Disempowering Compliments

by: Chris Bowers

Mon Sep 08, 2008 at 13:30


I want to win this election. I want to defeat John McCain and Sarah Palin. I want to stop a continuation of Bush policies. I want to end the political effectiveness of a forty-year conservative narrative of backlash identity politics. I want to make some kind of difference in this fight, and not just sit on the sidelines. So, what can I do?

More in the extended entry.
Chris Bowers :: Disempowering Compliments
First, the anti-McCain 527's were already taken away from us, so right now we only have the option to work on behalf of Barack Obama and Joe Biden, rather than against John McCain. Second, we are clearly not in a moment when the netroots can change or influence large institutions, but that happened during the 2004 general election as well and I don't imagine it will last forever. So, right now, as I think Matt accurately wrote last night, the progressive grassroots has been temporarily reduced to having no role other than giving money, registering voters, and amplifying someone else's message.

That is kind of painful since there was a time, not long ago, when instead of taking orders from large political institutions, the netroots were changing those institutions. We scared the bejesus out of the powers that be with the Howard Dean and Ned Lamont campaigns. We helped install the fifty-state strategy as the modus operandi of the DNC. Presidential candidates made pilgrimages to our conferences to answer our questions and seek our support. Just earlier this year, it is entirely possible that we were the decisive role in the nomination campaign, providing the caucus attendees and small donors that put Obama over the top. Now, however, even though the system really hasn't changed all that much, we are just foot soldiers who take orders from the system, instead of radicals who are transforming it.

Anyway, fine. I can live with that, since so much as at stake and since it will only last another eight weeks. I can help out, too. I am a local precinct captain (division committeeperson) in a sort of swing state, Pennsylvania, so I can help out with GOTV and voter registration. I have already donated to Barack Obama, so I have helped out that way. Also, I have a fairly large soapbox to speak from, so I can amplify message. I can, and have, done all of this so far.

Still, there is something holding me back. I don't have the same relish for these activities that I had even two years ago. It is not just being demoted from the position of the revolutionary avant-garde of American politics to imperial cannon fodder. It isn't that I don't agree with Obama on everything, since I long ago came to accept vast policiy and ideological differences with leading Democrats. It is, I think, that the people I am working for keep telling me how great my opponents are. Not only are we imperial cannon fodder, but our generals keep telling us how great the people shooting at us really are.

It's Russ Feingold saying what a great President McCain would be. It is Joe Biden saying how he doesn't know anyone with more personal courage than John McCain. It is Barack Obama prefacing every criticism he makes of John McCain with a glorification of McCain's service to America. And the list goes on and on.

This is the message I am supposed to be amplifying? In order to defeat McCain, I now have to repeatedly say just how awesome McCain is? That, um, doesn't feel quite right. It certainly doesn't feel like why I got into this fight, and why I want to make a difference in it. In fact, it feels utterly disempowering. I want to defeat McCain, not build him up. However, it feels as though my only option to defeat McCain involves working for people who are constantly building him up.

The compliments Democrats regularly pay to John McCain are self-defeating and disempowering. We aren't going to win an election where we say our opponents are awesome, while our opponents say that we suck. I want to make a difference in the fight to defeat John McCain, but with this structural set-up, it doesn't feel like I can. McCain's favorables keep going up, and his poll numbers follow along in due course. Gee, I wonder why that is.

Stop glorifying McCain, Democrats. You are making the record-breaking grassroots activism conducted on your behalf pointless. You can't win by telling everyone how great your opponent is. People are working their asses off for you, and they are not doing so because they think John McCain is awesome. Remind us why we should be in this fight. Maybe even a few voters will catch on, too.

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Disempowering Compliments | 89 comments
And use his real freaking name! (4.00 / 4)
Not McSame, McShame etc,

It's John McCain, conservative Republican and Bush backer. no one takes those stupid mangled names seriously. It's an embarassment.

But McSame .. (4.00 / 3)
ties into the fact that at the least .. he'll be 4 more(or 8) years of Bush .. if not worse ..  you don't think he's noticed that the Democrats in Congress cave at the slightest hint of a strong word from Commander Codpiece?
[ Parent ]
agreed (4.00 / 2)
Puns don't work for Democrats ("Betray Us?"), they just make us look lamer than we already are.
[ Parent ]
That nickname was given to him (4.00 / 3)
by his own troops.

Montani semper liberi
[ Parent ]
The word is Irresponsible. (4.00 / 9)

This is the word that is missing from Obama's message.    

And yet that is precisely what McCain is.

It is irresponsible at a time of great economic distress to run for President if you admit that you don't know much about economics.  It is irresponsible to run for a President in an era where technology drives change if you don't know how to use a computer.   It is irresponsible to pursue tax cuts when there is a $500 Billion dollar deficit.

If you believe that the stakes in this election are huge - and I believe that they are - you owe it to the country to state directly what the proposals of the other side are.  

The Obama campaign isn't quite up to doing that right now.  

Liar (4.00 / 3)
The other word is "liar".  Rachel Maddow showed us how to use it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Sprinkle all conversations with the word liberally.
Watch poll numbers rise.


[ Parent ]
Liar isn't effective in politics (4.00 / 1)
in my experience calling a politician a liar is useless: most voters assume all politicians lie.


[ Parent ]
In my experience (4.00 / 1)
it's not the word "liar" in and of itself that does the job, but the context. People accept the fact that politicians, like everyone in the world, will lie sometimes. What matters is, when and why do they lie?

If they lie for the right reasons, it's okay, if they lie for the wrong reasons, it isn't. So the real question is, "is this person trustworthy?"

