We Already Know We Can Win Elections. Now How Do We Keep The Democrats' Attention After They Win?
By Susie Madrak Friday Aug 07, 2009 8:00amAll I know is months ago it was conventional wisdom in D.C. that the Democrats couldn't take the House, that candidates shouldn't talk about the war, and that the best way to try to win 15 seats was to throw all your money into about 18 of them, and hope for the best. In the end, that's not how it played out.
- Duncan Black, better known as Atrios, in November 2006.
Who boosted Howard Dean into the chairman's spot at the DNC, bringing his successful 50-state policy to fruition in last year's presidential race? The netroots did. And in 2006, who showed Rahm Emanuel that yes, we really could take control of Congress? We did.
Whose fundraising pushed the Democrats over the top in the 2008 Senate races? Ours did. Whose activist base drove the publicity, turnout and dollars in last year's presidential primaries and general election?
Duh.
So what have we accomplished? The war goes on and we've even expanded our presence in Afghanistan. The Bush-era encroachments on civil liberties have not only been embraced by a Democratic president, the Democratic Congress gives him their blessing. And with the goal of universal healthcare within tantalizing reach, we have Blue Dog Democrats - Democrats! trying to obstruct it.
Enough of kicking the Blue Dogs. What can we do to be more effective? Where did we go wrong?
Take Patrick Murphy, who won PA's 8th Congressional district. I still remember that sweltering night at the local brewery when various candidates spoke to a packed, sweaty room of Philadelphia liberal activists and bloggers. I'd been talking to Ginny Schrader, who had a close-but-no-cigar run at the seat left open by the resignation of Jim Greenwood, a liberal Republican, the year before.
And then Pat spoke. He introduced himself as the son of a Philadelphia police officer, a child of the city's row houses who'd worked his way through law school and served in Iraq, where he earned a Bronze Star. "I am a progressive," he told the crowd. And just like that, Schrader's chances evaporated. Murphy, a political neophyte and longshot who quickly became a favorite of both local and national bloggers, did the unthinkable: He won.
At one fundraiser, held in a posh downtown skyscraper by his heavy-hitter law firm, I cornered Pat and said, "If you screw us, I'll kill you." He reassured me by reminding me his wife grew up in a trailer park, that he would "never" forget where he came from or the people who were counting on him.
We raised $23,489 for him through ActBlue. He's blue, all right - a Blue Dog. (But not a total loss - at least he's working to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell in the military.)
And then there was the personable Chris Carney (PA-10), who dropped by the Philadelphia Drinking Liberally to see if he could prod bloggers like Atrios, Booman, and me to support him. We did. ($8,210, which goes a long way in that media market.)
He won. He's a Blue Dog, too. (Don't mention his name to Howie Klein.)
Remember hitting the "donate" button for Stephanie Herseth? Not only is she a Blue Dog, she's one of their leadership.
While not every Democrat the netroots supported promised to vote against the war, most of them did. Remember anyone actually doing it? Me neither. (We also supported wonderful progressives like Donna Edwards, so it's not all bad. But this isn't about them. It's about trying to figure out how we can cultivate effective, collective clout on our issues.)
The thing is, the disappointing candidates we supported aren't such bad people - just mostly lukewarm on our agenda. Maybe we were naive to think that campaign promises somehow meant more coming from candidates who told us they were liberals and seemed so damned nice.
So where's the line? How do we inspire the same kind of dogged loyalty on issues from candidates that the lobbyists do? The Blue Dogs often vote against the interests of their own constituencies to please their donor base. How do we get that kind of credibility and clout? If we have to bludgeon our candidates every single time we want their attention, they'll start to tune us out and we become little more than an annoyance. Yeah, sometimes the big stick works. But we need a carrot, too.
Somehow, we need to break through a mindset that allows Blue Dog Democrats to favor the local voters and good old pork-barrel politics when it's convenient, yet blithely ignore them on big transformational issues like health care, when it's time to pay back the large donors.
Maybe we need a netroots lobbying firm.
The very thing that makes us so effective also makes us politically weak. We identified talented Democrats, assessed their chances and decided (correctly, in many cases) that small donations from around the country could add up to a real difference in the results. They did. That sustained push from the blogosphere raised the profile for the winners as our early money made them viable.
But here's the problem. Our influence is diminished because we're so diffused. And for most of these candidates, we only sparked the initial surge that attracted more establishment money later in their campaigns - we don't own the results, not the way the insurance, health care and defense industries do.
According to the candidates, they don't owe us a damned thing. (We're not alone in getting this kind of treatment, by the way. Women's and LGBT PACs are also invisible - once the candidates have won with the help of their all-important early money.)
We, on the other hand, thought we were supporting transformational candidates, people who would at least give us equal standing with the voters back home, and feel free to ignore the corporate lobbyists, knowing we had their backs. It hasn't worked that way.
Look at the Blue Dog Dems like Max Baucus and Kent Conrad. They come from states so sparsely populated, they probably couldn't fill Times Square on New Year's Eve. They have no problem ignoring the needs of their constituents when it makes the lobbyists happy. They were singled out for special attention by lobbyists because of their committee clout.
Maybe that's what we should be doing. How does the Netroots Nation buy ourselves some strategic committee members?
Your thoughts?
Login or Register to post comments.
by reminding them they could lose.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/259...
rahm shakes his finger at liberals, and warns us not to go after the blue dogs...
Oh yeah rahm? Or WHAT?
Why is Dean the person which Emanuel kicked out of controlling the funding of democratic candidates , Sticking up for Emanuel's program of electing republicans as blue dogs on the democrat ticket.
Enough of this BS about their background... If they are who they are trying to sell us they are ,, they why are they against the health care and other programs which destroy the very citizens they were elected to HELP,,, while passing the programs which have rob our treasury of our tax money for programs which have aided the Global War Empire , Global Military Empire , the Global Corporate banking Empire.
..
Yes ,, Baucus and other are receiving billions or dollars from the health industry which cuts health services to Americans for their huge profits ,,, but are really generous to people with their blood stain loot..
