Welshman comments:
At some stage the concerns of members of the Demecratic Party had better stop looking at the doomsayers and start taking a positive and progressive view of what is and how it can be made better within the context of what exists now, rather than the awfulness of what could be.
2006 elections are not that far away. The transition from appearing being just an opposition into a party of government, with a clear and pragmatic vision of how it is going to lead, needs to start now (and I wrote the same four months ago).
No solution for a future crisis in oil is going to emerge through 2006 to 2008 so accept the fact and work within the current boundaries of the possible.
Our blogs are choked with negativity. Recommended diaries are those which feed our misery. Let Boomantribune be the one to mark itself out as a positive source of confidence for the future. The electorate won’t buy into anything else.
All of which is has little to do with this thread, but I had to say it somewhere and it applies to 99.9% of the threads everywhere at the moment.
Welshman is right. Writes Seattle’s ever-perceptive Sandeep Kaushik in “OPPORTUNITY COSTS – Dems Are Misunderestimating Bush”:
Continues Sandeep Kaushik in his regular political feature story in The Stranger, a free weekly published in Seattle:
“The problem,” Kaushik observes, “is that what goes down can come up just as easily–especially when the opposing party appears to be locked in a state of suspended animation. Democrats are desperately in need of a positive reform agenda.”
Take Social Security:
To some extent, this is a function of being so completely shut out of power. But not entirely. Take Social Security, where the Democrats have demonstrated impressive unity …
“Gleeful liberal pundits argue that the Dems are winning, and should avoid the temptation to make a counter offer. They’re wrong,” Kaushik insists.
What now? How do we respond to Welshman? And how do we get the Democratic hierarchy to see that, as Kaushik puts it, “now is the time”?
I confess to being guilty of negative and a doomsayer. My excuse is that, after working my tush off in 2000, 2002 and 2004, I’m flummoxed.
I feel a smidgen of hope that Dean is now chair of the Democratic party. But I worry that he was installed as a frontman to placate the activist Democrats.
I see disturbing movements among Deaniacs in WA state. I see them bashing our junor, freshman senator Maria Cantwell for some of her votes, and ignoring the good she’s done. I see them scouring the countryside for a “progressive” candidate to run against her in the primary in 2006.
I think that’s an immense waste of time, and have said so. I’ve further said that, because she IS a freshman, she’s had to gauge her votes carefully. She voted yes on Rice’s confirmation (earning nasty rebukes from the Deaniacs) but no on Gonzales (and gave a marvelous floor speech on his ties to Enron). She almost got through her and Kerry’s ANWR amendment to the budget bill. But some of the Deaniacs are still hell-bent on making her pay for every vote they don’t like. Now, they’re looking at a Green Party candidate who ran aganist Sen. Patty Murray in the primary — I hope that’s the best they can do.
Cantwell will likely face Dino Rossi, the popular GOP candidate for governor who barely lost (and who his supporters insist won). She’ll have the battle of her life.
Spell-check, Susan, spell-check… it’ll catch your typos. That happens every time I’m HOT and BOTHERED… I type furiously. “Damn the torpedoes. Full speed ahead!”
But I’ve been very upset about the constant complaints against Cantwell because, for one important reason, such contant complaining yields tepid support. And tepid support is what can doom a candidate. (And so we saw in the 2004 gubernatorial race — many Democrats didn’t like their candidate Gregoire, and preferred theirs who lost the primary, and they never got off the dime to support Gregoire. That she is governor is a miracle.)
Stop polarizing, and start uniting.
It’s easy and attractive to simply sit back and point fingers at the flaws of the opposition, the problem is that the only net effect is to strengthen the determination of the opposition.
Forget about abstract issues like environment and humanitarian aid. Those things can be done easily enough while in office, if the green and bleeding heart contingent is content that things are, in fact, in hand under democratic leadership. I believe the track record speaks for itself.
Consider the first line of mental defense of your average conservative faced with value integration gestalt “But I don’t want my money taken and given to crack whores” (to paraphrase) “That’s why I vote republican.”
I heard this a thousand times this last election, but how many campaign speeches did BushCo give which addressed further welfare reform?