And there is definitely a case to be made here -- McCain is not trustworthy, because he tells lies at the wrong time and for the wrong reason.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Irresponsible? (4.00 / 4)
That's a very Kerryesque word--how bout "reckless," if you want to take that approach.

But the fact that all of us are throwing out different adjectives shows just how jumbled our message is. Is it that McCain is:

1. irresponsible
2. dishonest
3. George Bush
4. out of touch
5. beholden to the richer and the richer
6. corrupt
7. unstable
8. senile

I argue in this post

http://www.dailykos.com/storyo...

that Obama seems to have settled on number 3 as its umbrella message, and you could argue that it could encompass most of the rest. But who knows? They might drop it the way they dropped the "housing gaffe" line of attack.

I, personally, am less dispirited than Chris about the praise of McCain--that's par for the course for club members, and voters actually like that kind of thing. What bothers me is that the praise isn't coupled with a clear line of attack on McCain. The RNC convention was actually filled with token praise for Obama, but that was overwhelmed by the assault on his character and his fitness for office.

What we need is a clear, unambiguous, relentless, emotionally resonant campaign against McCain. I'd love one that captures the anger and sense of betrayal that many of us feel, but short of that, one that is at least visceral in its impact. It's fine to say, McCain is George Bush, but what does that mean for people's lives? Yes, fear can be our friend too.


[ Parent ]
But how can Obama (4.00 / 1)
come out tough against McCain and the GOP? He is the guy who romanced the Right and said they have some great ideas. So with that he HAS TO toe the line. And if he doesn't then those Independent and Moderate swing voters will say 'well he was full of it all along', and not vote for him. He dug his own hole with the help from you and Chris and many more who were more anti-Clinton than pro-Obama. Now you see what you get.

Of course Clinton as you know would never have gone as far in reaching out to the Right and therefore would be able to fight in a way that Obama can't (not that he is a fighter anyway).

So where are we now? We are at a point that it took the Clinton's to help bring about a convention bounce. And now Obama is to meet with Bill and both Bill and Hillary are expected to lift Obama up so he can squeak out a victory - maybe. So if it takes the Clinton's to win shouldn't it have been Clinton as the nominee and Obama as the VP all along? Then we wouldn't be in this mess.

At the very least Obama's lack of 'judgment' in not putting Clinton in the VP spot was a blunder of epic proportions. So now the little dirty secret that is every Dems mind but they won't voice might come to pass - - It may be the Republicans that put the first woman in the WH, not Democrats!

If Obama loses it will all be on the backs of him and of the  Obama supporters that Chris mentioned that put him over the top. It will be all of you who were more interested in being anti-something rather than pro-winning.

Let's face reality. If this were not a year where all factors were in favor of the Dems Obama would be so far behind his loss would be of McGovern proportions.

You all just picked the wrong person to be the nominee and that will be something you will have to live with for the next 57 days and perhaps long after that.

As Chris said yesterday our only salvation may be Clinton 2012. Hopefully by then you will have all learned a lesson. But I'm not betting on it.

[ Parent ]
hahahaha (4.00 / 1)
You crack me up.  
"Clinton would never have gone as far in reaching out to the Right..."

Please, please, troll again.  You are hilarious.

Tim Wolfe

[ Parent ]
I really dislike (0.00 / 0)
empty comments like yours. When you have evidence that Clinton said the kind things that Obama did about the Right and that she preached bi-partisanship beyond the norm like he did come back and post it.
[ Parent ]
The Same Attacks That Republicans Have Made (4.00 / 1)
Against Obama Would Work GREAT Against Hillary!

The "empty suit" ads aren't that great. That reflects Republicans having trouble trying to define Obama.

Against Hillary? The Media have spent the last 16 years defining Hillary. The right-wing wouldn't have to lift a finger. All the work of Swift-boating would be done by NBC/CBS/ABC/CNN/MSNBC/FOX.

Whatever weaknesses Obama has, Hillary had 10 times more. McCain just managed to rally his base? It would have happened in June with Hillary as the nominee.

"Angry feminist. Out of touch with America. Bring back the scandals of the Clinton era. File-gate, and Korea-gate, and executive pardons for Marc Rich, and the Rose law-firm billing records, and Vince Foster's suicide, oh yes, and White-water."

And that's just dredging up the past. The present would be far worse. Remember the Howard Dean "scream" that actually wasn't? That would be the entire media coverage of the campaign, if Hillary were nominated.

There would be an endless tirade and the media would have been leading the charge.

I'm amazed that Hillary-supporters just don't get it.

She would have suffered an ENDLESS perfect storm of made up media driven "controversy." "Is Hillary hormonal? Is she too emotionally unstable to be President? More details at 10:00."

Sarah Palin, the good hockey-mom, against Hillary, the angry femi-nazi who is a man in a pants suit.

If you thought the media was horrible in the nomination campaign, that would be NOTHING compared with the election!


Obama MIGHT lose, but Hillary would be GUARANTEED TO LOSE!

[ Parent ]
That was all debunked (0.00 / 0)
and the public knows it. You must think the public is stupid.
[ Parent ]
Not so much (0.00 / 0)
The public doesn't know it.

Whether the public is stupid or not, all that stuff gets brought back up again when Hillary gets the nomination.

Count on it.

Karl in Drexel Hill, PA

[ Parent ]
Suggestion: Daily coordinated-blog narrative (4.00 / 9)
How about you guys, Kos, Huffington, TPM, Aravosis, Armstrong and any of the other big blogs and post the "Daily narrative" (e.g.: McCain repeats Bridge to Nowhere lie in commercials) with instructions to us faithful readers to wallpaper targeted corporate media with that message. The "daily narrative" post is the same on all sites, but then the individual blogger can expound on it however he/she sees fit. (as I write this, maybe a 3-day message rather than a daily message might be more effective).