Enough of this BS , tell the representatives to enforce the town hall meetings with police protection to explain the details of their health bill and just who is for what and what could we expect from this health plan to Americans..
Instead of running and hiding when things get a little tough at the town hall meetings or democrats start pressuring our representatives for their lack of concern for us , while they hand out our tax money freely to other programs which does nothing to aid the American citizens... But in fact take away from them...
Just think of what the Americans citizens have to face every single day because of your lack of concern in the policies they pass for the benefit of these Global Empires..
( Don't spam the site with your link. Once is enough. SiteMonitor)
You're accusing me of spamming, but did you read what's on the site? You're censoring a response to valid ideas.
I posted my response to the question of what progressives can do to be more effective in dealing with two-faced blue dog hypocrites. That link has valid, viable answers to the question.
You are censoring what your readers are looking for.
( As I just said, Once was enough. Your first comment is still there. No one is censuring your comment. You needn't repeat your link. Delete my warning one more time and you're gone. SiteMonitor)
What do you mean my first comment is still there?
I haven't deleted your warning.
You deleted the link I put in my comment.
I see people put links in their commments all the time.
I don't see my original comment with the link in it that I placed that I think people would want to see.
Please clarify.
[Click on your name, then on comments. Scroll down. You'll see that it's still there. (Another) Site Monitor]
by following through on campaign promises?
About stopping the illegal war in the middle east for corporate control of the area and it's resources.
Purge the illegal spying which started in Bush/Cheney administration and Obama is increasing it's powers and I believe they are now working on the military control of the internet..
Place controls over this Global Banking Empire which now has it's personal in charge of the treasury department giving our tax money to them.
Re-negotiate the free trade bill which has lead to the outsourcing of somewhere in the neighborhood of over 1 billion American jobs..
Stop the gifts of free passports for foreign workers to come into our country and take our jobs..
Replace the tax breaks which Bush and his administration has cut on the wealthy in our country , so they could share some of the burden instead of the American citizens sharing all of the destruction from THEIR criminal crimes.
Instead of having the health empire create the health bill , bring American into the meeting , which are the ones paying for it and have to live with the results of this bill..
Democracy ,,,,, Of , For & By the people of this nation ,,,,, Not Of , For and By the Global Empire and for the Global Empire's wealth and power..
but we also have to complain about this too.
As a lifelong peace and social justice activist, I can confirm that we ARE complaining, organizing, holding teach-ins, continuing with "street corner" (sign holding) education, etc. The dems are interested in us ONLY when they want our time, expertise, organizing skills and money...they promise us everything we want (ummmm, pull our troops out, shut down GITMO, investigate torture/war crimes/lies, lies and more lies) until we work our (very old) asses off, believing again...and then tell us to f off, assuming we will back them cuz there are no options.
We don't need (and I don't want the dems) attention, I want a government that understands I am their employer. Forget the current one party system, the time is now, we are the people we have been waiting for and yes, Ralph (Nader), I HAVE been lied to enough.
It will be a very cold day in hell before I waste one more penny or one more second of my time on another dem/pub.
Out, out, out I say - my only hope is that the revolution will not be bloody, but, based on this country's history; I seriously doubt it will turn out well.
Wish I could provide some positive or hopeful comments, but, we have been used again…
The hardest part may be trying to figure out who is lying. There are people that can tell a liar, employ them to vet these "applicants" heavily prior to endorsing or giving one dime.
Another option, do not give them any money at all. Arrange only to support them with other groups and do ad buys, or support in some other way. They need to prove what they will do first, not after they get the funding. You can't trust an addict when they need their feed.
... a self-perpetuating problem. The inevitable line, "A representative for all Americans" has become dumbed-down in the same way the mainstream media has - through a false equivalency where one is not allowed to exercise critical thought, but must accept by default actions that are inimical to civil debate, democracy, even established law.
We don't say 'torture is wrong' - we give airtime to war criminals looking for 'moral clarity.'
It's fine to welcome discussion and differing viewpoints, but even an objective standpoint implies critical evaluation, and that's what we seem to be unwilling to do/incapable of.
"We raised $23,489 for him through ActBlue. He's blue, all right - a Blue Dog."
So Murphy and others SHOULD be bought by contributions if they are yours?
Are you just a shit stirrer?
but he's an ok guy MOST of the time...when he's not busting my chops.
of myself. If you are going to act like Congressmen are bought because of their contributions by this group or that, then the implication is that because "our" group gave him X we should own him. You are saying we think it is OK to buy Congressman through our PAC-like group, we are just pissed he did not stay bought. Or maybe we are pissed because we know we only bought him on the time share plan and somebody paid for a month and we only bought a week.
Yes I am a shit stirrer. Especially when it is the shit of people who think theirs does not stink.
fine.
Take care then.
Or just one of those right-wingers who pretends to misunderstand an argument just to muddy the waters?
Which is it?
He took it.
Get it straight. He says what he believes in. We agree and support him with dollars. After he's in office - he takes special interest dollars and goes against his original "beliefs" that we had supported. Understand the difference?
" . . . dancing with the one that brung ya."
Seriously, ricky, why do you think we made those contributions?
If this is about who's currently greasing their palms--folks, remember how big a deal it was in 2004 that bloggers were allowed press credentials at the Democratic Convention?
Uh, they got 'em because they were among the biggest contribution aggregators the DNC had. (If John A., Atrios and Kos were Republicans, they'd have gotten ambassadorships out of it.) Four years later, we wiped the floor with Mccain/Palin--well, for lot of reasons, but a big one is that we raised more money, and we did that largely because progressive blogs shook their collective readerships like a Polaroid picture.
Why are we coming to these 'dogs with our hats in our hands? Because we're Democrats and we suck at hardball? We may be blue, but our money's as green as anyone's--and we represent a buttload of it.
There must be a tasteful way of reminding these guys.
is to get rid of that bullshit idea that corporations are people.
Ban corporate lobbyists from contributing to candidates and elected politicians.
