Home » Users » Scott Goldstein » Blog » How it Happened...the Democratic...
Democracy for America personal blog for Scott Goldstein
How it Happened...the Democratic takeover was the product of real Party reform
There has been a lot of talk in the last couple of days about the macro factors that were at play in the midterm elections. The Democratic takeover was certainly due in large part to discontent over the Iraq war and the culture of corruption in Washington, but it would be a mistake not to acknowledge the massive changes that have taken place in the Democratic Party over the last two years
follow me below...
Almost two years ago Howard Dean took a stand that many in his own Party considered radical, that the Democratic Party should compete in all 50 states, in every single race from school board to the U.S. Senate. Against a lot of internal resistance he forged ahead with his '50 state strategy’ and made heavy investments in state parties. When he took over, the Democratic Party only had a real infrastructure in less than half of the 50 states, and just a year later, every single state had at least 4 full time Democratic staffers. That investment, not only of money, but of confidence, boosted the Democratic effort around the country.
For the first time in more than 30 years in some places, the Democrats went door to door asking Americans for their vote and presenting their plan for a New Direction for America. What they found were thousand of Democrats in red areas who were afraid to say so because they didn’t know there were any other Democrats around! Door by door stories came in of red state Americans welcoming Democratic Party volunteers with surprise, and relief. In Mississippi Democrats had paid to print their own Kerry signs in 2004 because there was no real Party infrastructure and the campaign had given up on more than half of the country.
There was an ongoing debate in the past year about allocation of resources. Rahm Emmanuel at the DCCC and Chuck Schumer at the DSCC wanted to devote all of the party’s money and resources to the 2006 effort while Dean wanted to take the opportunity starting in an off-year (2005) to build up the state parties to ensure not just a majority in 2006, but in 2016. The fight was fierce and confrontational at times, and in the end, deals were brokered.
Dean reserved a significant amount of funds for the 2006 effort without sacrificing the Party building. While the DCCC and DSCC were outdoing their Republican counterparts in fundraising, the DNC was still raising significantly less than the GOP. At least that was the story from the insiders.
What they forgot to consider was that when Dean went around the country raising money, he was very often raising money DIRECTLY for the State Parties instead of throwing it all to the DNC coffers and then redistributing it. This meant the DNC total looked small in comparison to GOP fundraising, but in actuality they were making a far more worthy investments, and placing a great deal of confidence in local Democratic leaders.
Even by the figures that the media kept citing, the DNC was still raising far more than it had under the previous DNC Chairman and setting records for off year fundraising. All this amounted to Chairman Dean being revered and respected by the State Parties and despised inside Washington. He was doing what he’s always been known for, giving power directly to the people.
Within months, Dean’s 50-State Strategy began to produce real results. On the ground, the newly hired organizers were building an infrastructure for the Democratic Party where we haven’t been active for a quarter century. They reached out to Democrats who thought the Party had given up on them, brought in new voters, and started spreading our message to Independents and moderate Republicans. And it paid off. The Democrats started winning races at the local level all over America. We won state legislature races in Mississippi and North Carolina, local races in Indiana and Utah, and laid the foundation for future victories.
Along with getting out the Democratic message, the new Democratic staff set up a '50-State Turnout' operation to compete with the famous Republican 72 hour get out the vote machine. And in the end the Democratic GOTV effort matched and in some placed surpassed that of the Republicans, and the results were clear. The Democrats swept to power in the House by an overwhelming vote, and they took the Senate by winning key races in Montana and Virginia (two places the 50 state strategy had placed a high premium on). The highest Democratic turnout in 2006 was in South Dakota, further proving the Party has breathed new life into areas they have long been ignoring. Amongst the Democratic pick-ups in the House of Representatives were 3 Democratic victories in Indiana, wins in Kentucky, North Carolina, Kansas, and Arizona. The Democrats set the all time record for contesting a total of 425 out of 435 races. The previous record was 418, set by the Republicans in 1994.
The party was also able to coordinate their message for the first time. Dean, Pelosi, Reid, Emmanuel, and Schumer were able to agree on a ‘6 for 06’ agenda for the Party including honest leadership, open government and real security including transition in Iraq, energy independence, economic Prosperity, educational excellence, a Healthcare system that works for everyone, and retirement security. Then they backed up each of those planks with very specific plans on each issue, including a plan for the first 100 hours of Democratic control including raising the minimum wage, cutting the interest rate on student loans, allowing seniors to negotiate for lower prescription drug costs, ethics legislation, and so on.