See if we can affect what the media reports and put McCain on the defensive.  See if we can recreate the "how many homes?" magic that JedReport got going.

John McCain won't insure children

Herding cats (4.00 / 1)
I'd challenge anyone to get all these blogs to actually have any coordinated message (given that we're not right-wing automatons)

But it's a great suggestion, so I'll throw it a rec.

Help support "CRASHING THE STATES"--a Netroots Film!

[ Parent ]
If it's a simple message that has been universally blogged (4.00 / 1)
(e.g.: McCain is a hotheaded asshole) than our cats can be herded.

John McCain won't insure children
[ Parent ]
Do you really think (4.00 / 1)
that a coordinated "Preaching to The Choir" is going to change the dynamics and momentum of this race? Get serious.

I know you will find this hard to believe but the voters you need don't read those blogs.

[ Parent ]
You misunderstand me (4.00 / 1)
The blogs put out the message du jour, which we as readers dissemenate via e-mails, letters to the editor, etc.  Kind of like those action alerts the blogs do (like when ABC aired "path to 9/11") except much more pre-meditated.

The message isn't for us. It's for us to spread.

John McCain won't insure children

[ Parent ]
Health records (4.00 / 1)
It's too late to go after McCain's credentials, your own nominee has seen to that.  Think Biden's going to bring up McCain's questionable links to lobbyists, after pumping him up as a stand-up guy?

It's time to go after his health records.

That will focus attention on President Palin.

Good (0.00 / 0)


John McCain doesn't care about Vets.


more ranting about nothing new (4.00 / 5)
this is getting stale.

transformers transform, sheep follow. if you want to do something radical than do it. organize your own video commercial production. raise millions for ad buys. the online left grassroots community is not small. the 527s folded on their own volition - they could have stayed in business if they wanted to. start your own 527.

crying over powerlessness seems to be a recurring theme that rears its head every six weeks or so. power is taken, not granted. do or do not. but please stop crying that someone isn't paying attention to you. make them pay attention to you.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

Shut up and raise millions? (0.00 / 0)
Is that your theory?

I actually have run a TV ad (more on that later, and other paid advertising. I know what I can do. I also know when the people I am working for aren't helping much.

But maybe I shouldn't talk back to the bossmen. It's just so stale.  

[ Parent ]
My Point (4.00 / 2)
is that you can sit here and repeat the same laments of powerlessness yet again, or you can try to change the game. its not unreasonable to think that the online left grassroots community could raise millions to do its own thing.

it is stale, these are the same laments that you guys had several months ago when you were upset that the 527s listened to Obama's request to shut down. Its their fault, and ours. OL in conjunction could have started a massive petition campaign to plead with the 527s to stay up and running. OL et al could have started its own 527 mission. Maybe it would be small in scale, but it could set a foundation for the future. You could organize massive fax/phone/email campaigns against select news outlets. You could try talk get readers to get infiltrate the Obama camp and push for more radical action. these are just things off the top of my head without having all day to think about it and other grasstops to discuss it with, but there has to be at least 20 smart radical ideas that OL et al could organize the community around. Would they be game changing? who knows until you try. but you and Matt seem to be more focused on feeling sorry for yourselves that you're not given more respect by the campaign. months have gone by without any fundamental change in the relationship between the online left grassroots and the campaign. that can only be our fault.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
Take Action (4.00 / 2)
I think you've got it right. I'd probably have tried to be nicer about it but the truth is that Chris and Matt aren't powerless and they do have the capacity to LEAD others in the netroots. They've done it in the past but this cycle I'm not seeing it. The left blogosphere is full of people who are hungry for a chance to help Obama win. They'd open their wallets for a good idea coming out of one of the progressive blogs.

Blaming it on Obama doesn't cut it with me. Just do it and apologize later if Obama doesn't like it. If we can impact the race in just one battleground state that would be something indeed. What's stopping us?

Of course that could be turned around on all of us. Why don't each of us just do something? That's fair I suppose but it does overlook the fact that nobody is looking to me as a leader and only a precious few even care what I have to say. That's not true of Chris, or Matt, or Jerome, or Markos, or Christy, or Jane, or any of another dozen or so netroots leaders.

So, here's my request: LEAD!

[ Parent ]
We can lead to, and we can (4.00 / 2)
even leads Chris and Matt into leadership!

We shouldn't put this whole burden on them. The question is, leadership in what particular direction?

Maybe if we as a community brainstormed that question, and arrived at some answers than our bloggy bossmen would take the ball and run ...

[ Parent ]
Who are these bossmen (0.00 / 0)
you keep talking about?  
[ Parent ]
wrong (4.00 / 2)
lots of us are pissed at these constant compliments of McCain. Biden and Obama need to just cut it out. I don't know what to do about Feingold, he's just an idiot. I can easily see news articles in 2009-10 where Feingold says "This isn't the John McCain I once knew" after McCain starts a war with Iran or vetoes a bill that Feingold cares about.

Obama/Biden are too scared of being accused of demeaning McCain's service. My answer is: don't even mention his service. The best thing to do would be to say that "this election isn't about 1968, it's about 2008". That'll piss McCain off and make him look old at the same time.

I think Chris is right, although speaking for myself I'm fired up no matter what Obama or Biden say.

