Promoted by Steven D. Thanks fladem for your first-hand account.
I think many here, and most who think of themselves left of the Democratic Party center are looking for a candidate other than Hilary Clinton. Front runners can lose, and there is nothing inevitable in politics. To date I know of four candidates that have floated their names (other than Biden – and I don’t think he is running.):
Brian Schweitzer – I saw him speak to the New Hampshire Delegation at the 2012 Convention. It was a low key speech that talked about the Patriot Act. Over the last year the have been disturbing rumors about him, and there is no indication he is still planning to run.
Jim Webb – I posted about this earlier this week. There are good things, but there are bad as well (see his statements on affirmative action).
Bernie Sanders – I was a UVM Student when he became mayor. He has endorsed every Democrat since Mondale for President: mentioning him in the same breath as Nader is to misjudge Sanders. I would vote for him, but I doubt he would be much more than a protest candidate. Make no mistake, even a protest candidate would be valuable in building a long term progressive organization.
Martin O’Malley.
More about O’Malley on the flip
This is O’Malley at a small event before his speech to the larger group of Portsmouth Democrats. To his left is Governor Hassan and a NH State Senator. To his right is Ray Buckley, chair of the NH Democratic Party.
On paper there is much to like. He is younger, there is a progressive record in both Baltimore and Maryland he can cite. Moreover governors are freer to frame their own candidacy than Senators are.
This is the third time I have seen O’Malley: the first was in Charlotte in 2012, and he was unremarkable. The second was at Jefferson & Jackson Dinner in Manchester. He essentially game the same speech in Portsmouth that he gave in Manchester. It talked about how crime ridden Baltimore was when he became mayor. He then talked about a program called “believe”. It began with a 4 minutes commercial than ran every night. The focus was on connecting people to social services. It was interesting, and my brief description does not do it justice. Thematically it talked about the values of collaboration and community. The speech was not ideological, it was very much an introduction to New Hampshire. Certainly at an event like the one in Portsmouth 38 days before the election you aren’t going to draw contrasts with the Clintons.
O’Malley is clearly running. His PAC has paid staff in Iowa and New Hampshire. There is clear interest from Hart alumni – I am one. And the room in Portsmouth had many former Hart alumni. When I spoke to him we talked about another Hart alumni. He knows the primary process. that national polling is irrelevant at this point, and that front runners can lose.
The problem is Hilary Clinton is not a typical front runner. There is very little in Iowa and New Hampshire polling to suggest she is vulnerable. The picture I took was of a room of about 30 people. That is New Hampshire politics until late next year. In that light several people told me about a house party for Hilary with about 80 people. She made sure she talked to everyone there – sought out the shier people in the crowd. She then answered questions, and when the question was asked she answered in detail, and her answer began with the person’s name who had asked the question. No, there were no name tags.
She blew the room away. This is the reality. In New Hampshire remembering people’s name matters. It shouldn’t, it should be about ideas. It CAN be about ideas, but it will never be ONLY about ideas in Presidential Primary.
Which left a group of old Hart people wondering what O’Malley’s strategy could be. To turn the line from Arthur Miller around, Hillary is not just liked, she is WELL liked in the Party. But is worth remembering this was an establishment gathering. The people who might vote against Hilary weren’t in the room he was in on Friday night. His target, like Hart’s in 1982, has to be the activists who aren’t part of the establishment.
Hart understood that instinctively. Does O’Malley? I am not sure. It’s not a question I would expect to be answered at an event like the one on Friday anyway. O’Malley is a VERY different candidate than Hart. For one O’Malley is twice the speaker Hart ever was. Hart excelled in small rooms where he could talk about his issues. The candidates who have succeeded in New Hampshire as insurgents have tended to be wonkish types who could talk issues in detail (Hart, Tsongas come to mind). I have no idea if O’Malley is good at that or not.
But the last thing that was said was probably the truest. 2015 isn’t about beating Hilary, it’s about beating the other potential alternatives.
Well, I like it that he fought crime by social service and outreach rather than turning Baltimore into Beirut or Ferguson.
Bill Clinton started out well behind the pack IIRC. But Bill Clinton is an outstanding crowd speaker. When he said he felt our pain, people believed it. (NOT arguing whether he actually did, talking about crowd dynamics). It’s not encouraging that he appears a run of the mill speaker. To beat the Hillary machine, one needs to be a Messiah.
I see another eight years of neoconservative/neoliberal economics grinding ordinary people into the dirt.
I think targeting the activists means hammering away at Hilary Clinton on foreign policy and painting a negative picture of someone who is very willing to lead us into another stupid war.
The stupid war will be in full flower with “boots on the ground” (and under it) well before 2016.
Every possible candidate is going to have thinks liked and disliked about them. The real danger here is if you have what some would call a real progressive Presidential candidate are they going to get the votes to win over the TPGOP Presidential candidate?
