[update]
Did you know? We are all the Karl Roves of the Democratic Party. We actually lost in this election.
Al Fromm, Founder and CEO of the Democratic Leadership Council, explains it all to us today:
The big political test will come almost immediately, in the ability of Democrats to offer a compelling progressive agenda for the country, and in a 2008 presidential contest that will be about the future more than the past. If Democrats act as problem solvers, not polarizers, that future will be very bright.
That last point was underscored by Joe Lieberman’s re-election victory in Connecticut, which helps solidify the Democratic Party’s credentials as a broad, inclusive coalition able to compete for the vital center of American politics.
Bruce Reed, writing in Slate, is also featured today on the DLC website, alongside Al From’s piece: He provides the comparison of the Blogosphere to Karl Rove & minions.
Democrats did just about everything right and ran their best campaign in a decade. Field marshals Rahm Emanuel and Chuck Schumer ignored the virtual industry of self-help nonsense (he inserts here a link here to Ed Kilgore’s and George Lakoff’s work – a sly dig at the reading habits of many progressive bloggers) that has paralyzed Democrats’ chattering classes and went back to a simple, proven formula: From the suburbs to the heartland, elections are won in the center.
Emanuel and Schumer went out of their way to recruit candidates that could put the party’s best face forward in otherwise-hostile territory. Despite pressure from various interests, they refused to impose ideological litmus tests. The result? Democrats did the opposite of what Republicans have been doing (and what losing Democratic campaigns usually do). Instead of shrinking their tent, Democrats made their big tent a lot bigger.
<snip>
With mainstream Democratic candidates who weren’t vulnerable on values and weren’t afraid to hit back when attacked, Republican social issues were the wedge that didn’t bite.
<snip>
In fact, the best news of the 2006 elections is the opportunity it gives Democrats to earn the lasting support of the independents and disgruntled Republicans whose votes just dropped in our laps. Tuesday was the death knell for Rovism–the quaint and now fully discredited theory that majorities are built not by expanding support with ideas that work but by mobilizing extreme minorities with ideas that aren’t meant to be enacted and wouldn’t work if they did.
Ever since watching Rove’s success in 2002 and 2004, some on the left and in the blogosphere have been trying to persuade the Democratic Party to follow suit and develop our own smashmouth politics aimed less at persuasion and more at motivating our base. As Lamont discovered, that approach wins primaries–but as Joe Lieberman showed him, that’s no match for pragmatic problem solving in a general election.
It is clear, that the DLC is operating as if the voters who were independent or undecided or moderate Republicans came to vote against the current administration in some sort of vacuum.
They totally ignore the role of the progressive activists in reaching out to these voters and persuading them to vote for Democratic candidates. That is entirely missed. The DLC is thinking that it is solely appeal to centrist positions that has persuaded people to vote for Claire McCaskill, or Patrick, or Webb or Tester or the several other anti-war candidates. They fail to recall that their strategy didn’t win elections before 2002, either. They don’t count the millions of phone calls, home visits, letters written, talks given, due to volunteers solicited through progressive blogs. No indeed, as the DLC sees it, these people just materialized at the polls, persuaded by the likes of Al From arguing from the Progressive Policy Institute. The citizens of Pennsylvania, for example, were overjoyed to have New York and Illinois pols choose a “safe” Senatorial candidate, in a year when Kermit the Frog would likely have defeated the incumbent.
It is particularly nasty to see the many interconnections of the blogosphere, the courage of ordinary citizen-leadership, the extended group activism, and the fine get out the vote work catalyzed by these relationships compared to Karl Rove’s dirty deeds.
For Shame!
How do we contact them? They need an earful.(or a quick e-mail) This is one middle-aged person who would be obliged to let them know exactly who helped Dems win this election!
I have e-mailed the DLC in the past – politely and somewhat respectfully – about their educational policies. and gotten exactly zero response, other than regular requests for donations, etc. I don’t think they want input. They have the truth, and they are sticking to it. What’s needed is a wider national voice, e.g. NYT columnist or Op-Ed piece or some such. Surely some progressive writer is preparing that ms right now.
I don’t think they want input.
Bingo. They want the grassroots to be their piggy bank, but for god’s sake they don’t want our ideas.
I have a number of clients who are industry trade associations — they do a lot of pro-business lobbying. Today I had the happy thrill of posting Nancy Pelosi’s photo in a weekly newsletter in a discussion of what the election results would mean for their legislative agenda (while bemoaning the loss of Santorum and Talent, they point out that a large number of the candidates they supported did in fact win, and they’re certainly pragmatic enough to be bipartisan in their lobbying).