[ Parent ]
thats clearly not what this post is about (0.00 / 0)
Chris' post is about being upset that the 527s are gone, that the online left grassroots is not changing institutions anymore, and that Obama's campaign is not listening to the grassroots strategy feedback.

complementing McCain has been going for months and months, as has the complaining about it. I agree, I think complementing his is stupid too. its not new, and its not what this post is really about. because if this post was about that it would be about organizing tens of thousands of readers to slam the Obama campaign headquarters with emails and phone calls to tell them to cut that shit out. but this post is about being powerless and accepting it.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
1 email sent (4.00 / 1)
sent to BO:

Hi -

I think Obama and Biden and other Democrats need to STOP complementing John McCain. Stop prefacing every attack with "he's such an honorable stand up guy". This is a confusing message. You don't have to belittle his war service, and you don't have to complement it either. You can say "nice soldier, lousy representative of the people". That's it. No honor and applauding or "he's a good friend I would do anything for." cut it out! We want you to win. Stop building him up.

Good luck,
Will

--

there. there is one. better than doing nothing.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
This post isn't about the compliments? (0.00 / 0)
Maybe I should re-read or re-title it then.  
[ Parent ]
Nice line. (0.00 / 0)
How do we get somebody to use it?
[ Parent ]
I am working hard to keep exhaustion ... (4.00 / 9)
...from setting in prematurely. But, as a Popular Front Democrat, that is mighty hard for the reasons you say.

As anybody who knows me is well aware, my political strengths, such as they are, do not lie in electioneering, marketing candidates and the day-to-day tactics that winning candidates must engage in, although I've learned a lot from you and a dozen or so others who have, over the long haul, impressed me with their skillful analyses. I'm at my best on the phone bank, the precinct canvas (I'm a precinct captain, too, and, with four other captains, the co-organizer of 25 precincts), and on the discussion of issues.

But I have vowed not to talk too much about the issues from now until November 5 because now isn't the time to voice the many disagreements I have, not just with Senator Obama but also with most Democrats, particularly the leadership, but also with the new generation the netroots has some effect in assisting into office. I'm willing to be an uncomplaining foot-soldier in order to get someone into the White House who will at least mean we don't have to keep fighting rearguard actions to protect the FDR legacy.

However, I wholly agree with your take on what we're seeing far too much of, as you describe it:  

It is, I think, that the people I am working for keep telling me how great my opponents are. Not only are we imperial cannon fodder, but our generals keep telling us how great the people shooting at us really are.

Jeez. As if we don't have enough hurdles to overcome.

Well said (0.00 / 0)
And there's much vanity in these parts that compels people--including me--to hold forth on strategy and message for the purpose of hearing themselves write, and so that they can take credit if the campaign does what they suggest, or say I-told-you-so if they don't and fail.

At the same time, though, part of the promise of blogs (perhaps quaint) is that a normal person armed with an opinion and united with people with like-minded opinions might actually influence the debate and even the direction of a presidential campaign.

[ Parent ]
Just A Thought (0.00 / 0)
Just maybe, we need to show patience.  Obama's got the chops of a community organizer whose community is most of the United States.  

If you believed the tracking polls during the primary, Hillary won.  Did I have a similar period of Obama is gonna lose anxiety during the primary, just ask my wife (almost ex).

This election I believe rides on the debates, full stop.  

What would be interesting to know how the polls trended in 2000 and 2004 pre and post the debates.  

Keep the faith.

 

Hillary almost did win (0.00 / 0)
in 2000 and 2004, Gore and Kerry won the debates, the polls trended to them...and then away from them a week later.

[ Parent ]
I think the worry is (4.00 / 2)
that the debates will continue the dumbass "Brutus is an honorable man" bullshit. As Chris suggests, we can't pin all hope on what the Dem leaders do. We have to figure out how to get our own messages beyond the choir.
[ Parent ]
I Agree (0.00 / 0)
The media will continue to beat the drum for McCain.  But, Obama is not Gore, not Kerry, and definitely not Dukakis, he is a street guy, a fighter.  Ever play street basketball, now that's a contact sport!

Give.  Organize.  Keep the faith.

[ Parent ]
True. (0.00 / 0)
I've had my disappointments with Obama, but it's good to keep in mind that he's not Gore or Kerry or Dukakis. I still think he'll pull out of this with guns blazing. But first he needs to get some better advice. Or just forget the advisors altogether.
[ Parent ]
Running a GE like a primary (4.00 / 2)
It is a pity Obama won't attack McCain with a fraction of the energy with which he attacked Clinton.
throw us a steak Obama! (4.00 / 1)
Nate Silver at 538 makes a theory of the latest polling (thanks BCdem)

It seems plausible to me that some segment of conservative Republican voters had effectively been in hiding from the pollsters, either embarrassed by the performance of George W. Bush (and therefore disengaged from politics), or embarrassed to disclose to pollsters that they support him. Suddenly, with the selection of Palin, there has been a jolt of energy within this group, a release of pent-up frustrations, and they are coming out of the woodwork.

What if this is right, what can Obama do to counter? He already moved to the center with vote on FISA and talk about abortion and faith based initiatives. Now Palin owns those votes and it's a dry well for Obama.

What if Obama gives red meat to progressives, and fires up his base? That would help him more than compromising now. I want to see a strong position on restoring civil liberties, Biden would be credible on that. I want to see strong positions on a more democratic media and internet, single payer health care, ending the drug war, the US working for more peace not more war.

And generally Matt's Five Untouchable Symptoms
http://www.openleft.com/showDi...

What Obama policies would get you fired up like you haven't been before?