Yep...That's exactly what should be done. Get the greedy tentacles of corporations out of political campaigning. And the law that says corporations are people is truly bullshit. It's not even a thing. It's an idea on paper. This is not a person.
frustration about this. We must change the election laws in this country. That would be a start. Think of dominoes lined up in concentric circles. Tip the first one, and eventually they all fall. Trouble is, those who could change all this (legislators) are benefiting from it. Lobbying (code for bribery) has to go first. Then term limits must be legislated. For instance, expand the Presidential Term to 6 years. Ethic laws that prevent anyone holding government office to be banned forever from holding employment at a firm that was connected to the work they did while in office. Or at least 5 or 10 years. BTW, corporations have all the rights of a real person, but their only responsibility is to make a profit for their shareholders. Another sweet deal, huh?
But you see that takes all the money out of the game. That's kind of like saying to an athlete you can't make money off endorsements and you have to play more ball.
Everybody knows its about the money, not the sport.
But this, as I am sure you well know, is no game.
I researched campaign finance reform back in the eighties when it wasn't as big an issue. It was clear just about all the problems in government can be traced to political finance. But I see no way of creating a remedy short of pulling away from the government.
If I had to do it all over again, I wouldn't even get a social security number. Then work from there.
for every time I thought about really goin undergound...I'd have a lot of nickels.
writhing around in the dirt penniless, eh?
After I pay rent today.
And if I don't find a roommate soon, I will be without pennies for the foreseeable future...yippee!
service." End of that discussion.
That's a start. But as we've seen - they always find ways around it - e.g. PACs
It's one of those "fox guarding the hen house" kind of things.
But she's a blue dog? Aww shit.
I'd still attempt to have sexual relations with her, then be turned down humiliatingly.
c'est la vie.
What if we enjoy being humiliated?
lol!
In that picture, is she describing the minimium size penis she'll accept?
(Huff Post) Dem Senators: White House Says It Cut No Deal With Drug Makers
So .. who is telling the truth?
Are the Drug Dealers lying to undermine Obama's credibility?
Or did Obama cut a secret deal?
Um, I'd take Obama for truth telling over Big Pharma. I don't know about you.
...how credible the NYT can be at times. Not very.
of the last century right despite a decade to prepare and five editors to proof.
Obama - yes. big farma - no.
The NY Times article said:
"A deputy White House chief of staff, Jim Messina, confirmed Mr. Tauzin’s account of the deal in an e-mail message on Wednesday night.
“The president encouraged this approach,” Mr. Messina wrote. “He wanted to bring all the parties to the table to discuss health insurance reform.”"
So I guess Messina was playing coy with the NY Times? The president "encouraged the approach" but didn't actually make a deal? Or is the Times stretching the truth?
Yesterday C&L posted this:
Let's Make A Deal! White House Has Egg on Face After Admitting They Capped Drug Company Reform Costs
.. and Obama got roasted by us ..
So .. I thought it was important to post the Huff Post piece ..
It is already illegal for them to negotiate lower drug prices. Part of the creation of M.Pt.D. during Bush years. Read about it.
How do you like being "handled?"
HR 676 - Medicare for all - would MANDATE government negotiate bulk pharmaceutical prices, overturning Part D.
Support HR 676!
Or are you referring to mandatory purchase of health insurance from private companies and mandatory purchase of drug coverage from private companies? Seriously. No snark intended.
Billy Tauzin has not always been all that straight with the truth
understatement of the year
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwHWbsvgQUE
Buy our own megaphone.
BUY TWO OR THREE.
If they're just using us as an ATM, we need to be reminding them that we have the resources to fund candidates to run against them as well.
An honest politician is one that stays bought. If they don't stay bought, buy new ones.
Can we compete with health insurabce corps???
It may not yield immediate results, but it's important to do. We need to find greater numbers of Progressive candidates who are willing to at least *try* to run for public office, regardless of their level of experience.
This will be hard to do because, frankly, most people I know who are Progressive, while intelligent and thoughtful, are so turned off by the bullshit of politics that they want nothing to do with it. They lack experience, they don't want to roll around in the mud with dumbasses, and they don't see it coming to any positive end. In short, they're too smart to run for office.
That said, if we can encourage intelligent Progressives to run in primaries, it forces the better-known center-right Democrats to the left. And it gives us a place to focus our money and efforts.
For me, personally, it will be a long time before I vote for another "centrist" Democrat. My representative may lose big in 2010. That's a sharp double-edged sword, but I certainly won't be canvassing for a liar in the next election cycle, no matter how many "D's" he or she has next to the name.
isn't related to Cofer ;)
It was necessary to support these likely Blue Dogs in order to gain a majority. That wasn't a wasted money or effort. Remember before 2006 we had *nothing.* At least with sufficient D's we gained control of the agenda. That was no small accomplishment. Now, many established Dems like Rahm Emanual undercut our efforts, and we definitely suffer from weak leadership, especially in the Senate, but in the House as well, aside from Pelosi. And the establishment Dems just completely suck at media management. So there is work to do.
Where to put our efforts? Developing our own candidates? That's the long view. Job number one is better media management. Construct a media machine on a par with the right. Now that we have a solid margin, primary the most egregious losers like Carney and Murphy. And please. Can we send Harry Reid out to pasture?
Better media management - you got it right on the money.
media management as the solution is incredibly difficult when enemies of progressives are the owners of said media conglomerates (GE, disney, viacom, etc)
Creating a liberal version of the right-wing talking-points machine is only going to validate the right-wing talking-points machine.
We're seeing it now. Conservatives shun the 'mainstream media' because they're looking for news that provides self-validation and casts the right's activities in a favorable light. Liberals shun the 'mainstream media' because the false equivalency mandated by the right has turned television news into a daily diet of shit pancakes.
Broadcast venues are feeling the pinch of the internet, not because the internet offers greater immediacy (how radio and television triumphed over print), but because - scattered among the dross, there are honest-to-goodness treasures. Commentary that is both well-informed and factual.
Management in news thinks the audience wants the same old fare, posted to blogs, streamed to our Blackberries or dribbled out in Tweets (and visit us on Facebook!) That touting one-man crews (a single person reporting, shooting, editing) is the exciting new journalism, rather than a penny-wise/pound-foolish decision to cut costs/overhead.