The citizens in allegiance with the GOP is content that, regardless of whatever rhetoric is used to catch the rabbit, the stew is going to taste the same, they’re going to push tax cuts and welfare reform.
The GOP is seen as the party that is working for you.
When the republicans start talking, they’re telling you what they’re going to do for you.
When the democrats start talking, they’re talking about what you HAVE to do for them, or other people, to be a good person.
Welfare, humanitarian concerns, iraqi deaths, abortion rights, health care, how does this affect me with my corporate benefit package and loving wife? What matters to me is how much take-home pay I’ve got and how the market’s doing. If you’re going to win my vote, you’ve got to provide a prospectus with a reasonable ROI.
The election is no longer the means to the end, the election is the end in itself, and unless the democratic party realizes this and starts behaving accordingly (or a third party somehow becomes magically relevant) they will become increasingly marginalized.
No body believed in the health care crisis, because they can get health care anytime they want.
No body believed in the unemployment crisis, because they all have jobs.
No body believed in the recession, because all i got was a tax cut, break my friggin heart.
No body cares about the Iraqi invasion, because it’s national defense and economic prudence.
No body cares about human rights violations, because American Idol is on in ten minutes, and I gots to get my Tivo programmed.
But they believe in the dangers of the homosexual, and they believe in the rightness of America. When you’ve got a bunch of froot loops shouting and pointing fingers, calling you stupid and evil for simply believing in what you think is right, you’re not all that likely to give too much of a rat’s posterior what else they have to say.
Dems need to stop talking so much, and they need to start listening.
You’re facing a monster created from 30 years of effort by the most powerful beings in the world. It marches with lock-step precision from the oval office to the radio booth to dining room tables and water coolers throughout this nation.
You have to show what’s in it for me, or I’m patently just not interested.
Seek the common ground and ignore the differences, they’re only cosmetic, anyhow.
If you want to make progress, acknowledging where you are is a good first step.
This is true whether you are driving a car, or considering the salvagability of a nation.
And as always, it depends on the goal. If you want to feel good, expressing things in more attractive terms can be very effective.
If your goal is to climb out of the swamp, calling it a lush wetland and noting how well the rubber boot seller is doing is less productive than admitting that A) it is a swamp, and you are stuck in it and B) if you want to get out of it, you will have to get out of your rapidly sinking car, find a stump and some rope, and do some sloshing and pulling.
Some of those doomsayers are kind of like the old grandparents you wish you’d listened to when they told you things like “keep playing with that transmission and you’re going to strip your gears,” “you better quit running up that credit card,” “if that’s how he treats you when he’s courting, wait till you see how he treats his wife,” and on and on, spoiling your youth 😉
They were not doomsaying. They were telling you things that now, in retrospect, were obvious. Annoyingly obvious.
Not wanting to be thought of as doomsayers or buzzkillers, they frequently told you too late. The transmission was already shot, you had just charged some awesome speakers on the credit card, and fallen in love with the unworthy suitor.
Come to think of it, I guess today’s doomsayers aren’t too much different in that respect, either.
I’ve always found that if your goals are kind of general you end up going in a general direction but never quite know if you’ve arrived. Specific measurable goals for every plan is essential for success. Whether you’re trying to get out of that swamp or trying to improve healthcare. Our party needs goals… specific goals. Goals that address Republicans’ blunders and goals that are uniquely Democratic. We can do this. We have to do this.
Another way of posing the questions might be this.
Yes, we all want to see the liberal accomplishments of the past few decades maintained or restored or furthered. We want the environment protected, equal rights guaranteed, and Social Security secured. We want a just tax system, excellent public education, and a foreign policy that doesn’t follow the maxim, “Invade first; ask questions later (Wait–don’t ask questions later; just invade.)” And you can add to the list.
It’s a substantial list, and it’s going to take quite a lot of work and luck to see even part of it realized. The fact that so many of the liberal accomplishments are under attack naturally puts us on the defensive. So, what does it take to move from defense to offense?
A stronger Democratic leadership? Sure, and we might be beginning to see that. An energized grass roots or blog roots? Starting to happen. Is something more needed?