The base is fired up (0.00 / 0)
that's not the problem, the problem is he's losing Independent voters to McCain/Palin. Firing up the base isn't going to help because the only people who aren't excited about Obama or maybe hiding under the woodwork are Clinton supporters the only way for Obama to appease them is to kiss Clinton's ass, put her on the ticket, or step aside for her.

He needs to win Independents and he's not going to do that by appealing to the base...I agree that tracking to the center doesn't appear to be helping much either. Independents are fickle. They are independent because they don't have a core set of principles in which they vote on. Palin is perfect for them.

To win Independents, we must convince them McCain and Palin are partisan hacks like Bush and Obama/Biden are not. To do that, Obama has to NOT appeal to his base, and yes, we must sit here and take it.

You think the Republican base is excited about McCain? They're not, they like Palin.  

[ Parent ]
I sense a mood of doom and gloom .. (0.00 / 0)
Obama has a big base, but I sense a mood of defeatism and hopelessness creeping in.

Reasons:

- For the first time, the polls are sensationally bad for Obama. Ok, the daily tracking polls can be notoriously dishonest and inaccurate, and its probably only McCain's campaign bounce working through, but for guys who have been ahead since last March, this has rocked them.
- The media is wall-to-wall with a new narrative: Sarah Palin, how the Republican base is energized, how Independents are flocking to the McCain camp ... its probably 50% BS, but it is after a year of visible low morale in the GOP. It is a shocker to suddenly find yourself confronted with a snarling tiger when you thought is was a pussycat.

Some inexperienced Obama workers are suddenly facing for the first time the possibility of losing.

Obama needs not to panic, of course. But he needs to spread some calm and reassurance as well. He needs also to put some points on the board, and maybe disrupt the media narrative that has got away from him.

He is the best judge if he needs to re-focus and re-energize also.

[ Parent ]
Yes (0.00 / 0)
but the doom and gloom isn't on Obama, it's on the country. There's a feeling that Obama is the best candidate many of us have seen in our lifetime. Some people even belief (what's been considered blasphemy) that he's better than Bill. Despite being fired up and confident, the guy is struggling, nobody knows the fuck why, and the only thing we can assume is that the country is rejecting something great for them.

It doesn't mean we work less or get discouraged and go home, it just means that we're frustrated. I'm convinced we're losing and this election is falling away from us. I'm probably more discouraged and frustrated than anyone around here. So what am I doing? I'm taking an LOA from my new job in Rome to fly home and knock on doors in Loudoun County, Virginia.

If Obama is going down, I'm going down with him.  

[ Parent ]
Expand the Electorate, Democratize our Political System (4.00 / 5)
One thing that's baffled me about the current progressive movement if that, unlike its historical predecessors, it pays little to no attention to the structural issues of our political system. Almost all successful progressive movements in the past have been successful in part because they expanded the electorate (ensuring that minorities, women, and 18-year-olds had the right to vote) and democratizing the system (direct election of Senators, ballot initiatives, single-member districts, etc.)

There's no discussion of these structural problems today, which leaves Democrats contesting elections, particularly at the presidential level, with the deck stacked against them. A true democratic, progressive platform might look like this:

1. Eliminate the electoral college: Rick Perlstein's book reminded me that this almost happened in the 1970's, and it could happen now if Democrats made it an issue. Today, it's possible for someone to run for president and win without ever setting foot in any of the top twenty metropolitan areas, which represent 100 million people, a third of our population. Eliminating the electoral college would ensure that our country reflected the wishes of the nation at large, not just overrepresented and out-of-touch states like Wyoming and Alaska.

2. Uniform voting standards: Force states to use standardized ballot design, done at the national level, and require that the results are certified by an independent governmental agency. We already do this to some degree through the Civil Rights Act in some states; we should do it everywhere.

3. Higher, and more immediate, penalties for campaign fraud and abuse. Establish mandatory minimum sentences for election fraud, and up the fees so groups aren't as fearless about breaking the law. Poisoning our democracy is a serious crime.

4. Automatic voter registration at 18: Most people turn 18 within one year of finishing high school, so they should be required to register then (like they are required to register for the selective service). You could also require all drivers, tax payers, etc., to be voters.

5. Instant and online voter registration transfer. If you move to a new state, you should be able to change your voter registration online.

And -- for longshot goals:

1. Statehood for D.C. and, possibly, Puerto Rico. No one talks about this, and it's a shame. It would be easier to implement with the elimination of the electoral college.

2. Redistricting of the U.S. Senate. The U.S. Senate is one of the most anti-democratic legislative bodies in the industrialized democracies. Progressives should figure out how to make the Senate more democratic, either by distributing half or all the seats by population, adding seats to account for population, or some other way. The progressive agenda can't be passed when the large population states have so little representation in the legislative body that manages to stop most reform.

3. Term-limits for the U.S. Supreme Court. If we enacted 30-year term limits for justices, it would make sure that no president or party has the ability to control judicial policy indefinitely. The founders could not have anticipated that presidents would appoint justices in their forties and fifties who then served in the capacity for forty or fifty years. We'll get better judges, with more active judicial experience, and it will make the courts accountable to the people.

I think progressives, and most voters, feel so disengaged from the political process because they aren't able to take an active role in electing the president, the branch of government that has become the most important in recent decades. Many people never make the leap to local or state politics because it seems like small beans when compared to electing national leaders.

[ Parent ]
DC (4.00 / 1)
They tried to get DC a vote in Congress, and the Republicans filibustered it despite that 57 senators would have voted for it.

The electoral college could be done though, since it just needs states worth 271 EV's to pass legislation promising their EVs to the national PV winner.  