Howard Dean fashioned a great media machine when he was head of DNC, but he was undercut at every turn by the Rahmbos. I'm talking about having a stable of excellent camera ready progressives to do the talk show rounds, a team of talking point writers to stay in constant contact with the beltway journos, training media laisions for Congress critters to treat the political journos the way the rightwing media machine treats them, e.g., very well, ego-stroking, lede-writing, phone-call answering, source-referring helpfulness.
How do you think the right dominates the news cycle? It is by default, because the Dems are flat-footed incompetents at media relations.
...the media still has Dean on frequently. For someone who was whispered to be "anti-media," the media likes Dean. He's intelligent, he's polite, he's funny, and he NEVER comes unprepared. You rarely hear him repeating talking points; he always comes up with a new way to say what he has to say in a simple way.
The left needs more people like him.
Dean figured out the media game very well. If he devoted his time and talent and knowledge to creating a big bad progressive media machine, man, ...imagine what that would do! A way to counteract those Drudge-fueled media frenzies on cable teevee...
Man I would TOTALLY contribute to that....
Many of these comments point out the obvious. When you drop to the level of your opponent, you never win. Creating a lobby to outbid the corporate lobby is a loosing tactic. Democracy is based on gathering enough people, not enough money. By getting the majority in congress, democrats took over the chairmanships and the agenda. That was a key victory.
Expecting an individual member of congress to vote your way because you contributed to their campaign is the republican way.
Progressive voters would systematically build a war chest month by month. When House and especially primaries come up, we'd use the war chest to defeat and publicly criticize those who most betrayed the principles that got them elected. The actual targets would be selected by vote of donors to the fund.
In my vision, the attack ads would be relentless. (I know this benefits their opposition - so I'd only do it at primary time.)
Until then...we have these guys...I just donated 25 quatloos for teh cause...
https://pol.moveon.org/donate/august.html?id=...
It's all a simple case of greed. Bottom line, if you get elected into a senate or congress post, you can be set for life. Not just because you can collect a pension, that's small potatoes, but because if you ride the fine line between doing some things right and playing for the big lobbyist backers, you are guarenteed a future job as a consultant, lobbyist, or any other wishwashy title as your reward for seeing thing their way.
The idea that our elected officials get elected by begging for money to run obviously spells out corruption. The pre-wealthy guys who pay their own way usually take the position to further their own interests.
The election/candidate system here breeds corruption... period.
the position to further their own interests." And those of their friends. This is class warfare, and we are losing. We cannot outspend them.
No... I'm a Democrat.
-Tom Sawyer
Still true today.
It's not that the Dims are not organized.
It is that they are the "junior," less important wing of the Party of Property, the party of 'inferiors': negroes, mexicans, gays, the poor, etc.
Pukes are the "senior" wing of the party of property, the wing of the "superior" white people...
The American Corporation Party, with two arms, the Rs and the Ds.
Vote for either at you own peril.
A sucker is born every day.
---
My discovery du jour
Douglas Rushkoff
Life Inc.: How the World Became a Corporation and How to Take It Back
from
Are We All Corporate Shills?
By Helaine Olen, AlterNet. Posted August 7, 2009.
here
Rushkoff speaks at Amazon (Inc of course) here
---
To this must be added the parallel and converging catastrophes of peak oil, peak energy, peak growth and the greatest peak, peak ecology.
The jig is up.
"A sucker is born every
dayMINUTE!"fixed it fer ya alice... don't than me, my little chickadee...
But they are not people and were never intended to enjoy the rights guaranteed by our Constitution.
All corporations SHOULD be under the strict control of the government (the "of, by and for the PEOPLE" government) .. and whenever a corporation fails to act in the best interest of the people its charter should be terminated (or revised) and the Board and Officers of the corporation should be held CRIMINALLY LIABLE.
Like it used to be before the ROBBER BARONS took over in the late 1800's.
how do we keep their attention?
a true failure of democracy that that question has to be even asked.
but this is where we are, and have been for a long time.
really, if we had a healthy democracy, the question would be reverse: how do politicians keep our attention. this would be because politicians would KNOW, without a doubt, that if they went back on campaign promises, worked on behalf of moneyed interests over the people's, and treated their position as pseudo-aristocratic, they would be kicked to the curb. yet, they know this doesn't happen (for the most part. lieberman a notable exception, in dem-land). so, as we see time and time again, a lot democratic politicians go back on their word, their assurances and their platform once elected.
the best way to assure that we 'keep their attention' is to withhold our votes for the GOP-lite, for the DLC members, for the corporatists when it is their time for reelection.
the politicians have learned that they can fuck the people, but will pay dearly if they vote against corporate/banking interests. this needs to be turned on its head. the politicians need to know that if they screw their constituents they will be sent packing, no matter how much $$ they are gifted from their corporate bosses.
Those votes need to go somewhere else to have any impact. Is the time ripe for a viable third party? A lot depends on what happens in the next year or two.
We can't wait a year or two to get organized. By then, it will be too late.
But I can't see it happening until there is a clear failure on the "D" side. If a health care bill either doesn't go through or one that is clearly industry friendly passes, then the impetus might be there.
I think the feeling of frustration comes from the fact that we did "everything right" this time--we had our backs to the wall after years of Bush (and Clinton acting like a Republican); we had a strong candidate in Obama; there was high voter resentment toward Republicans; we organized; we worked hard and raised unprecedented amounts of money for Democrats (which, as AliceX rightly points out, is at the root of our problems either way); and we got "our people" in the door.
And we're still begging for scraps, getting very little for the efforts we made. What do we have to do to get earn our representatives' respect? Because "traditional" means certainly didn't do the job.
i should have been clearer: i didn't mean for people simply not to vote, just don't vote for the untrustworthy dem candidate. write someone in, vote green, etc.
and, hell yeah, it is time for another party--some call it a third party, others (like me) would say it is time for a second party.
candidates. There is not. Elections are shams. Until people accept and acknowledge this, they will remain distracted by falsehoods. The only thing crooked politicians worry about is revolution. That is why they keep this charade up.
n/t
Maybe I'm naive, but what about candidates signing their names to a document in a promise to actively promote those issues we hold dear. Make it a, "you agree to do this and if you don't, then we will do that" kind of arrangement. At least it's more than their word for it. The document could then be used to beat them over the head and elect someone else to replace them. Just trying to come up with something, anything.