At the time, the media had a narrative, “The Republicans may be incompetent, but the Democrats have no ideas.” No matter how many agendas the Democratic Party released, no matter how many press conferences they held outlining specific policy proposals, the media would not report it…they already had their storyline. While the media loves jumping on the Democrats for not having their own plan on Iraq, the political calculation made by the Party was exactly the right one. If they had released a specific plan on Iraq, the attention would have turned to the faults of their plan as the Republicans and the mainstream media would have picked it apart. But instead they were able to keep the attention on the failure of the Bush administration and the Republicans in executing this unpopular war. If the attention stayed on Bush and Iraq, they knew they would win, and did exactly that.
Apart from building a new 50-state infrastructure, building a bench of future Democratic candidates, and coordinating their message, the Party also managed to reform how they reach out to the LGBT community, Evangelicals (which worked as they picked up 1/3 of the Evangelical vote), and their base of African Americans and women more effectively. There were significant reforms at almost every level of the Party (barring how they reach out to young voters, which will be a topic of a future editorial), and on Tuesday we saw the results of a new, more confident, more coordinated Democratic effort that has a real chance to secure a lasting majority.
Great write-up, Scott.
And let's all say Happy Birthday, Fox News. Hilarious video.
Is this the active thread?
If so, then Deans are first.
I actually think that reason is a rather late development in the evolution of the human brain--sort of an add-on that we can do without.
Hi, Monica. Carol Shea-Porter is STILL the greatest example of a Democrat breaking out of the mold. I am sending her story around to every Democratic activist I know.
Think about how great it would be if we could put the funds into organizing precincts rather than funding outrageously expensive TV ads all the time? Just think about it....Dean is brilliant.
Stat Man
Tue, 11/14/06
9:44 am
"moderates"! But what does that mean?
Moderate - someone who jumps on and straddles every fence around.
THIS JUST IN FOLKS..............................
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad has said Teheran is ready to talk to the US once it changes its attitude.
His remarks follow suggestions that the US should start direct talks with the country to reduce the violence in Iraq.
Bishops Call for Change on Iraq Policy
By Michael Paulson
The Boston Globe
Tuesday 14 November 2006
Catholic leaders stress need for justice, peace.
Baltimore - The nation's Catholic bishops, saying the United States needs to move past the "shrill and shallow debate" of last week's midterm Congressional elections, declared yesterday that the goal in Iraq should be justice and peace, rather than victory, and that the nation should withdraw its forces at the earliest opportunity, consistent with a responsible transition.
Meeting here in the aftermath of the election in which American voters, in part because of anger over the Iraq war, handed control of the House and Senate to the Democrats, the bishops unanimously authorized a public statement calling for the nation to "seriously examine alternative courses of action" in Iraq.
Indy Steve
Tue, 11/14/06
1:37 pm
I would break up into two groups:
- Those that are "conservative" on some issues and "liberal" on other issues. Since 2005 Murtha would qualify (prior to that he waqs a big military supporter)
- Another kind of moderate is one seeking balance, as an example one who would beleive that the current tax structure is overly benefitial to the rich but also understands that a 1970's kind of tax structure will kill the economy. Let's just say there are many levels of moderation between Bush and Castro.
Murtha, a big Military Supporter
Hoyer, a big Militarial Enforcer.
Which do you think is better?
The DemocracyFest Thread finally made it to the "Most Popular" page. I'd still like to see it Front Paged though...
Not sure how that happens, but more recommends can't hurt ;-)
http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/18376...
Linda*in*SFNM
Tue, 11/14/06
2:05 pm
I think you would find that up to 2005, Murtha was a big military spender and enforcer, his change is very recent.
Anyone know where I can access a sample campaign field plan? I know what we need to do in my head, but it would be good to have a template to edit.
It seems like I remember something like that from the DFA training, but can't seem to find any of the actual training materials on DFA-Link.
12.
Stat Man
Tue, 11/14/06
2:09 pm
...Murtha was a big military spender and enforcer, his change is very recent.
-------------
...lol, takes time to gain wisdom..., for some lifespan isn't enough
It's funny, but the very people who like to call themselves "moderates" usually aren't. I guess the word will go the way of the "compassionate conservative" which wasn't either.
If I had to pick between a too-far-to-the-right John Murtha and a Bush-kissing too-far-to-the-right Joe Lieberman, I'll take Murtha any day.