[ Parent ]
Two words, Chris. (0.00 / 0)
Voter. Registration.  

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power
I agree (0.00 / 0)
Chris, there are so many things that you and Matt could be doing as leaders to increase dem registration--just like you did with Act Blue--coordinate, champion and implement.
[ Parent ]
what , like plastics? (4.00 / 1)
voter registration ins't some factor hidden from polling that produces shock results. Polling firms ask whether people are registered to vote or not before interviewing them.

My point is that we have done a ton of voter registration alrady. Three million new voters in the nomination campaign. A couple million since that time. Several million more back in 2003-2004. And yet, despite these new registrations, McCain leads anyway.

The idea that all we need to do to win is jsut register a whole bunch of people is one of the oldest fallacies in Democratic politics. Nothing is a singular cure all.  

[ Parent ]
oldest fallacies in Democratic politics? (0.00 / 0)
ouch...
[ Parent ]
Exactly right (4.00 / 2)
It pisses me off every time I hear them say that. Hopefully in the debates they won't be so gracious, especially when McCain and Palin will be lying right in their faces.

Obama needs to say two things in the first debate. He needs to call McCain a liar and point out those lies.

Second, he needs to say that this election is not about 1968, it is about 2008.

Both have the effect of attacking McCain's character, exposing his lies and POW crutch, and pissing McCain off royally. If McCain is pissed, he will have a meltdown on national TV.

The Debates are Meaningless (4.00 / 3)
Bush threw a major temper tantrum on stage during the debates in 2004 -- he looked like the spoiled brat he actually is. Didn't matter. He behaved oddly in other ways too. (The suspected wire on his back wasn't just some out-of-nowhere conspiracy theory.)

No matter how good the debates are for Dems or how bad the debates are for the GOP, the GOP will always win the debates in the media. Because the media expects the GOP candidates to be dumb, regular guys, who connect with voters but don't really grasp the issues and drool all over themselves in public sometimes.

Relying on the debates to change anything is foolish, especially given the known right-wing bent of the moderators this year. The expectation is that Palin will get killed by Biden. In reality, 'she'll do fine,' as Joke Line put it. She'll be able to cram enough to bullshit her way through. She will lose, but nobody will care. McCain will need to meet a similar standard. He will lose, but he's a POW and the media will praise his simply being able to make it up to the stage without falling over.

The right has more control over national media now than they've ever had before, and they're still testing their powers. Until the Dem candidates themselves start to recognize this problem, there will be no progress. Which is a reason to give money to Darcy Burner and others.

[ Parent ]
Kerry caught up to Bush (0.00 / 0)
On the strength of his debate performances.

He was significantly behind leading up to them.

here.

[ Parent ]
Also four words: (4.00 / 3)
Letters to the Editor.

If the corporate media won't tell the truth about McFailin, and our nominees won't either, then it's up to us foot soldiers. Good thing there's a lot of us.

My letter is going to go something like this:

Who is Sarah Palin?
1. A corrupt politician and a liar
2. A religious extremist
3. A window into what America can expect from a McCain administration


Montani semper liberi

Maybe it's time (0.00 / 0)
for the mass smear e-mails that were effective against Obama.  
[ Parent ]
I dunno. (0.00 / 0)
It's quite clear we're nowhere near as good as they are in that department.

John McCain thinks we haven't spent enough time in Iraq
[ Parent ]
glaring lack of restraint (4.00 / 3)
The sad thing is the Democrats didn't have to DO anything. They didn't need to attack McCain's war record or courage or character, etc. They just needed to NOT lionize him every chance they got. I can't wait for the October ad featuring Obama, Biden, and both Clintons vouching for McCain's brilliant character and heroic courage. There was no need to hand the GOP that ammunition.

Since it's such a profoundly and obviously shitty campaign tactic to heap praise upon your opponent, my only conclusion is that they actually believe it. They really think John McCain is a man of unimpeachable integrity. He's their hero.

They do believe it (0.00 / 0)
which is why they didn't want to face him in the GE. That's why the Republicans knew what they were doing by nominating him, base be damned. They knew Democrats liked him and would have a hard time running against him.  
[ Parent ]
I think it's one of these "glue politics" (0.00 / 0)
things Mike Lux was talking about last week.

They may or may not believe McCain is a swell guy, but they certainly can identify with him, and feel comfortable with him, in a way they do not with the partisan rank and file. He is "one of them" and we are not.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
It is clear that whomever is at the top or within the circle of the highest (4.00 / 4)
reaches of the Obama campaign have made a decision that this is how they are going to wage this campaign....it's been going on for months: what a swell guy,what a friend McSame is, what a hero, his tremendous service yada,yada, yada

I'm typing this and it's striking me, as it does you, this constsnt drumbeat: And why do we want to defeat this swell guy, who except on his positions on issues is a friend to so many Democrats in the Senate, he's a guy with honorable service behind him a guy that we don't want to say anything about that will alienate his friendship with us

Don't they see how fundamentally OFF this sounds???

We have to make it impossible for someone to vote for the guy.

All the research says that.

The message this campaign and surrogates is sending?

It'll be a shame if Obama and Biden loses.

You know the image that goes along with that statement?

A shrug, a pursing of the lips, with an Oh well whattaya going to do tagged on the end of it.

They do make our work harder. That's for sure.

It precisely plays into their strategy. (4.00 / 3)
The McCain campaign has pretty much abandoned all pretense of being about policy or issues. They've bet everything on a soap opera/American Idol response from indifferent voters. It's all about emotion and "nice guy" perceptions.