If the netroots pick a candidate, raise money for him/her, they win, and then become a blue dog, do it all again next time. Get another candidate and boot the old one out of office. And don't be suckered by their lines again, no matter how much they say they're really with us.
No mercy. They have none for us.
We can elect the most upstanding, willing to serve, uncorrupted person on the planet and before he or she takes office, there are already lobbyists climbing over each other to back truckloads of money into his or her office. The only solution is to take money out of the system but since that money lubricates the system, I can't see how that happens short of popular uprising. I'm not advocating civil war of course but I don't see how anything short of that will do what needs to happen. Make lobbying by corporations illegal and enforce it. Or expect more of the same no matter the party in charge at the moment.
...that Obama once in office would go against some of the ideals he campaigned on (as well as others in congress). I think it shows once and for all that the system is rotten to the core and true change isn't going to happen within the system. It has to happen some other way, organically and grassroots style probably. Yet the idea of a revolution, which sounds good in theory, would probably just replace what we have with v.2.0. I hope for evolution of thought and being will transform this whole shit storm.
Look what spiritual epiphanies did at C Street.
and was fawned over.
Raised lots of hope and a bit of money, too...
turned out to be a traitorous fuckwit.
nobody could have anticipated....
on the principle of people of honor negotiating in good faith.
About 40 years ago, the Pukes decided to game the system. they abandoned such honor as they possessed, and ceased to negotiate in anything even remotely like "good faith." The Dims--merely the other wing of the party of property, power and privilege--went along. They couldn't do otherwise.
Now there is no going back. You don't recapture the lost honor of maidens or of legislatures...
.
Sorry, but no.
It's bad enough that people were taken for a ride. That happens in politics.
But the venom that was unleashed on the people who pointed out (in vain) "Hey, THEY ARE POLITICIANS, and THOSE FOLKS LIE" was inexcusable.
So forgive me for not being upset that you're learning a trite and obvious political lesson. When people tried to educate you before the damage was done, your kind didn't want to know.
mind your manners, boy
My handle back when was this:
I would have stuck with it except the new system wouldn't accept a name that long. I maintain the underlying concept.
Obama, yes we Cannes, it is marketing and manipulation.
A sucker is born every minute (h/t to woody).
On the FISA song (I will have to listen again)
here
Please Howard Dean, run for president again!
just proves that the vast majority of politicians, regardless of party affiliation, are simply dishonest, greedy, and selfish. So expecting them to behave otherwise is just stupid.
Campaign reform...riiiight...to be enacted by the people who would lose if it were! LOLOL.
Term limits...riggggght...see above...
Limit contributions...riiiiight...see above...
Peaceful Protest! LOLOLOL...no no...please stop...I'm gonna hurt myself!!
The system is rigged. Deal with it. You don't like the system...throw it out. It can't be changed by operating within the system.
If that seems harsh to you...put on American Idol...grease yourself up...bend over and stop yer bitchin'.
As soon as a politician is elected his/her first thought is how to stay in office, get re-elected.
Hmmmm??
While every news outlet chooses to lament "Oh where are those in favor of Obama's plans" because we're not all on the streets making fools out of ourselves too, and while I know precisely where they are - I wonder why we aren't taking better advantage of WHERE we all are.
How many millions of perfectly legal emails would it take to crash say Harry Reid's websites? Or the sites run by Max Baucus? Or how about the RNC's website????
If they want to drown out our voices, fine. So we'll write what we have to say instead. And write, and write, and write and write until they begin to start listening again.
Make the best of what you have!!
Only a fraction of our political representatives are normal people, the majority are a rogues gallery for people suffering from various types and stages of psychiatric personality disorders. Politics, law and big business attract such people because they are professions where proficient and sincere liars get ahead. They are changelings who are masters of appearing human but lack empathy and anything resembling a conscience. Once someone like this has back slapped you today with a smile and back stabbed you later with the same smile, he or she will do it again whenever convenient and wonder why you are stupid enough to tolerate it. Political traitors are no different than any other kind of traitor and should be summarily given a bum's rush. Once a Blue dog always a Blue Dog.
No, what we need is a bigger stick and to be willing to use that stick constantly.
"Be progressive or next time we'll vote third party en masse and you'll get less votes than the WWMP and the ANP.* We'll embarass the living shit out of you. Your career will be over. Your next TV appearance will be trying to sell used cars at CRAZY CRAZY CRAZY prices."
We already support them with our votes, now we have to pay them every time we want them to support a cause? Should we just dispense with the politics and rules and allow them to auction their vote to the highest bidder openly? ("I've got fifty thousand for a union busting bill, do I hear sixty for a vote against?!")
How the hell is this democracy?
*White Working Man's Party and American Nazi Party. The idea behind that message would be "Even the scummy racists were more popular than this guy.". It's even possible a liberal independant would win. They might even be willing to stick to their principles...especially if they beat the last guy because he wouldn't.
Give all of these Blue Dogs a free copy of Noam Chomsky's Failed States, and tell them that if they don't understand class warfare, then they don't understand politics.
The idea of a third party may seem enticing, but it would be unlikely to succeed for a variety of reason. If you really want to control your congressmen you need to have a strong organized block of people that will work tirelessly to defeat candidates who don't keep their promises, whether in a primary or a general election.
Sometimes in order to win you have to be willing to lose.
Arlen suddenly started voting 97% with the Dems once he got a primary opponent. The netroots need to find NEW candidates to run against these people in the Democratic primaries next year. Then you'll see them change their colors -- and fast!
reason # 3,456 for why i am an indep
Rahm Emanuel warns liberal groups to stop ads
White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel warned liberal groups this week to stop running ads against Democratic members of Congress.