I think so. We’ve stopped thinking big. We’ve stopped imagining. We’ve stopped daring to envision transformations. When was the last time you heard anyone seriously talk about ending poverty in America? When was the last time you heard a Democratic leader speak with the moral conviction of RFK or MLK? When was the last time you heard anyone propose wholesale reform of public education funding?
We have been so successful on specific issues such as Social Security and Medicare that we naturally focus on defending the successes. Sure, defend social security. But also think of what America would look like as a truly just society, articulate that, and move on it.
I like what Welshman is saying. The daily Bush/Republican outrages we are subjected to can have a cumulative effect on the psyche… namely, depression and negativity. It’s hard to avoid. I used to have a job where the ‘deffication hit the oscilating circulator’ from 5 directions at once… all the time. To avoid being torn apart at the seams I used to put on my ‘mental slicker’, set measurable goals and go steadily in one direction. I hope that makes sense, it kept me (relatively) sane in an impossible job. The trick is to stay on your feet and stay focused. Maybe it’s time to start writing to our leadership to suggest they start on our 2008 party platform NOW. Tailor it as a point by point rejection of Bush’s failed policies. Put our best minds into formulating ideas and reforms and policies that reflect who we are and where we would lead this country. Then spread the word. With that kind of attitude, no matter how often we get knocked in the air, we’ll land on our feet. I really like what Welshman is saying… he is soooo right. To tell the truth, I’m sick and tired of feeling so damn helpless. This kind of thing could really put a fire in the belly of the Democratic base. Stand tall, no more crouching. Thanks, Susan, you made my weekend.
Well I agree that there is too much doomsaying, but one must admit that the outlook is gloomy. It is gloomy because the leadership of the party is miserable; I mean miserable.
I hope that Dean gets the Democrats shit together very soon, because right now there is nothing to be cheery about.
Regarding Social Security:
How stupid do you have to be to say nothing on this topic?
I do not advocate offering any proposal for Social Security, but that does not mean that I want my representatives to do nothing.
Look, Social Security is healthy and successful and will be strong for 40 years- FORTY YEARS. The Republicans control 2.5 branches of government and the media. We cannot start negotiating with them or they will get what they want: the destruction of Social Security. Offering no plan is our plan because we do not negotiate with dishonest brokers.
What needs to happen, NOW, is a quick reframe to a bonafide crisis that is taking place right now: peak oil, healthcare, and lack of good paying jobs. I choose peak oil because the solution is a quadruple whammy in favor of the Democrats: we get to shoot down SS on the grounds that it is stupid to address at this time when we have massive debt, (oh yeah, did I mention that?) and a host of real live, CURRENT crises facing us, we get to propose forward thinking action moving towards renewable energy, we get to create jobs, and we get to attack global warming. That hits 4 major Democratic party planks.
What do we get? NOTHING. Head in the sand, finger to the wind, tucked inside their shell. They are pathetic. I wish I were leading them, as at least then we would be doing something.
We are totally out of power: no media, no branches of government, no corporate support. What do we have to lose? Nothing. We should be going big, or going home. It looks to me like the Democrats have gone home.
A little more for clarification…
We could refocus the debate to a host of real live crises: healthcare, national debt, peak oil, media consolidation, perpetual war, voting, clean elections, damn the list is as long as my arm, there is a crisis for every flavor of Democrat; a crisis that is taking place right now.
40 years…possible problem…third rail…public support vs immediate crisis…real problem…Republican caused…nobody knows about
I choose peak oil as the crisis to focus on because it is not going to get any better, ever. THe price of verythign we buy will increase. It will cost jobs. It will pollute the environment. It is the Republican’s fault.
I hope that clarifies a bit.
That’s something that people are rather sold on.
If we run out of oil to the point where the market can’t sustain a petroleum based economy, something will come along to take it’s place.
Forget oil. Oil is too necesarry to use as a wedge. You can rail against Exxon’s greed all day long, but the fact remains that, without it, you wouldn’t have a keyboard to type on or a sandwich to eat while doing so. You are complicit in that guilt, as are we all. It is not “The Republican’s fault”.
It’s not even America’s fault, it’s just the way things are, and laying blame gets you nothing but laughed at.