But the article was also quick to reassure on this “centrist” theme… basically to emphasize that no, things won’t be THAT different. No, the Democratic majority won’t be pushing an anti-business agenda here.
THAT, I think, is what “centrist” really means, at least to them. It’s codespeak between corporate and industry lobbyists and their “friends” in Congress and the Senate … for Business As Usual — so long as corporations get what they want, they really don’t care WHICH party they are dealing with on the Hill.
And it is EXACTLY on that point we will need to keep an eye on things. Remember what the “pro-business” lobby brought us… The bankruptcy bill. Medicare D. Jobs sent overseas because workers in China or wherever can be hired far cheaper and without benefit plans. NAFTA and CAFTA and other free trade legislation that benefits business, but not workers on either side of the border. Telecommunications conglomerates that salivate at the mere THOUGHT of controlling the lucrative “pipes” of the internet. Rollbacks of environmental, safety and worker benefits protections regulations. Runaway CEO compensation. Tax breaks for the richest, who make their money not from wages, but from investments and dividends, which can be protected from tax liabilities. The loss of the right to sue, or hold companies liable and accountable for products, manufacturing processes, or shortcuts on their way to ever greater profits at the expense of consumers, workers or the environment. The pursuit of short term, ever greater profits… at the expense of everything and everyone else.
Right now it sounds as though they believe that if they keep repeating the “centrist” meme, it will become self-fullfilling… to remind those re-elected and convince the newly elected… that they hold their seats not due to the efforts and votes of constituents and supporters across the country, but to the industry PACs and lobbyists who can sign the checks to finance their next election… or that of their opponant.
They’re getting the troughs ready, and doing their best to lure the new arrivals to taste the goodies.
These issues were not as high-profile as the war in Iraq (though of course they are all connected), or the scandals and coverups…. but they are vital nonetheless, and something we as voters and citizens will need to keep an eye on. I think — I hope — we have enough new (and continuing) Congress critters and Senators who are NOT going to be that quick to the trough, who will remember who their real constituents are.
I hope so. If they forget, well, we will have to remind them!
Janet, your comment makes me think about the point that Booman makes regularly that, until we have publicly funded elections, we have to show our elected officials that we can not only talk to them, but help them fund their campaigns as well. As individuals, we don’t have the $ the business community has. But as a group, we really need to do what we can to take them on.
From what I’ve seen, the best investment I made in the last year was to buy “Democracy Bonds” at the DNC to help Dr. Dean with his 50 state strategy. So if you can do as little as $10 or $20 a month (or more if you’ve got it), I suggest making an investment there.
This will be a centrist Democratic Congress. Bet on it. Nancy Pelosi might not have an easy time trying to reign in some of the more moderate and conservative people in her own party. The DLC and Al From have it right. You want to oppose everything, go right ahead, but you’ll pay a price down the road for it.
How is that DLC program working out for us in the South?
Kerry didn’t even campaign in North Carolina, despite picking a running mate from that state.
I think the DLC is on its deathbed.
Exactly. If the DLC is so hot on including moderate Republicans and undecided voters, why would they write off any part of the country? Kerry certainly was not inclusive in his campaigning, and the DCCC wasn’t inclusive in who they chose to fund in this campaign, either. Had other people not been working to field candidates in some of the elections, we would not have had candidates already there to run in those races where scandals sent people flying out of Republican slots at the last minute.
I’ve said nothing about “opposing everything”. I just don’t like, and see no need for the failure to be inclusive of activists in their own party. Indeed, not just an omission of who helped obtain the victory, but a viciousness in implying that the blogosphere is tantamount to Karl Rove. That’s not a “big tent” statement, it is deliberately pushing those persons out of the fold.
It would have cost them nothing, and gained them much to simply be gracious in at least sharing credit, as Howard Dean did when he made his statement on election eve. The fact that they did not says a great deal, and it isn’t positive.
I agree that the Congress under the Dems will be more moderate than most progressives want – but it will also be more progressives that most DLC members want. That’s the nature of political compromise.
Your last statement about opposing everything is certainly true – true for the DLC also. And they need to fully see that.
I’m not seeing much mention of Dr. Dean’s name in the midst of all the back slapping, either.
I find the absence of his name and contribution being discussed just incomprehensible. I think Gov. Dean is largely the person whose vision put the party in a position to take advantage of all those Repub gaffes.