Talk of the Nation on NPR discussing the future of the Democratic party NOW.
Oops. I guess I should have looked harder before asking for help. Here's a sample field plan on page 80 of the DFA Training manual:
http://www.dfalink.com/uploads/files/415...
Moderates: Those people who never found a single issue they could not stand on both sides of.
There is mid ground between Castro and Bush. Liberal democrats occupy that midground and so do most americans. The problems is that people have been brainwashed about what Liberal really means.
What is really funny is that all those people republican commercials were calling liberal two weeks ago are suddenly labled moderate or conservative.
Truely the TV media is useless.
TTT,
I'm having the same problem. They suggested I wipe my cookies, but that didn't do anything. Fortunately, I have this old backup account.
I can login using my primary account at DFA link.
Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
Published on Monday, June 12 2006 by The Nation
Murtha v. Hoyer
by John Nichols
When the House of Representatives voted Thursday on the question of whether to allow old media companies to colonize and control the internet, the two men who would like to be majority leader in a Democrat-controlled Congress split their votes.
House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, the Maryland Democrat who has long been seen as the heir apparent for the majority leader post if Democrats regain power, stuck to his usual pattern: He did as the lobbyists for the largest corporations – and their allies in the Bush administration – asked.
Congressman John Murtha, the Pennsylvania Democrat who has indicated that he will challenge Hoyer for the No. 2 position in the party caucus if Democrats retake the House in November, did the opposite.
Hoyer voted for the corrupt "Communications, Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006, which the telephone and cable companies are using as a vehicle to create a two-tier internet in which the sites of corporations and candidates that pay high fees to broadband providers are easily accessed while the sites of small businesses, community groups and independent thinkers will be difficult – perhaps impossible – to reach. Murtha voted against it.
It wasn't the first time that Hoyer and Murtha have split on fundamental questions.
While Murtha has been an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, Hoyer has steered a cautious course far closer to that of the Bush administration.
Last December, Murtha voted against making the PATRIOT Act permanent. Hoyer voted in favor of the move, and in so doing gave the Bush administration everything it was asking for with regard to the controversial law.
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0612...
Statman, facts speak for themselves.
Looks like a lot of people cannot log in with the blog changes last night. 3rd account. Will it kick me out again once I log out? Who knows.
Look, I'm tired. We're all tired. Do we really have to watch another blow-dried, self-important career ass-kisser like Hoyer or Lieberman throw DLC slugs or NFL-linebacker-resembling lawmakers like Ellen Tauscher on TV to insist the sky is not blue? I mean, can we at least get a few days rest from this? And more importantly, can the Democratic rank-and-file in Congress please put its foot down and reject this comedic-yet-sad B-movie parody? I mean, come on people - it's embarrassing.
Just checking to see if I logged in successfully - hi everyone!!
No problemo :)
Well, that last email account lasted for a few posts. Let's try a new one.
This blog always seems to take a few steps back every time it takes a step forward.
We will not tolerate politicians who are corrupt and who are bought and paid for by the rich. We will go after any elected leader who puts him or herself ahead of the people. And we promise you we will go after the corrupt politicians on our side FIRST. If we fail to do this, we need you to call us on it. Simply because we are in power does not give us the right to turn our heads the other way when our party goes astray. Please perform this important duty as the loyal opposition.
Okay,
I added my mailto link, formatting and picture to my backup account and it wouldn't let me login. I went back to a regular name and it let me back in. So it looks like Luigi has done something to stop us from playing games with our names. Since Denise's picture is still up, I'd say it's tied to the anchor tag or the headline tag.
When we started in January, war profiteering was a subject that desperately needed attention. It was a story that wasn't being told and the issue cried out for exposing. And then this past Sunday November 12 the issue was front and center on page one of the New York Times and all over the news. In different and various permutations, the headlines all read that there will be hearings, there will be oversight, questions will be asked. The profiteers will be exposed.
Is amazing too strong of a word? It is a result of all your efforts.. Your support of Iraq for Sale and the issue of war profiteering has been remarkable.
So, thank you to the volunteer researchers who worked in secret to get us key information.
Thank you to the thousands of screening hosts who made over 4,000 official screenings happen.
Thank you to the Patriots Against War Profiteering who donated 8,500 DVDs to libraries, schools, and military installations around the country and around the world so this film can be seen by as wide an audience as possible. Read some responses from folks who received the film, like that of Army Medic Dan Walsh who wrote to us while serving in Iraq “This stuff needs to be known by the average American."