Moderate Democrats who are elected and re-elected in GOP-leaning districts and states earned their spurs in part by running away from liberal orthodoxy and are unlikely to be moved by outside progressive groups, goes the White House thinking.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/259...
never forget: to the democratic party elite, the ONLY thing that matters is a democratic majority. this trumps every issue. sure, a lot of elected democrats might vote like republicans, be rightwing, but the democratic voters and base should be satisfied knowing that their economic needs and their political passions are sidelined indefinitely for the greater glory of a democratic majority.
fuck that and fuck rahm
STFU!!!!! "The Administration"
The Az01 Democratic candidate I was given thanks to big business will lose next year if I and most of her angry constituents have any say over it.
We'd rather have a Republican we can see than a Democrat we can't trust.
Leadership you can believe in huh?
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/23/27618934_9a...
Being "Republican light" is how Daschle lost to Thune. Daschle lost the democrats votes.
How about by producing results. We don't give a damn about bipartisan happy horsesh!t. The economy, equal rights for gays, (real)healthcare reform and the environment get something done on these issues.
http://www.metroland.net/features.html
See also Letters to the Editor in current "The Nation," second letter that is signed by five doctors. This issue is not dead yet, and no one should give up on it.
may as well be holding guns to the heads of this administration.
Ain't going to happen
But demanding single payer could cause the whole crooked situation to explode, and that would be a good thing for truth. I believe that there is no medical mafia. What proof do you have?
I like Radhika's idea above, about the war chest.
Collect throughout the months between the elections, accumulating enough funds that when deployed against 2 or 3 of the worst offender Blue Dogs will almost certainly be a decisive impact.
Then challenge those blue-dogs who played at being progressives and then betrayed us in their primaries. Hit them with an avalanche of pre-existing funds.
If the funds exist throughout the year, it's a Sword of Damocles hanging over candidates we supported. A constant pressure to not betray us or face the flip side of that support in full force, next primary. And remind them at every step of the way during their term in office that that sword exists and we will hold them accountable for EVERY decision they make, not just the ones where they tack left with a new primary looming.
In the larger view, primary-ing them is the best solution if working within the system (that is, not burning down the whole system). It's the only solution really. Progressive power is at its maximum during elections (when our organizing, passion, early fund-raising, and blogging are most influential). Throughout the year, special interests have enormous advantages. So we need to project our "localized" power throughout the year. The best way to do this might be being able to point to 2-3 bank accounts filled with a number followed by a lot of zeros and say to the wavering congressperson, "Look at what we will bring to bear later if you don't support us now. And we mean specifically YOU."
pols don't need voters or the netroots. They are marketed the same way everything else is. They need on-going money to prepare for the next marketing campaign (aka election) with expensive advertising and PR, and the corporate sponsors who provide that money get what they want under the threat of withdrawing the on-going funding. We're invisible. Our pittance doesn't amount to much. With the big money in hand, they sell out the public interest, the ones who aren't outright psychopaths telling themselves they have no choice and that they're actually making a noble sacrifice. They don't care much about their voting record, or about pleasing voters because they know the public can be manipulated at election time through advertising (for their own good of course) as long as the pol has the bucks to pay for it. I don't know the answer, but I think educating the public about all of this is important, and the netroots do a great job of that. Exposing the critters in their districts with negative TV ads, as we've done lately, may be powerful too. Take it to them publicly; we don't have the big money to win the bribery game behind the scenes, and maybe we shouldn't play that game anyway. Helping promising candidates early in the process is still probably a good idea, but the "promising" part is just that, and we'll sometimes get screwed. Maybe a Donna Edwards every so often makes it worthwhile.
No matter how cynical you become, you just can't keep up - Lily Tomlin
I am furious with the Democratic Party, for not communicating with me, and for carefully and regularly not standing up to Republican talking points.
I am furious with them for not impeaching George W. Bush, refusing to prosecute Bush officials who have tortured prisoners, embezzled public funds, and who have upended our Constituion.
I am furious with them for NOT handling this Health Care debate well at all. Never mind 'single-payer,' we have now even lost the public option because of their carefully engineered mishandling of this important National debate.
I am especially furious with Democrats this week, over their milquetoast reaction to Repbublican thuggery at their townhall meetings. They have a duty to protect my personal safety when I attend a townhall meeting. They have a duty to arrest demonstrators, and to investigate and arrest the Republican functionaries who planned their activities. This falls just short of domestic terrorism and they are ignoring it on a grand scale.
They are doing nothing.
I can't believe how collectively out of touch all of them are; including our supposedly enlightened and compassionate President. Screw this!
=-=-=-=
If the Democratic Party wants to keep their rank and file energized; they need to START DOING THE JOB we elected them to do.
sc
that's the bottom line as long as Goldman Sachs and lobbyists keep greasing their palms.
You didn't think you live in a DEMOCRACY did ya?
You didn't think that politicians get elected to serve the PUBLIC interest did ya?
If you have a Democratic rep or senator, check your mailbox for their newsletters. Other than that, they can't control the message when the corporately owned press act as the conduit between you and your representatives.
I've made my views clear on this site that impeachment charges would have led to no convictions. Can you name the Republican senators who would have voted to convict?
And the DoJ is still full of Bush appointees who have done their damnedest to foul investigations and prosecutions (see the successful appeal of Ted Stevens' conviction for glaring proof). Additionally, the Republicans in the Senate have been holding up the confirmation process on Obama appointees.
Again, the Democratic Party doesn't own the news outlets.
Sorry, your safety at these events is in the hands of local police departments, not a political party.
Obviously the wrong conclusion. They ARE attempting to do something, but they are facing many obstacles right now. Evident, ain't it?
I've made my views clear on this site that impeachment charges would have led to no convictions.
that's functionally the equivalent of saying torture is wrong because it doesn't work.
it doesn't matter if it works or not. It's wrong on principle.
Just as impeachment, whether or not it would have succeeded, was the principled thing to do...
you are correct, they are doing something...they are pretending they are not lying, stealing repubs...they are worse than worthless, and the obstacles they are facing are their scams...
It is critically important that we go all in to replace these freshmen who lied. First, to punish bad behavior and to build a reputation for results. Removing them teaches future candidates about consequences. And they are never more vulnerable than as rookies running or re-election.