Given the absence of inclusiveness on their part, I think they are going to try to use the victory to push him out of office.
From my point of view it is not incomprehensible that Dean is being left out of the discussion of who gets credit for the win. I think it is entirely predictable. He is not one of “Them.” He has toned down his rhetoric since becoming chair of the DNC, but he is still an outsider.
Speaking of outsiders, here is today’s
synopsis of MoveOn.org’s contribution to this election. (1.04MB PDF file)
That is impressive.
It certainly is impressive. And how can something that involves 3 million people really be an “outsider’ movement? You’d think the MSM would be all over this.
I made this comment in another thread. From what I’ve been reading today, the only way Dean gets out of the chair is if (a) his term expires and the DNC hires someone else, (b) the DNC votes him out, or (c) someone convinces a majority of the DNC that Dean needs to be replaced, they call an election and come up with a candidate to replace him (Harold Ford’s name is being bandied about).
(a) won’t happen for another couple of years at the earliest and I don’t think (b) and (c) are likely. However, I think it would be a good idea for all the Deaniacs out there to track down the names and addresses of the DNC members in their state and send a polite but insistent letter telling them in no uncertain terms that they need to support Dean as DNC chair, since he’s the guy who put the Democrats in a position to win and win big in this election. I have every intention of doing this first chance I get.
Your suggestion about talking/writing state DNC members concerning Dean’s presidency is a good one. I hope we can keep that idea going. The fact that Ford’s name is being discussed makes me think that there is behind the scenes work going on to try to push him out.
of a 50 state campaign is what won this election. It was a “No Voter Left Behind” run like a well oiled machine. Rahm and Chuck are so busy beating their our chests that they have not mentioned the DNC or Dr. Dean once. For shame on both of them. They never would be where they are today and in this election without his stradegy. Howard made the voters feel as if they counted again.
Screw the DLC. This is their wake. Funeral in ’08.
What a totally idiotic and incomprehensible comment. You don’t even make sense…troll
Since you have all this figured out, and obviously are smarter than everyone else in the room, enlighten me Mr. professor!!!
Lieberman…No standards, no integrity, no loyalty…with the added benefit of no brains.
Yes, it’s truly better to give up your principles and get into lockstep with the “centrists”, a sure path to success.
The two of these dummies are trying to paint the biggest failure of the Dem party as its biggest success. That is, of course, de rigeur for these idiotic members of consultant/pundit class. Lieberman is not even a Democrat anymore and they are claiming it is a victory for the Dems? If the Democratic party had gotten behind Lamont like they should have, after he won the Dem nomination fair and square, Lamont could have beat joey sleezeberman. They could have had a reliable vote for the Dems and not one who’ll be waffling all over the place looking for some sort of muddle in the middle, all the while raising the Rovian talking points of the day to beat Dems into submission to the right wing uber-agenda.
Don’t give me that Joe Liberman, bullshit.He lost the Democratic primary, we all know that Liberman is only looking out for himself. Remember the Democratic party of Conn. chose Ned Lamont as their representative. Liberman is still a tratior to the Democratic party, is the gov’t of Conn. a Democrat so W can give a Liberman a position in his cabinet…as that is the only thing he can do to gian redemption.
I for one don’t expect Lieberman to take a position in W’s cabinet, nor do I think he will be offered one – he isn’t in the inner Bush circle. However, if he were to get such an offer, I can’t see him taking it. He’d lose his position in about two years, and then he wouldn’t be anything in Washington. Because of his history with the Dems and the Repubs, I’m not sure he’d have much value as a lobbiest, either.
I think he likes being a top dog, which Senators are, not a mere ex-cabinet member.
to admit that I was wrong about Lieberman replacing Rumsfeld as Sec of Def. I was convinced it would be offered and he would take it. I guess I really wanted him out of the Senate.
It’s a shame that the DLC even exists.
It’s even more of a shame that the national media will buy this bs propaganda.
Why did the Democrtas win so big?
Yes, it is a shame. However, the national media is in bed with the DLC – or vice versa, really. They still want their guys in charge, not the likes of us – the unwashed, unsophisticated horde.
Too many of us are in the flyover zone, not among the elite of the beltway, or NY, or Boston. We haven’t been vetted, so we do not belong. We have just two assets, neither of which is seen as important: one vote each, and (likely), a small amount of money. They’ll take both, thank you, and we get largesse of their wisdom about who to vote for in return.