Thank you to Senator Dorgan, his staff and the Democratic Policy Committee who hosted hearings in DC on this issue- and invited people in Iraq for Sale to participate and share their stories. You can watch video of the hearings at the DPC website.
Thank you to the elected officials like Senator Harry Reid, Senator John Kerry, and Congressman James Clyburn who used the film to call attention to the issue and the need for oversight and accountability in the war.
Thank you to all the candidates who ran for office in last week's election - like Jim Webb, who saw the film and immediately agreed to introduce it at our DC premiere and then organized over 100 screenings in Virginia- and candidates across the country like Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders who used the film in their campaigns and urged voters to choose a new path.
Thank you to the folks at UNITE HERE who hosted hundreds of screenings across the Mid-West and reached thousands of union members with the film.
Thank you to the heroes and heroines in the military, like Sergeant Jon LaCore who wrote to us after watching the film in Iraq. In his letter he said, "I'm anxious to see if a change in the House and Senate will bring about a change here in Iraq." And, looking at the Sunday paper, it looks as though he may get to see change happen.
A deep heart-felt thank you to all the families and patriots who participated in this film. Your bravery in sharing your stories has touched millions. You have brought about real change and for that we are all grateful.
And finally THANK YOU to the 3,000 of you who contributed 50 dollars or more to make the film happen. We want you to know the front page of the New York Times would not have read the way it did, if all of you had not made it possible to begin the work on the film with your generous contributions.
Each and every one of us at Brave New Films sends our great appreciation, respect and deepest thanks for an amazing job. We celebrate the critical raising of this issue, we salute those who have stepped forward to tell the story at great personal sacrifice. We grieve for those whose lives have been sacrificed to profiteering. And, we look forward to the work ahead to make sure the profiteers are stopped.
Come January we look forward to getting your ideas on what's next for Brave New Films.
Yours sincerely,
Robert, Rick, Jim, Jimmy, Sarah, Tracy, Devin, Paris, Lissette, Jesse and everyone at Brave New Films
All the fun pics are gone? What happened?
Weather is so strange in the mountains today. We had a ten minute blizzard and now the sun is out. High winds but whoops - looks like more snow is coming.
No, Rich, I did what Denise did...pic only...and it let me in last night but booted me out today. There is something wrong in the programming. Luigi emailed (doesn't seem to be anything he did on purpose) and he has some high priority projects but is aware that we are having problems.
Anyone know if Tara is still with DFA? I haven't heard from her in ages but don't remember her sending out anything saying she was leaving.
http://www.counterpunch.org/lind11142006.html
Paralysis in both parties:
In a reality neither Republicans nor Democrats will dare face, we have only one option left in Iraq. That option is to admit failure and withdraw. We can do it sooner, or, at the cost of more American dead and wounded, we can do it later. Obviously, sooner is better, but that would require a bold decision, which no one in Washington is willing to make.
In World War I, after the failure of the Schlieffen Plan, Kaiser Wilhelm II wanted an early, compromise peace. Regrettably, he was unwilling to force that policy on his recalcitrant generals.
Today, in Washington, the generals want peace. They could give the politicians of both parties and both relevant branches of government the cover they need to make peace, by going public in favor of an early withdrawal. Unfortunately, that would require a level of moral courage not notably evident in the senior American military. In its absence, the whole American political system will continue to flounder in a sea of half-measures, American troops will continue to die in a lost war, and the crisis of legitimacy of the American state will continue to grow.
Worth a read, follow the link:
Leave the Internet aside: the architecture of Dean Politics has become the de mode style for the entire party. Dean promoted a vocal, confrontational style of campaigning, one that did not cede an inch to Republicans. His primary campaign was predicated on a 50 state strategy. He urged Democrats to adopt issues that would drive wedges between the Republican base and the party's weaker adherents (mostly in the suburbs). He rejected the politics of inoculation, pronouncing himself proud to be the talisman of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. He intuited that the party (and voters) wanted the Democrats to be the opposition party.
. . . .
But give Dean credit for setting the tone and style of Democratic politics. Successful, Democratic politics, that is, in an environment that Dean first detected three years ago.
Yes that worked. Taking all the formating out.
I met John Murtha, shook his hand and listened to his speech to a county dem picnic--real basis people who understand real basic points.