There is no escaping the simple fact that oil is the single most useful substance in the world, it’s in apparently abundant and unlimited supply, and it’ll take a whole hell of a lot of light, sweet crude suppositories and buckets for vomit and wastes before we’ll kick that monkey off our backs.
I collect old Sci-Fi paperbacks,
here’s the last page from the 1978 edition of Edgar Rice Burrough’s “Thuvia, Maid Of Mars”.
Would anyone care to lend some perspective?
Welshman went and wrote a diary all about it at Daily Kos, and it’s marvelous:
Stop it! You’ve got me drinking, visiting bordellos and reading Cheers & Jeers!
I once had teacher in psychology who said human beings are like donkeys, you can get them to move in two ways, one is by hitting them with a stick from behind and they will start running just anywhere away from the stick, however they might end up in a place even worse than before. Or you can tempt them with a carrot or a sugar into moving toward it-
To me democrats seem to be like the donkey running away from the stick. The carrot would be a vision or goals – but at least from abroad they are not visible to me. What I consider important is to create a vision that is worthwhile moving towards. I am sure then democrats can be successful again.
(Cross posted at DKos, who need it more than we do, and dedicated to Susan ‘cos I never could refuse a gal with a pretty name)
All my life I had been a large corporate guy. For fun, I started a software design company doing work for public utilities and local authorities. Mainly in Visual C and C++ (don’t worry, I never could handle stuff like that either). It was fascinating. I didn’t even know how to use Excel when I started. I translated the customer’s needs into a model and the programmer’s turned it into something usable. No system design engineers. Too fancy. Too expensive.
Prototyping? We invented it. Except we didn’t know that was what we were doing. Talk about iterative modelling. We were back and forward to the customer every second day.
But it worked. Our software reflected the needs of our customers in a way that none of your big software company stuff ever does. No fancy systems manager telling the customers how it should work; just the customers telling us how it should follow the way they worked. We developed some good systems. It was fun.
Except it started not to be fun. With up to a dozen people employed, we had to sell the product. At least, I had to try and sell it. The sort of brilliant geeks who worked for me hated leaving their monitors. I was all they had. In any case, I was the most dispensable. Trouble was that I had never sold squat in my life.
I usually took Graham with me in case they had a systems guy on their side. One day we got a call to go up North to do a sales pitch. For some reason most of our customers were always on the other side of the country. Each sales visit cost us $2000 dollars a time. Not clever when you grossly under price your product because you don’t know how to sell it.
So Graham and I went North. It seemed like a great potential customer. I had just come off the back of a visit to Manchester that was a complete downer. I had pitched to a manager who had assembled eight of his people into a nice little lecture room. I gave them my best shot. At the end, after two hours of questions, the response came “Thank you. That was one of the best monthly seminars we have had for a long time. We like your software as well. We just wish we had the budget for it in the next year.”
As my company was making no money, the $2000 spent on the visit came straight out of my pocket.
Now look, I don’t want you sniggering at me. I know that you yanks are the best sales people in the world. I don’t joke. You are. The Brits can sell a bit too, so don’t take my performance as indicative. I was just a human resources guy who was one of the best industrial relations negotiators of his time. I was just a dumb salesman, that’s all
So we went into this customer and he was a nice fellow and gave us a cup of tea and we chatted away and then he invited me to explain my software and how it could help him. By this time, I felt a bit churlish about doing so. After all, he was a nice guy and it was a pity to spoil our blossoming friendship by asking him to buy something.
Still I was excited. He had shown me his current system and ours was exactly the advanced application that he needed. I had a field day telling him all that it could do. Way beyond the capability of the machine code, steam driven thing on his network.
He was nice at the end as well. He was definitely going to discuss it with his people.
In other words I had bombed. I had screwed the whole thing up and I knew it and I admitted this to Graham in the car. I pulled the “How to be Successful in Sales” paperback book out of my pocket. “Look at chapter seven, the sales review section, and tell me what I did wrong”. I asked him.
I set off down the motorway for the long drive home as he read to himself what the book said. When we stopped at a motorway café, he told me his conclusion. “According to this”, he said “you told him was wrong with his current system and what was so great about ours, but you never asked him what problems he wanted to solve. It was only luck if you hit any of the issues that were critical to him.”