Some idiot consultants have decided that the Dems will win by conceding the emotional bullshit and countering with issues. Too bad McCain isn't winning on issues. He's winning on the factor that the Dems are lining up to promote for him. I think Dems have bought the nonsense about Americans being "sick of division and wrangling". No they're not. Obviously. Get over the convenient lies and get attacking.

[ Parent ]
It's a good thing you have your own (4.00 / 2)
blog.  On Daily Kos, some would want to quarantine you.  (See Rec List diary).

I think we are going down the Dukakis road and some Obama supporters just won't see it.  I hope the campaign sees more clearly.

If I hear one more mixed message from Democrats about McCain, I'll scream.  Did Palin talk about how good Obama was?  Even here "compliments" dripped with mockery and insults.  

You put your finger on it. (4.00 / 2)
I think you defined the source of the malaise (to use classic DemSpeak) that's been pervading the leftosphere even before the McCain bounce came to light. I've been feeling it as much as anyone without quite knowing where it came from. Now it becomes clear: we are without warriors in the places that matter for winning the election. Our party has been running scared from the beginning and leaving the rest of us with no place to stand and fight. How odd that only Harry Reid, of all people, should be the one to peg McCain for what he really is.

What makes it all even more dispiriting is the smell of "consultant" all over this. Let's not try to fight the popular perception, let's do the "Brutus is an honorable man" play. Bullshit.

Dems are listening to "experts" stuck in some other century. The way we hear things now, the "honorable" part is all that sticks and all the counterweight just fades away unnoticed. But what do we do now? Our only shot, seems to me, is to break ranks with the Dems and try to shape a separate narrative that aims to take down the whole McCain hero/patriot/straight-shooter mythology. Maybe if it gets a little traction some part of the "mainstream" will be emboldened to pick join in.

The other thing this whole experience teaches is that we need to develop structure with no ties to political parties except when we choose to make them. We need some kind of permanent presence. There are brilliant, insightful posts here and elsewhere in blogland every day on ideas, strategy, and tactics. They get a flurry of excitement (or totally ignored) and then scroll off into the void like water down a drain. We need to consolidate that thinking and find ways to inject it into the mainstream on a permanent basis. We need to do less futile yapping and more building connections beyond the left choir. We shouldn't be despondent -- we've come a long way in a short while. But we can't be roots forever. It's time to get the tree growing in the real world. Let's start figuring out how to do that.

Bingo. (0.00 / 0)
We chose sides too quickly in the primary this time, we did not make the nominees court us for our support. We're stuck with them now, and duty bound to do everything we can to help them even if they won't help themselves.

But next time, we need to make it clear that praising Republicans is unacceptable, a deal breaker.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Disagree (4.00 / 1)
Dodd and Edwards courted us (progressives/lefty blogospherians) and won some support; Edwards's blog support was significant probably the only reason he stayed in as long as he did.

Once it was down to Hillary and Obama, essentially two moderate centrists -- more sympathetic than not to the DLC -- I don't think we even remotely had the capability to sway them this cycle. They're not really interested in our support. They don't trust us and they don't really believe in the leftier positions we support, and they both think they can convince GOPs to vote for them en masse. (Remember the 2004 Republicans for Kerry commercials? How could we have lost? Republicans voted for Kerry!...)

[ Parent ]
I think we should've at least tried. (0.00 / 0)
As it was, most blogs threw in 100% for Obama, and a few cast their lot with Clinton, but nowhere did I see anyone (except maybe Digby) who asked the question "what have you done for me lately?"

Montani semper liberi
[ Parent ]
... (4.00 / 1)
I would suggest a lot of what you call malaise is just being plain tired of the whole process.  It's been nearly two years of hand to hand combat for any voter not hard right convicted Rep.

Palin will energize the hard right base but she, and McCain's pick of someone so extreme will also REenergize the left base.  She was just the shot in the arm the left needed to avoid complacency.

I also don't understand why y'all wouldn't make the arguments the way you see them.  If you believe something, speak out.

At the same time give the electorate a little credit and a little vetting time.  As more comes out the pick of Palin will begin to look more and more cynical to more and more folks.  She's a flash in the pan and nothing more than a female Huckabee who didn't win anything did he?

[ Parent ]
Well said (4.00 / 3)
When Obama talks about how wonderful McCain is while McCain's surrogates call Obama an Unamerican Taxraising Muslim Socialist, low-information voters will get the clear message that McCain will be a great president and vote for him. You can hardly blame them. I'm hoping that the Dems will learn, someday, that you don't play nice and bring flowers to a gunfight but I'm afraid it's not going to happen soon and certainly not in time for this election. The one thing that really helped was the houses uproar; won't somebody in the campaign please notice? Obama is a great candidate and would make a great president but he has a flaw like a Greek tragic hero in that he seems to really believe that people respect politicians who say nice things about their opponents. I'm hoping the outcome is better than in Euripides.

And for crying out loud, the hero bit isn't even true. A hero is somebody who accomplishes something valuable or important. McCain got shot down and tortured. No accomplishment, just endurance. Not a hero, just a soldier.

Biden is the chief culprit .. (4.00 / 1)
Trouble is that Biden and McCain have been in the same Gentelman's Club for so long that Biden cannot seem to bring himself to say anything nasty.

He goes on at length before he gets to the criticism, and by then everyone has tuned out, and are left with the message that John McCain is a great guy.

I wouldn't like Biden watching my back in a streetfight!