Second, left alone, these examples are the Max Baucus chairs of the future. If we don't get rid of them now we will live with them for the rest of our lives.
Seriously, embarrass the fu*k out of them. If people in the areas where funds were raised or who donated funds into a general pot are angry enough they can donate money to ensure that everyone in a given representative's electoral district knows how badly misrepresented they are. That's the only way these people might respond (some are dead to reason or empathy). In the end they can get all the money from the corporations and lobbys but if the people all know how useless these folks are in representing them than it won't matter one bit how much corporate clout they have. Energize the people folks. You did it once with the help of some soaring rhetoric. Do it again and properly empower the people.
Nagahapun.
Humiliation, now, there's a good chance that would work.
Shower the fuckers in rotting vegetables and animal parts whenever they appear in public.
that MIGHT have a chance...
They are.
When tom Daschle lost to John Thune in South Dakota it was because even the democrats would not vote for Tom. He had voted with the republicans too many times on issues too important to the democrats. Thune did not defeat Daschle. Daschle defeated himself.
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin is making the same error by taking the blue dog position on health care. She will lose the next election because she abandoned the democrats who put her in office. Being republican light doesn’t cut it with democrats on important issues like healthcare, civil rights and the illegal war in Iraq. Blue dogs from other states may suffer the same fate.
is to vote in a Green Party candidate. Democratic partisans will forever be Charlie Brown the Democratic Party's Lucy until you show them you're willing to upset their very cozy apple cart. Throw your money and votes behind a Green Party candidate for the House, and watch them go apeshit. It does you no good to sit back and let a Republican win, either. You have to go whole hog into supporting the alternative. That's how you get change. It probably takes more spine than the average U.S. voter has, though.
along the lines of an idea I've been tossing around called "out-bribe.org". the organization raises $$, then offers 5% more to whatever Congressperson it's necessary to bribe than what they are being paid by the special interest in question. be able to raise money on the spot & from the DCC & DSCC, together with private donations.
just buy the votes back from the people who've been bought off. it's the only thing that will work.
You said, "Maybe we need a netroots lobbying firm."
No.
We already have one that we sign and snail mail every April 15th (provided they deliver something called "gainful employment" instead of out-sourcing it to cheap, ignorant, foreign wage-slaves). If that's not enough, let meritocracy flush 'em straight down the damned Potomac without a life raft and into the unemployment, foreclosure, and welfare lines provided they can survive the freakin' drowning.
You also said, "If we have to bludgeon our candidates every single time we want their attention, they'll start to tune us out and we become little more than an annoyance. Yeah, sometimes the big stick works. But we need a carrot, too."
Here's a good enough carrot for 'em: Remind them that we don't negotiate with terrorists and a terrorist is a terrorist -- be they wearing a crescent, crucifix, star, dollar sign, or pretentious American flag lapel pin in that suit that cost more than a child's education in a public school for a year. They want to traffic in plantations and Stockholm Syndrome, then by Jefferson's deist boots, let 'em reap a harvest of what they've been sowing H.L. Mencken style -- good, hard, and right up the tailpipe without the lube.
Remind them also that if the netroots can help them get elected without resorting to lobbying firms, we can also start a true, non-AstroTurf, 50 state grass roots referendum that reduces their salary to $50,000 a year and strips them of the power to vote themselves cost-of-living raises. They're not going to vote for the working poor and middle classes if they're getting paid *BETTER* than the median income of the working poor and middle classes (stuffing their office freezers with bribe and blood money notwithstanding). Cut the purse and the "power/personal profit" motive out of the equation, and that'll be a start in the right direction.
I read this. I agree, we have the ability to put them in power, we should have ability to take them out of power as well (peacefully, obviously), but I think that requires a little bit more message control on behalf of progressives and Democrats.
Message control is what Republican's have always had and they jam it down the populous' throat. I'm not saying we should be like them because I honestly hate what they do, but if we could at least directly and efficiently challenge the validity of the Republican noise machine, we could make a difference.
Unfortunately, we need to start with our own problem children (Ahem, Blue-Dogs).
The right is where the right-wing authoritarians go -- the hardcore *followers*. Hard-core followers don't tend to be progressives. The segment of the American population that worships and wants to be told comforting lies and "clings to their guns and their religion" are always going to believe a blatant shyster like Reagan over the disquieting truths told by a decent progessive like Jimmy Carter.
The media will, in turn, bow to the right at every opportunity, because the right has all the dopes who will be eager consumers, just as they are eager Teabaggers. You don't offend your most credulous demographics.
You're asking what the solution is to a system where a tiny number of people with lots of money and power control a bunch of nitwits who believe whatever is presented to them in the most jingoistic, manipulative way? There isn't one. Sorry to say it, but this country is doomed, thanks to human stupidity and the many, many compromises that weak people in government have made to stronger, more ruthless people.
You call these people neophytes, but you describe your selection of them the way someone might select a casual friend... So who is the real neophyte?
Next candidate you select to support, have three people go out for a private conversation and present 3 very different images of who you are. See how flexible your candidate is.
And don't advise me who to support again, until you can say for sure that your recommended candidate told at least one of your 3 folks to go to hell.
I would have to do some research but it appears as if these recently elected Blue Dogs are relative novices at politics. They didn't really have any body of work that you could judge on what they thought or how well they kept their word.
Perhaps the secret is to only endorse people (if possible) who have served in some level of local politics. If Joe Smith has been an alderman or mayor and has proved themselves progressive then endorse and raise money for them.
One thing is clear and that's for a lot of these individuals. It is really easy for them to lie and tell everyone what they want to hear regardless of which side of an issue they're on. You're progressive? Well buddy I'm one too. You're a conservative. There is no one more conservative than me pal. And so it goes.
It's worth considering. What's worse, to back someone who then stabs you in the back or to endorse no one? If you endorse no one in a race because there are no progressives then you have that much more money to give your true progressive candidates to get them elected.
Yes - the assumption that the 'netroots' candidates would feel some obligation to pursue 'transformational' policies was naive.