I didn’t fire Graham for telling me that, George W, I just felt an idiot and told him so. We never did as badly again.
If you have got this far, you may be wondering how the title relates to all this? Probably not much, but then another kindly email last night reminded me that I don’t do diary titles very well either.
But you see, I worry about the dialogue going on here and other boards. They are so damn depressing. Everything is going wrong and everything is going to get much worse. The only relief is when someone on the other side says or does something so outrageous that even our sleeping media wake up for a minute.
Just look at our diaries for the last few days and pass the Glenfidditch or the Southern Comfort. It doesn’t matter which, it’s not the taste that I’m after.
Our blogs are choked with negativity. Our most recommended diaries are those which seem to feed our misery the greatest.
Yet at some stage the concerns of members of the Democratic Party had better stop looking at the doomsayers and start taking a positive and progressive view of what is and how it can be made better, rather than the awfulness of what could be.
No solution to avoid a downturn in the economy or prevent a future crisis in oil or to make right what has been done in Iraq is going to emerge by 2006. Accept the fact and work within the current boundaries of the possible.
These 2006 elections really are not that far away. The transition from appearing to be just a party of opposition into a party of government must be made, and made now.
It is not that the concerns aren’t right nor that they don’t need urgent addressing. It is just that there are a few short months left until 2006.
You stuffed the world with the result of your 04 election, we Brits are going to stuff it next by voting Blair back into power in 05. Please, please don’t let it happen again in 06! We have to change mode.
So what was the point of the introduction showing what a stupid, dumb idiot I am? It was a bit of honesty that allows you a laugh at my expense in order to persuade you not to go down the same path.
You see, when we start talking of becoming positive, what do we say? We talk of defining our values, of framing issues in a way that we can address them. We are writing diary after diary about what is wrong with their product.
Oh, sure. You know better than any Republican the misery of just getting by, of facing unemployment, or coping with the cost from the sudden sickness of a child. You know because you care and, if you haven’t suffered these things yourself, you are more empathetic than others to those who are facing these difficulties.
Yet these aren’t the votes you are trying to turn your way. It’s those on the margins of the right that you want to get. The tiny number, the 1.8% that you spend millions of dollars to try and reach with your advertisements. These are the ones. The voters who heard something in what the religious right said that resonated with them, the ones that still think the social security plan of George Bush makes some sense and the ones who don’t go to church but somehow feel that all this talk of proper values has some meaning for them.
Heck, most of you have better degrees than me so I don’t have to spell it out for you. You are currently presenting to the customer at best the great bells and whistles of your product. You are not talking about what you can do to solve the issues and concerns that are really concerning them.
Why did some of these voters that once voted for you, vote for George Bush? Well, start asking them what they are looking for that the Bush product seemed to offer them, not turn them off by enquiring why they supported dumb policies.
Let me have a couple of guesses, although from here I can’t possibly know enough to get the right ones. Aren’t you the slightest bit concerned about the youth crime and kids carrying guns to school and seeming to have lost respect for everything? The right wing religious nuts addressed it. Addressed it stupidly, but at least they addressed a concern that these voters had. Aren’t you a little bit concerned that companies are running out of the ability to fund their pension schemes and benefits are going to suffer? Well George Bush addressed, stupidly but he addressed it. Aren’t you a little bit concerned about homeland security? Well…. you know the rest.
If you think I am suggesting meeting these people half way toward Republican policies, I’m not. I just want you stop spending your time telling your customer what is wrong with the product he or she has now. I want you to stop telling your customer how great your values are and how wonderful for them your product would be.
I just want to see diary after diary investigating not Gannon/Guckert but what the concerns and issues are for this 1.8% marginal swing voter. You can’t laugh at them, deride them or otherwise be snide about them. They are real people with real concerns who somehow allied themselves to the right rather than to you.
Forget the fact that you would never hire a PR firm to promote your message in the media because of your Democratic ethics and consider which of these values of yours creates a policy that can address these individual anxieties of theirs. Then you can play the Dog Whistle Politics that the brilliant Aussie invented like you were a master of the instrument. Without having to flex one damn knee towards the Republican agenda.