[ Parent ]
I'm sure McCain is twofaced to them (0.00 / 0)
We're talking the Senate, and I'm sure that in the backrooms and hallways Biden, McCain, and Obama have civil, frank, and even constructive discussions. Biden and Obama, unfortunately seem to think that's the real McCain and that's how to treat him in public. McCain understands his backroom demeanor places no restrictions on his public behavior and wields a machete in public with glee. After the election I'm sure he'll have more civil and frank discussions with them and if they complain he'll just chuckle and say "That's politics! You want my support now or not?"
[ Parent ]
Naïve (4.00 / 1)
They know exactly who and what McCain is. Biden has been in the Senate forever, and Obama has had at least one run-in with Mr. Two-Faced Belligerent McSame. They've chosen to go the route of excessive praise because they think somehow it will help them get elected.

Why they would think that, I'm not sure.

[ Parent ]
Heroism (0.00 / 0)
He was awarded the Silver Star, a Legion of Merit for Valor, Distinguished Flying Cross, three Bronze Stars, two Commendation Medals and two Purple Hearts.

Whether service in Vietnam is relevant  to his ability to serve as President is certainly questionable.

His military record isn't.

[ Parent ]
great moments in leglislative strategery (4.00 / 1)
What exactly... (0.00 / 0)
What exactly is holding you back from framing the race any way you wish?  Has the Obama campaign come to you and said you must use the terminology we use, the arguments we use and nothing else?

I simply do not understand the handwringing that goes on amongst the left.  If you believe something, talk about it.  If you have disdain for McCain or his policy proposals, talk about it.

What's hold you back besides your own reluctance?  

Now who's got the enthusiasm gap? (4.00 / 1)
Seriously, this is what I was thinking before I read this post just now.

I lose enthusiasm the longer Obama remains passive, and the more fulsome his and Biden's praise of John McCain becomes.

By ceding the air war they're going to lose the ground war they're doubling down on -- who will they have to get to the polls?


Palin is not going to make it. Her snark is going to get old, if it hasn't already. (0.00 / 0)
 and McCain is a weak condidate.  I am waiting this "American Idol" moment out.  
Hope so (0.00 / 0)
Orwell is often quoted in response to GOP strategery, but Heinlein, in his Future History, wrote something more appropriate to the present moment, to the effect that a religious demagogue was elected POTUS in 2008 on an explicit platform of theocracy. In 2012, there were no elections.

[ Parent ]
Well, I really doubt the working men and woman who depend on (0.00 / 0)
elections for their paycheck are going to see that happen.  It may be a farse, like wrestling, but it will still take place.  

And like my grandmother,then in her 70's, who grabbed a beer and watched wrestling many years ago, the electorate will still want their show.

Now we can quibble over the meaning of "elections...."   ;-)

[ Parent ]
Maturity. (4.00 / 1)
You suggest your lack of enthusiasm isn't because of the issues, the worthiness of the fight, or even tactics.  It's because the leadership says McCain is a nice guy.  Your commitment to your movement can be defeated by mere civility.


It's not civility (0.00 / 0)
it's disloyalty. We fight for them but they do not fight for us.

Don't get me wrong, like most partisan Dems I'm disciplined enough to fight with or without support from the leadership, but damn it would be nice to have sometimes. We deserve it.


Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
It's civility (0.00 / 0)
"Disloyalty" is for McCarthytes.  There are quite a few on the blogs.  Fortunately no one listens to them, most especially not the leadership (who are largely sane people who don't have time for this sort of foolishness).

BTW:

"Let me begin, if I may, with a few words about my opponent. Don't tell him I said this, but he is an impressive fellow in many ways," McCain said. "Senator Obama talks about making history, and he's made quite a bit of it already. And the way was prepared by this venerable organization and others like it."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI...

"I know that Joe will campagn well for Sen. Obama, and so I think he's going to be very formidable,'' McCain added. "Obviously, Joe and I have been on different philosophical sides, but we have been - I consider him a good friend and good man."

http://www.swamppolitics.com/n...


[ Parent ]
lol (0.00 / 0)
that McCain is so "disloyal"!! I'll bet the right wingers will soon be posting angry laments about those lines!
[ Parent ]
You need a reminder for why you're fighting? (4.00 / 2)
You've GOT to be kidding me.

Stop whining already and get to work. This is getting ridiculous.

I agree (0.00 / 0)
This is not the time for whining or wishing one had more influence on the Presidential campaign strategy.

Now is the time to circle the wagons.

Buck up, suck it up and work our asses off to ensure we do not end up with a McCain-Palin administration which likely would be more radical than even the Bush admin.

Draining people's motivation by bitching and complaining about Obama's campaign strategy at this late date is as Mizner said, a case of vanity. Better to rally troops.

We need to push message both online and on the ground. GOTV.  

[ Parent ]
This line (0.00 / 0)
here:

Just earlier this year, it is entirely possible that we were the decisive role in the nomination campaign, providing the caucus attendees and small donors that put Obama over the top. Now, however, even though the system really hasn't changed all that much, we are just foot soldiers who take orders from the system, instead of radicals who are transforming it.

Is unbelievable to me. I mean really? And who, exactly, is the "we" here? The blogs? Open Left?

If so, that's a joke, frankly.

Face it. The left wing blogs did ZERO to help Obama during the primary.  Actually, let me amend that: left wing blog frequently and repeatedly did everything they could to undermine Obama during the primary.  And no, I'm not talking about the loony Hillary site. I'm talking about most of the left wing blogs.  They were completely anti-Obama the entire campaign. They were in the tank for Edwards, then Dodd. Oh, and let's add in some whining about how Saint Feingold should have run.  The only candidate Open Left disliked more than Obama was Hillary.

Disempowering Compliments | 89 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox