Gaining Power Matters Little If You Cannot Wield It Effectively (0.00 / 0)

Having worked in local politics, I concur with your views about gaining power. I think, however, that you might be leaving something out - wielding power effectively.

You are right to think that advertising policy matters very little in the elections. I have seen first hand that having the right ideas matters very little if you haven't created, or found, a movement or powerful interest group that will see to it that you have a chance to see your ideas through.

However, this perspective does not always lead to positive results. Once in power, it is important to have prepared to wield that power effectively. This is something that everyone likes to lay claim to when running for office, yet few people really possess the aptitude to deal with life in office.

Executive officials matter more in their capacity to say "NO" than to propose policies. They wield a lot of power in appointing minions, but are easily hurt by their appointees misdeeds.

Legislators need to become very rule- and procedure-savvy to push their agenda. If they are too good at their job, however, they tend to look like monsters to the voting public - who see an unattractive pencil pusher stacking procedures to favor one interest group over another.

I am no fan of the current incumbents in much of the Democratic Party and I think that your views make a certain amount of sense. However, I believe that it is important to consider the polish and finish of candidates who know how to effectively wield power in office.  

---

by: ubrayj02 @ Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 20:37:37 PM UTC

Not what I meant (0.00 / 0)

It isn't about disrespect, I didn't mean it to be taken that way, anyhow. And I didn't mention Markos in my post at all. He wasn't the point.

As I think I said several times, I want to know why we aren't getting this across. I'm not interested in blaming anyone else for that. It seems, if anything, a communication failure on our part.

Why don't you (the generic you) think this is urgent? Why's it putting you to sleep?

It's a request for information. And usually when I write about the environment at MyDD, hardly anyone pipes up. At least I got some attention this time around, as well as what I considered some very useful feedback. Plenty of it was criticism, that was fine. Is fine. I wanted to hear it and deliberately asked for it. I needed to read some of those comments, be told some of those stories and complaints, I don't know how else I would have elicited them.

It isn't because I'm questioning anyone's purity. Everyone gets information overload these days. My job is to figure out why this and not that? Why yesterday and not today? Why from her and not from him? If people care but still aren't hearing, and I want something different to happen, it's my responsibility to figure out how to get that done, how to persuade people it's in their interests.

I presume that this is in people's interests because they keep telling me it is. But when it comes time to do anything, there's no help for it. That's just how it is.

We're in the process of trying to figure out how to build a coalition around this so that more can be done. You already know that it was a big issue in Donna Edwards' campaign. It could be a major electoral issue, a real factor in elections, and if done wrong could scotch a lot of future progressive advancement. Somehow, most of the NGOs have sidestepped that, though the Sierra Club and FoE, among others, have been doing a good job, showing spine even.

Maybe it's entirely because of ED and NRDC, but I think it's probably more because the climate movement hasn't figured out how to talk to people about the issue.

You and most of the national bloggers are interested in electoral politics, but you do hang that on issues. FISA, torture, corporate corruption, telecom policy, etc. These topics spring easily to your mind though they are in fact arcane to many people, especially the level at which you're all familiar with them.

Why not climate? Everybody cares about far more things than they're ever able to act on, everyone needs a selection process and not everything can make the cut. The answer, whatever it is, just is. It's a neutral fact.

I have no judgment in asking, only curiousity.

---

by: Natasha Chart @ Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 06:12:38 AM UTC

Calling out Markos (0.00 / 0)

Yes, Matt, my post called out Markos ... because Markos was quoted, quite centrally, in an article re the issue.  

To be quite clear, I did not question why "Markos isn't following the Lieberman-Warner legislation winding its way through the Senate".   I did question a statement as to total lack of knowledge about it until it was advertised on his site, despite the face that Lieberman-Warner Coal-Subsidy Act had been repeatedly discussed at Daily Kos (including in "recommended" diaries and "front-page" posts).

But, you're right, I did "wonder why" and make a call for help.

In some ways, your post and thoughts help answer why and do help.  So, thank you.

On the other hand, this misrepresents what I've written:

"don't disrespect people who are interested in political power by pretending that everyone has to care about what you care about."

I questioned the evident failure of global warming bloggers to be able communicate fundamental principles as to Global Warming legislation such that, when asked, "One of the (if not "the") most influential voices in the progressive blogosphere" didn't have something better to say than "wasn't aware of it".

I've proposed (http://energysmart.wordpress.com/2008/02/14/global-warming-legislation-what-matters/) some core/basic principles that could be a basis for those missing talking points:

Global Warming legislation should

- Promote social equity;
- Have a core principle: polluter pays for polluting;
- Strengthen the economy through green jobs;
- Promote US leadership for concerted global action;
- Meet scientifically based targets for avoiding catastrophic climate change.

Lieberman-Warner fails on all of these criteria

- A Democratic President and more Democrats in the Congress will help get the US a bill that does meet this principles.

Make sense to you?

---

by: a siegel @ Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 17:49:20 PM UTC