Then we will see positive diaries, diaries full of bright ideas and solutions. I can stop drinking and need not flee to Cheers and Jeers for light relief from the interminable gloom.
The bordellos? I lied about going there. My mum told me never to go into one.
It’s a super diary, with a wonderful story about your lessons learned from your business adventures. And it’ll be interesting to see if it gets recommended.
Just want to say that I ahve written two diaries just this past week that each, in their ways address the points of this diary. Both were pretty much ignored.
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2005/4/6/234829/9558
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2005/4/4/16525/65228
I believe that the best answer to the Welshman’s concerns are not to succumb to despair, or worse chicken littlism.
Rather we have to be active in preparing for the elections ourselves. There is no substitute for citizen involvement in electoral politics. There is no substitute for citizen involvement in electoral politics. There is no substute for citizen involvement in electoral politics.
One more time, ’cause of the Welshman: “You don’t sell Chevy’s by slammin’ Fords”. My dad’s maxim.
First develop a basic philosophy, reduced to writing as governing principles. Say, fer’ instance: the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution of the United States. Call those the “foundation”. Build on that with specific statements on how those principles should be carried out. Call that a “framework”. Further define those statements into a more detailed set of solutions to the problems existant at the time.
This is where it gets tricky, because the first parts of any structure are both the easiest and cheapest to build. How you cover the walls, what types of windows & doors, what kind of roof cover, hell, even the color of the paint can’t be set. And you still haven’t even started on the inside – the finishes applied to create your own personal space. You want it comfortable, easy to clean, plenty of light, and big enough to have guests every now and again.
I’ve been through that process more times than I can remember. In every single instance there was heated discussion over the relative merits of eleven shades of paint, 30 different options to cover the floors, and the vast array of products available to put in a damn bathroom. Sometimes I just wanted to smack ’em. “They should have taken care of this shit when you were in the design phase. I don’t have time to “go away for two weeks” while they make up their freakin’ minds”.
Was that the carefully planned process in the election? No. The Democratic Party’s vacuous, disgustingly verbose planks served no one but the few drafters, and their attempts at communicating a message clearly broke down. They chose to move fast, and “catch it later” in trade parlance. Wrong. You don’t go back.
First you take the time to plan – talking to everyone involved in the project – which will result in solid blueprints. Once you start building, you finish each phase in sequence, making sure all the parts fit properly, and that all the subsystems are properly installed, before you go forward. It takes a tremendous amount of time to coordinate a large project, and rushing to get it built only hampers progress.
Right now we’re trying to design a framework substantial enough to support the forces working to tear it down, while simultaneously trying to plan how the beast will look when it’s done. It can be done – I’ve been there – but you better have very deep pockets, cause every time you make structural changes it’ll cost at least double.
Got foundation & frame? Then maybe it’s time to put it out there for the rest of us to see, ’cause what’s there now just won’t work.
You know — and this is for Welshman too — we tried all that during the Dean campaign. Dean built a great framework of his views on issues, and his Tom Paine-like brochure.
I was very active, a leg. district coordinator, led the local Meetups, and spent a weekend at the Vermont headquarters meeting people and appearing with Dean on TV when he decided to forgo federal matching funds.
In Burlington, I met person after person who was representing aspects of the framework and actively engaged in outreach to all affected communities. E.g., one woman I met was in charge of outreach to Native American and other minority communities.
And all of this was built through constant interaction between, and among, supporters up and down the chain, who felt like what they cared about also mattered to Howard Dean.
They did it so right. But it wasn’t enough.
John Kerry did a lot of this too, as did John Edwards, Wesley Clark, Gephardt and others — not as well as Dean and staff — but they did it.
Every one of the presidential candidates had positive plans. For example, they all had well-crafted health insurance plans. But it was almost impossible to get their POSITIVE programs in the media.
During the fall, Kerry gave an outstanding speech on Iraq, but it was barely covered by the media.
I do not think WE have FAILED to date. I think we’ve done some great work. But it’s very difficult to get a positive, action-oriented program out there and publicized.