Somebody asked on the other thread why Hoyer said a pull-out would be a national security disaster. There's a real simple explanation. They've stuffed the country full of high tech spying equipment and latests in arms and they don't know how they're going to get the stuff out. The Iraqi propensity to loot has them running scared.
First question is who's going to admit that all that stuff is there?
I think Rich hit on the solution. I logged to DFA-Link rather than the blog. In my contact info, I took out the code that linked my name to my graphics blog, and just used plain text. I was then able to log-in at the blog with my original account.
So DFA-Link can now brag about at least two new members. But, they're me. LOL
The Baker Commission--Same old, same old
http://www.counterpunch.org/werther11142006.html
In the wake of the human and fiscal wreckage of the Iraq fiasco, all Washington trembles in anticipation at the release of the Baker-Hamilton Commission's report on Iraq. Unlike many other commissions, its lucubrations have been held in camera, the method favored by chief Bush family consigliere and fixer James Baker.
A run-down of its other principals should give us a strong indication where this operation is heading. Aside from Baker, there is as co-chairman once again Lee Hamilton, a past master at these performances. As the éminence beige of the Democratic foreign policy apparatus, Hamilton has been participating in high-level cover-ups of government shenanigans stretching back to the Iran-Contra affair.
The rest of the cast consists of: Vernon Jordan, one of Bill Clinton's money men and obviously intended to slap the Wahabbite insurgents of the Black Caucus into line; Ed Meese, faithful purveyor of balderdash for countless decades and a link to the Reaganites; Lawrence Eagleburger, a saturnine Bush family wheel horse and Kissinger liegeman known mainly for his staggeringly immense girth and ability to balance on a cane while juggling a cigarette and an asthma inhaler; Leon Panetta, a professional ward heeler and thief of a 1986 Indiana Congressional election, tasked to corral a spectrum of Democrats roughly bounded by Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer; former Defense Secretary William Perry, representing the interests of the merchants of death; Charles Robb, who began his career as a White House doorman and who symbolically remains one four decades later; ex-Senator Alan Simpson, wise-cracking cowpoke (and member of a disastrous Congressional delegation to Iraq in 1990, whose purpose was to ply Saddam with U.S. taxpayer loot via the Commodity Credit Corporation); and former Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the lone member of the commission with no obvious ties to Beltway monkey business and presumably tapped for the sheer novelty value.
Probably the only reason Baker and Hamilton didn't select Clark Clifford or Paul Nitze to serve on the commission is that these two quintessential Establishmentarians are legally dead.
Apparently my second email account stopped working as soon as I went in and linked my "jc" to my graphics blog.
Cooptation of the term Progressive.
On NPR, the "representative" of the Progressive side was a Director of Third Way which bills itself as a "strategy Center for Progressives". Best as I can tell, this is a spinoff from the DLC (Gov. Vilsak, BTW, is the chair of the DLC). Be aware of how distorted the term progressive has become and don't be fooled. THis is a Clintonite/DLC organization passing itself as progressive.
Third Way has all all of the same honorary chairs as the DLC. It is a front organization.
And by the way, the program on NPR talked about the future of the Dem party and the elections, but didn't mention Howard Dean once.
#42 but I did not have a link on my account last night and that one will not let me into it today. The only thing I had was a photo. And if you are saying that we can't have photos either, why does it work for Denise?
I think there is more too it.
Ok, I have this figured out.
It doesn't like any of the HTML formating before the first name, but seems to be ok with that formating after the name. So the Picture comes up because it is on the second line.
Try that.
Barbara,
Maybe you and Denise have your photo link code in different spaces? (First Name, last name)
Has Denise tried to comment since hers above, or could she be having trouble now? I was able to for a while, then when I closed my browser, it wouldn't let me back in with the new browser window.
I'm just making some guesses, which is usually part of trouble-shooting.
Here's a good article describing the group Third Way. Beware, they call themselves Progressive but are really a center-right group financed by the DLC. Statman, this looks like where you belong.... ;-)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41113-2004Nov10.html
I'm sick of everyone calling themselves progressive when they are really NOT.
I would bet that Denise has her image code in her last name, with no code before her first name.
Okay, I just moved my blog link to my "last name" field and left a single blank in the first name field. That gave me an error screen when I first tried to enter this comment. I just changed it back to plain text.
I was able to write my whole name with the <br> breakign up all in my last name.
The link is now working.
-
By The Original Stat Man on Nov 14, 2006 9:44 AM ESTModerates and reason are first.