Right now with the current makeup of congress how effective is a Progressive President going to be? Seems to me logic would dictate that what first is needed is for Progressive candidates to run and win in state and federal elections first. Then you have a solid foundation to build upon for a Progressive Presidential run.
Right now even FDR could not accomplish near the legislation he pushed through with the type of congress we currently have. Like it or not the numbers just are not their folks.
“When F.D.R. took over the Presidency in 1933, the Democrats controlled 64 percent of the Senate seats and 73 percent (!) of the House seats” Nice chart showing congress percents during FDR here http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/obamas-no-fdr-nor-does-he-have-fdrs/
This is what we need to make some lasting changes.
we need both Congress and a great presidential candidate.
MARTIN O’Malley.
He’s my guy right now. A lot of people owe him favors, as he stumps for everyone, even those the party (wrongly) has written off (like Barbara Buono). He doesn’t shy away from fights, doesn’t back down, and Chris Christie hates him. All good traits.
I think he’s the front runner if Hillary demurs. If she runs, he attacks her gently to secure the veep position. I’m willing to bet he’s on the ticket in 2016. Whether that means in the top spot or second is the question.
Warren will at the minimum. It is hard to envision the field: my guess is you get a number of other candidates as well.
If Hillary doesn’t run, Biden will.
Sounds good but … Two “Northeast Liberals” ? Difficult to see. I might expect Hillary to choose a Latino as a running mate. From the South or West.
I’d like to see Bernie Sanders in a debate, speaking truth to power. I’d like to see him move the Overton Window, and force Hillary to the left at least a bit. But if she runs, I will want her to win in such a landslide that she will pull the whole Congress back to the Dems. As was stated earlier, only then can we hope to get anything done.
I’m not an idealist, and never expected Obama to be other than a centrist and a mostly reasonable person. Warren or Sanders cannot get the nomination and would not win were they to get the nomination. I also kinda like Sherrod Brown and Shumlin, the Vermont Governor. But I think only Hillary, with lots of help from Obama, Michelle, Bill Clinton and Joe Biden, has a chance to totally clobber the Republicans. Just my opinion.
I wonder if Latinos would see a man serving under a woman as a “no cojones” case?
I’d like to see Bernie Sanders in a debate, speaking truth to power. I’d like to see him move the Overton Window, and force Hillary to the left at least a bit.
I don’t. I’d rather he and every other disaffected liberal would shut the fuck up permanently about leftist politics. And for his supporters to be a lot more realistic about how this moronic nation views leftist politics.
Don’t get me wrong, Hillary Clinton stinks of impending centrist fuck-up and the Democratic Party has gotten too addicted to Wall Street sugar. So they need someone to pull the Overton window left. But this person is not going to be Bernie Sanders. First of all, he’s way too fucking old for his position in government to be taken seriously. Second of all, he makes a convenient target for hippie punching. Hillary Clinton can brush off any criticisms he makes by going ‘lol socialist’ and the cackling hyenas in the corporate whore press will lift their wine glasses at the bon mot. Third of all… have you actually listened to him? I mean, REALLY listened to him. Rub one off first after thinking about Job Guarantees and proportional voting so you can do this with a clear head. As a speaker… he actually kind of sucks. He has no gravitas and struggles to get one over on people he should be putting away like Bachmann. Far from convincing her to move left to woo voters, she’ll just use him as a punching bag to go ‘see? The stooooopid liberals want stoooooopid shit like isolationism and socialism; don’t listen to them’.
You know what this all adds up to? Ron Paul in 2012. Might get a couple of zingers that make the antiestablishmentarians cream their pants because ZOMG TRUTH TO POWER I’M SO FUCKING INSECURE THAT I NEED TELEVISION VALIDATION OF MY MINORITY VIEWPOINT while being totally unaware of just how big of nobgobblers they look to people outside of the Bernie Sanders/Ron Paul bubble. He’s the Washington Generals of leftists.
Serious question: Does Deathtongue’s post make sense to anyone else?
tl;dr version: Bernie Sanders is an awful spokesman for liberal causes for reasons that are his fault and aren’t his fault and doesn’t even have the gravitas to serve as a leftist gadfly. All he would do is serve as a convenient punching bag for HRC to show how centrist and serious she is and may in fact drive the party right. Thus there’s no reason to make him the standard-bearer of a post-DLC Democratic Party other than the fact that he makes the netroots giddy; if they were really serious about leftist causes rather than just dwindling in purity trolling like a Ron Paulite they’d be putting their hopes on someone else.
never make sense; i’ve stopped reading them
pick based on who will help her win: I don’t see O’Malley helping. I could see Nelson form Florida, Udall, if her survives, from Colorado and Brown from Ohio.
Thanks for report on O’Malley. Been hearing good things about him from MD residents for years. Very glad to hear he’s running and putting in the hours supporting other dem candidates. I’m hoping the context shifts away from Hillary in the next year – i.e. she is a candidate from “the past”, her issues are the past. Publicizing a future oriented candidate can only help. Also, to keep in mind, the republicans don’t have a candidate.