and the term "quagmire" reflect more the 150,000 American military personnel on Europe since 1945, the 125,000 American military personnel in Japan since 1945, the 34,000 american military personnel in Korea since 1954, the thousands of American military personnel in Bosnia, and the American naval presence around the world. As a country we are (and should be) proud of what these committments did for the world. It doesn't take much of an imagination to see what the world would be like without it. Yet in the face of the growth of the international cancer of islamic fundamentalism (the middle east, the pacific rim, europe, africa), with no country really capable of standing against it alone, and so many suffering from it, and international waters under constant threat from it, democrats turn from their traditional, historical positions, and oppose a valiant effort to avoid a very real WWIII, because a republican is in the white house, and the republican party might benefit from success !!! wow.....
Most of us have no love for republicans because they are very simply wealthy Americans, who have theirs and want to keep it, to hell with everybody else. Pretty simple philosophy. Should be pretty easy to beat in a democracy. Little things like fiscal irresponsibility (our government size, mentallity, etc is a result of democratic control of congress for about 60 years), out of control unions ( it takes little to understand that the improved American way of life is a direct result of unions. it takes little more to recognize that union corruption, and greed is destroying them, and taking our way of life with them), environmental excesses (water and air are vastly improved since 1960...but at some point you have to re-evaluate), homosexual rights ( all americans should be treated the same....none should be treated special), blacks ( there are 3 times as many whites living in poverty than blacks. yet blacks are responsible for most of the crime, take the least advantage of educational opportunities, and have educators, employers, political leaders, etc fearing for their careers should they say or do something to "offend" someone) and liberals blatant, vocal, non-ending, un-apologetic, total disdain for lower and middle income whites. Hey....they make up most of the population !
So, in your little self absorbed minds, where you know what's right and we're all stupid, you have aligned yourelf with groups that have narrow goals, usually very valid, that have mostly been achieved, and that have taken on a new, parasitic life beyond the original intent or need. Worse, you have let them take over the leadership roles in the party ! In come the Clintonites with their questionable sources of money (don't ask, don't care) and you people are off the map. you have NO alignment with mainstream American needs or values. And you can't figure it out......DUH ! Too bad, we could use a viable alternative. But, as the democratic party exists, they aren't it.
By the way, it's not a question of changing your marketing strategy. it's about changing your party....

 
At 1:20 AM, Blogger jmscott72@gmail.com said...

If you think that the DNC and MoveOn are married, whose going to tell MoveOn that the DNC is having an affair with the ACLU?

 
At 1:43 PM, Blogger A. F. Litt said...

First of all, I wonder how much influence the DNC Chair actually has on how people vote. I didn't see Terry McAuliffe’s merrits being debates that much during this year's campaign. However, if the chair was held by some one with a higher profile, like Dr. Dean, I do not see how the holder of this post would not be a larger factor in the debate.

There are definately a lot of pros and cons to this idea for the Democrats.

A few weeks back I found a post on a message board from someone who used to live in Vermont debating the merrits of Dean running for President again versus going after the DNC Chair.

He wrote:
"I would like to see Dean as DNC chairman, however, as I see it, he is not a viable choice for the presidency. I lived in Vt for 8 years, while he was in office. I met him numerous times. He is, without a doubt, a good, honest, well meaning man.

"That said, there were problems in Vt during his tenure as governor that, I believe, would be exponentially worse were he sitting in the oval office. I agree with most of his platforms and ideals. I was proud to live in a state where children had access to schools and healthcare, and same-sex relationships were recognized and offorded protection under law. I was proud for all those things and more.

"That said, his programs were based on ideals rather than practicality. His programs were easy to abuse, and created a culture of freeloading off of taxpayer money."

There was more to this, you can read it at:

http://democracyind.proboards39.com/index.cgi?board=democrats1&action=display&num=1099973694

Myself, I do not know if Dean is the right guy for the job or not. I do not know if he is the one who can re-define the Democratic Party into a player in Red America or not, but at least he would be a fresh voice and move the party away from the 2 and 2 record of Democratic Leadership Council style wonks.

For fundraising and grass roots campaigning, Dean is the guy. But for winning elections, that really is going to depend on the platform, the party's ability to focus and deliver their message, and, most of all, their ability to field compelling canidates.

http://democracyindistress.com
http://democracyindistress.blogspot.com

 
At 2:03 AM, Blogger stephatriseup said...

I’m seein a couple issues here.

First—Is a high-profile and some would say controversial former presidential candidate the ideal person for the chair’s job? Would it mean a repeat of voters sayin “I don’t think Dean can win a national election”?

I think we’ve got to separate the role of the chair from the role of the candidate. If it’s Dean’s intention to run for President again, then this might not be ideal. But how high profile is somebody like Karl Rove these days? Or any of Bush’s spiritual advisors? To be honest, I don’t know much bout the RNC chair’s profiles.

Except of course, that the co-chair in Ohio also ran the board of elections. And apparently to some people there’s no conflict of interest there. I fail to see a conflict of interest if the national chairperson’s ideals and vision resonate with the issues in the lives of the average American.

Perhaps the resonance occurs because of the coverage he received thru his prez campaigning. But it’s precisely his campaign style that can bring some freshness and direction to the DNC leadership.

This brings up aNuther Q—how does the struggle to elect a new chair really effect the direction of the party as a whole? I ask that meaning, will the leadership really be accountable to its base, its membership, and not the other way around, as it has been in the past. We’ve seen the party leadership walking the DLC line, and we’ve seen what happened.

So what does it really take to win a presidential election these days? We can’t win by being republican-lite. If we see the country as centrist-right on a national level, then maybe that can’t and shouldn’t be our primary fight.... yet. Think of the progression of the conservative rise to power. Where did they start? Where did their leaders first emerge? In school board elections. In really local elections.

This is what I see as the strength that a candidate like Dean brings to the DNC. Unlike the top-down, “beltway” focused DLC, his grassroots campaign building, as well as that of moveon and other similar orgs, built local structures of supporters and avid volunteers, many tapped by the kerry campaign to do their dirty work. These organizations supported many progressive candidates in their runs for local races, givin lots of people real concrete ways to get involved in their communities to change things, make a difference, feel good about their ability to gain access to power and act on things that mattered to them. And guess what? Many of their candidates won.

We’ve got to take notes from the right, and from our “left,” though I would hesitate to call peeps like moveon crazy radicals. I mean, come on, moms and their kids callin folks in swing states and talking to them about their issues and what they think about voting? Hardly radical. More like, as American as apple pie, or however the phrase goes.

Or maybe it’s radical because we’re talking about shifting the means of production. The organizations being built by groups like moveon, aren’t simply building a populist movement, they are taking on the structures of our so-called democracy and challenging the inadequacy of our elections process. Heaven forbid, somebody asks me if I’m gonna vote. My neighbor wants to know if I care about the cuts to my financial aid? What, people want to observe at the polling places? They want a receipt, or a recount?

Bein an organizer, I’m pretty confident that basic populist principles can appeal to the masses. And frankly, I think that is what scares the pants off the party leadership. Why? Cuz if they were really in touch with the people “below,” they’d realize they don’t really represent their constituency properly.

For real. How many people of color, how many low and middle income folks are in positions of authority? Make decisions?

If this is about organizing an “opposition”/ “opposing” party, call it what you will, the
leadership has got to have support from “below,” have legitimacy at the roots, or what’s the point of electing a chair, or havin a national party committee at all? What will they be coordinating?

To gain a groundswell of support for a national candidate TAKES TIME, it is going to have to be rooted in local issues and projects, and it’s gonna take a lot of coalition building.

And that means vision from below. And a lot of hard work. And funding the work of community organizations. I agree with the posts that complain about all the orgs and party leaders with serious institutionalized psychoses about how things work, leadership that has no accountabilty but is about preserving their positions.

This is a risky move, no doubt. There will be growing pains, no doubt. But, if the Democratic Party (and not just the leadership) wants to win, it’s going to have to undergo a serious facelift. The peeps at the top will have to go, and make room for leaders that have legitimacy, that resonate with the base, and can really carry the torch for a party that stands for…

Not against something.

 
At 6:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mark R, I love you.
So much.

 
At 3:56 AM, Blogger Interad said...

Hi, I really like your blog. There is this outstanding website regarding kbs korea. You better check it out some time.

 
At 12:01 AM, Blogger Interad said...

Hello, I am a korean visitor, good to see you.
I am sure that your blog page looks great to me which mean looking crowded so, I would like to let everybodies know korea information official site korea.net same as Dynamic korea - contains all about korea news and informations, please let me introducel this cool site. Dynamic korea offer korea travel, culture, food, arts and government info exactly what you want to knowflag of north korea. You better check it out some time.

 
At 8:00 AM, Blogger Interad said...

Hello, I am a korean visitor, good to see you.
I am sure that your blog page looks great to me which mean looking crowded so, I would like to let everybodies know korea information official site korea.net same as Dynamic korea - contains all about korea news and informations, please let me introducel this cool site. Dynamic korea offer korea travel, culture, food, arts and government info exactly what you want to knowmarine in korean war. You better check it out some time.

 
At 12:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think you're right on track and not many people are willing to admit that they share your views. colony lost is an AWESOME place to discuss LOST.

 
At 4:28 PM, Blogger Interad said...

Hello, I am a Korean visitor, good to see you.
I am sure that your blog page looks great to me which mean looking crowded so,
I would like to let everybodies know Korea information official site Korea.net same as Dynamic Korea - contains all about South Korea news and informations,
please let me introducel this cool site. Dynamic Korea offer Korea travel, culture, food, arts and government info exactly what you want to know korea air. You better check it out some time.

 
At 10:09 PM, Blogger job opportunitya said...

I peep the web for blogs just like this one.
Airtight blog. Your site was off the chain and I will
return!
Click on my bad plastic surgery blog before its to late.

 
At 11:57 AM, Anonymous africa flag said...

This is an excellent blog. Keep it going.You are providing
a great resource on the Internet here!
If you have a moment, please take a look at my africa flag site.
Have a great week!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home