“Washington (AP) – Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean said Friday that the national party will invest almost half a million dollars in state parties in Missouri, North Carolina, North Dakota and West Virginia. All four states were won by President Bush (website – news – bio) in the 2004 presidential election.”-from the story today.
from http://www.seattlefordean.com and http://www.howieinseattlefordean.com
I understand your frustration, and recognize that there were effective plans out there. Missing was compiling them into a solid platform under a unified Democratic Party. There was no cohesion, no consensus among the rank & file, and no solutions offered that came close to the true will of the people. I did read their platform, and think my description is accurate.
I honestly believe the Democratic Party needs to pull back a layer or two and become a true umbrella organization, rather than a regimented corporate entity. Your discussion below makes the case. Find the best candidates among those progressives working in the field, and support them – party registration be damned.
I agree the party hasn’t totally failed yet, but the framework is damaged and there is still no replacement document with enough vision to get people actively involved. My perennial favorite: it’s the living wage stupid. Nowhere to be found anywhere in any “official” democratic party document. It’s not a partisan issue, it’s a class issue.
Yet the party leadership can’t seem to grasp that. They ask why people are upset when they’ve backed a raise in the minimum wage. Hint: it’s because most of us see the effort as pure politik. “Let’s trot this dead horse out one more time, it’ll show we really care.” Who the hell do they think they are?
That’s the disconnect.
Yes. All the great stuff created during the primaries never made it into the general. Sigh.
The postives are there – you pointed to them: Dean + DFA. I just think it’s a long slow build from the ground up, and that will take time. Not as slow as pundits think, not as fast as we think, but definitely before the ’06 primaries.
How would you respond to this? What would you like to see happen? Is this a good use of Democrats’ time? (And more from me after this.)
State Senator Tim Sheldon, a Democrat, joined with conservatives in the State Senate to defeat the bill.
This is not the first time we have heard from Senator Sheldon. He backed George W. Bush and Dino Rossi for Governor, even appeared in Rossi advertising. He gave the GOP caucus $10,000 to run ads against fellow Democrats. He’s sided with conservatives on budget votes. He’s even said he would vote against collective bargaining for state employees, blatantly turning his back on working men and women.
Sheldon is so conservative that the Senate Democratic Caucus no longer allows him to attend their meetings. He calls Howard Dean the most extreme figure in national politics and describes his own views as similar to that of former conservative U.S. Senator Zell Miller (D-GA).
I’m tired of hearing about conservative Democrats like Tim Sheldon and I hope you are too. Fortunately for us, Senator Sheldon is up for re-election in 2006, and I’m asking you to support our efforts to replace him.
Progressive Majority is actively working with progressive activists in the 35th Legislative District (Mason and parts of Kitsap and Grays Harbor counties) to recruit and field a candidate who will stand up for working families and fight for civil rights for all. I need your help in this undertaking. Please take a moment now and contribute $35, $50, $100 or more toward our efforts to beat Tim Sheldon at the ballot box with a true progressive champion. Click here to contribute: Support Progressive Candidate Recruitment!”-from Progressive Majority of Washington.
from http://www.seattlefordean.com and http://www.howieinseattlefordean.com
The other Democratic senator who didn’t vote for the gay rights bill is mine: Jim Hargrove, a perennial winner. Like Sheldon, Hargrove’s district is very conservative. Bush and GOP gov. candidate Dino Rossi won in both areas. But Hargrove did not, like Sheldon, support Bush and Rossi.
Before the final vote on gay rights, I was asked to contact active Democrats around here — particularly those with religious ties — and get them to contact Hargrove and urge him to vote yes. I did that, with the caveat that the GOP here would love nothing more than to have Hargrove vote for the gay rights bill so they can finally get rid of him.
Now, Hargrove is getting blasted in e-mails from Seattleites, who are far removed from this area and its more conservative environs. I wish Hargrove had voted yes. I think he should have mustered the courage to do so. But I can’t condemn him for not voting yes.
My personal response would be to work to get Sheldon out.
I don’t know how Hargrove handles everything else, but if he doesn’t actively work against the Democrats, or do things like Sheldon has reportedly done in talking out against them, then a vote with the right wing from time to time should be considered in the context of his district.