Particularly for House members, the campaign's the thing: the every-two-year cycle of elections pretty much necessitates raising campaign $$$ ALL THE TIME. If the $$$ come from well-heeled, industry-supported lobbyists, well - that's the way the game is played.
If the 'progressive' movement hopes to succeed - 'succeed' as in 'getting what we want' - we need to have a very large bank-account - not just during formal campaign seasons, but ALL THE TIME. It's not impossible, but it'll take some extraordinary organizational skills... just exactly the kind of skills that the diffuse, progressive netroots lack - we're in it for ideas & policies, not for politics!
By being simplistic enough to buy into this bullshit argument that people can be herded into only one of two sides on one singular line. This disregards every other point in space, & if you're buying into this crap, you're the problem.
Batman needs a Joker, otherwise he just spent 20 billion to become the world's richest ninja to catch purse snatchers. Look at how many Fox news posts there are on this site.
Stop playing along with their games, hate the Democrats as much as the Republicans, & remember that WE are the government.
Identify the most egregious Blue Dog offender and consider that House seat expendable as it may as well belong to a Republican. Start a fund raiser on these pages to raise money for the Republican opponent and give the money, very publicly, to that opponent. Watch other blogs follow suit and watch the media catch one. Its an easy, no brainer, no research story for some lazy MSM reporter.
Send press releases to right wing blogs, conservative columnists and on air personalities. They will love it. A Republican getting cash from progressives. Pardon the visual, but I can imagine Glen Beck crying in joy. Blue Dogs are a bg media story right now and this will get play during the August recess.
The message will be delivered loud and clear and the incumbent Blue Dog will be crippled in the eyes of his core constituency. Doubts will be cast among the slim majority of Democratic voters as their Member of Congress is targeted on a national basis. It will also be a rallying cry among the Republican voters and I'll go out on a limb to predict the defeat of the Blue Dog.
Sacrifice one to save many. War is hell and as a former paratrooper, I know that one of us had to be the first one to jump. With seaborne invasions, someone has to be the first one to hit the beach. At least there would not be any second guessing and hand wringing if a Republican had the seat.
While a campaign starts getting attention with the first Blue Dog, start one on the second. That will make a lot of Blue Dog heads turn and many will realize the reason they were elected.
Sometimes one has to take steps backward before moving ahead.
The answer, I believe, was in believing that Democrats were somehow less beholden to special interests than their Republican counterparts. I'll grant that there are some Dems out there who vote their conscience, but for the most part they pander to the same degree as their opponents. The only difference between the two parties seems to be that the GOP is more honest in their indifference to the American people by way of their full support of corporate profits. The Democrats try to say one thing to get elected, and then try to fly under the radar when they change direction. The debate on health care is yet another illustration that the two major political parties are really just two sides of the same corrupt coin. We need a viable third party. I'm tired of voting for spineless weasels.
The funny part is you think that the Democrats care about your ideals. They are as bribed up as the Republicans.
Unless or until we can change a system whereby we are basically FORCING our politicians to need so much money that they must sell themselves out, we SHOULD have a netroots lobbying firm.
is at www.RIGHTtoCONSENT.com
We don't want to hear from you guys.
Ever.
I think that forming a "PAC" changes the entire purpose for which Act Blue was set up. It is by definition an organization of grass roots Progressives to support grass roots politicians. There seems to be something wrong with living in NYC or D.C. where people become immediately enthralled to the point of forgetting the world outside of their "landing pad".
I think the best thing to do is seriously. When a candidate we supported turns out to be a BLUE DOG.... Label them as such at the Act Blue site and open the door for another candidate. We should use the same method to replace them as we successfully used to place them.
Maybe the second round of "Progressive" politicians might remember who sent them to Washington in the first place. Just throw them out.
We have time right now to seek someone else from their districts anew. Someone else who has time to prove their Progressive values. Someone else who can be supported instead of the Blue Dogs.
The reality of our system is survival of the financed. It costs so much money to get elected and re-elected that the office holder's choices are fund raise or die.
Bringing moral and ideological arguments to this system may be satisfying. But it is not going to get progressives where they want to be.
Our Congressmen are going to sell out. They really don't have any viable alternative. The question is whether they are going to sell out to us or our opponents. Someone is going to own them.
And, we have the potential to own our Congress. Business has money. But we have money too. Lots of it. We're just going about it the wrong way.
I give to the Democratic Party. The last time I got a call, the plea was for $50. I gave $100. I tried to give $50 per month. But that was REFUSED. Why? Because I'd already agreed to a single contribution of $100. (Didn't make any sense to me either.) If they'd accepted $50 per month, I'd have given at the rate of $1,200 over the election cycle. (As it turned out, I gave to Obama too. All told I made about $6-$800 in contributions last year, I think.)
Think about it. I understand that the Democratic party raised about $763 million in the last election cycle in total. It would take 1.25 million people giving $25 a month to equal that.
We only want to finance the liberal side of the contests. Is there anyone who cannot pay $25 per month to buy back our government? Are there not 2 million liberals willing to put their money where there mouths are? If there are, it would be $1.2 billion over the election cycle. That's a lot of influence.
OK I admit it. That is way too much money. But still the idea is the same on a smaller scale.
It looks to me like a failure to organize. The potential is there. Pick liberal candidates. Finance the candidate in full on the condition that he not take funds from any other source on penalty of losing our support. And, keep score of his performance.
Remember it is not a question whether the candidate is going to sell out. It is a question whether we are going to be the owners.
Hello all, 1st post here...
I know what you are thinking, but I am really tired of waiting for it to be our turn...
In my home state the "Democratic" candidates are always Blue Dog types and not because there is no support for progressive values and goals. The problem is that the state party and the local apparatus statewide is controlled by the old line southern Good Old Boys and they have no interest in stepping aside or seeing anyone else enter the fray.
Bottom Line- On election day, we get to choose between a NeoCon Republican and an almost NeoCon Blue Dog DINO. Some choice & my state is not unique in this regard. We need a place for progressives to be heard in the public arena and not just among the party faithful. It's time to purge the Democratic Party of DINOs or found a Progressive Party.
Login or Register to post comments.