Geoghegan results: $100 per vote (John Halle)
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/f...

$325,000 in contributions, 3,253 votes.

Pretty lame, IMHO.  I would imagine more than a few of us who contributed are feeling a bit suckered by those who were hyping this as a winnable election.

Moral: Progressives need to establish themselves as credible candidates with a strong local and regional constituency before they attempt congressional runs.  

Bowers didnt hype this. Cheap shot.
It was introduced as a long shot. It was introduced as a long shot, and polls were laid out showing what info on the ground was available, showing fairly closely what ended up happening.

I am not disappointed. I am encouraged by the action. I more than fully support this action again.

Dont cry in your cereal, organize.

If openleft's actions raised 350,000 dollars for this Id be jumping out of my shoes. Lots of people in many walks of life, not just here, for reasons of their own put their shoulders to the wheel for this excellent candidate. I applaud them, and openleft and other online progressives for pushing on principle and character.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

Bowers did not. Sirota did. Not a cheap shot.
On the larger point, movement leadership needs to show that it has good judgment in choosing which campaigns to support.

The cost of such lapses in strategic judgment is that we are perceived as not to be taken seriously as a political force-a paper tiger and ultimately as a joke. No doubt Tauscher and others of her ilk are looking at these sorts of results as an indication of whether she can get away with dissing us.  The answer appears to be yes.

We need to hold our leadership accountable-on all levels.  

[ Parent ]
He's done in fringe candidate territory with those totals (% and actual)
John Halle is right.  If we take an action, esp. now 5 years after the Dean Insurgency and after 2 cycles of democratic wins in the house, senate and presidency, the action or challenge has to be credible.

2nd or even 3rd within a couple of hundred votes or a point or two is credible and something you can build on.  Donna Edwards' first challenge was credible.

This is not.  

I don't know the district and not to pile on, but besides his professional career how tied is Tom to the community and district?

Does he go to church locally? On the PTA?  A track record of pitching in at annual earth day cleanups?  Is he on the library board?  A volunteer fireman?  Does he read to kids or rake senior's leaves on a regular basis?

All politics is local. We win with people who are connected to their community. So if you really want to enact progressive change, get on a town or county commission or organize a local event.  Then take it from there.  

[ Parent ]
Or more importantly
Does he know how to organize.
[ Parent ]
Excellent point.

[ Parent ]
Tom Allen got stomped
in a two-way race, and I supported him strongly even after I knew he was gonna get stomped.

Sometimes you lose. Sometimes you lose badly.

The Democrats just spent five years avoiding fights they knew they were gonna lose because they were afraid of looking weak. Nothing's weaker than that.

[ Parent ]
Nah, that's a lie
I always said it was an uphill battle - claiming otherwise is just a fabrication.

And BTW - the ratio of what other candidates up the ladder spent per vote is likely similar to Geoghegan, as they had far more money, and the winner of the whole election only got about 10,000 total votes.

More importantly, the idea that we should simply support Establishment candidates because they have a better shot to win is pathetic. You win some, and you lose some. We lost this time. But the idea that because we lost means we shouldn't support courageous progressives like Geoghegan is just self-defeating.

[ Parent ]
Ratios
Wheelan was about $100 a vote, the two state senators running were at $60 and $80 a vote...it was a low turnout election, those kind of ratios happen.

Again - you win some and you lose some. But you will lose all of 'em if you use one loss as the reason to say we should only help Establishment candidates.

[ Parent ]
the which?
the idea that we should simply support Establishment candidates because they have a better shot to win

whose idea is this? i am missing anyone saying any such thing.

not everything worth doing is profitable. not everything profitable is worth doing.

[ Parent ]
Here
Progressives need to establish themselves as credible candidates with a strong local and regional constituency before they attempt congressional runs.

That's a euphemism for Establishment - because there are lots of cases where progressives made credible (if not outright successful) runs before they had supposedly "established" themselves in a given race (see, for instance, Howard Dean's very credible candidacy for president - he wasn't an "established credible" presidential candidate until he actually ran).


[ Parent ]
Boy That's a stretch, Establish = Establishment?
I think Halle's emphasizing connections and relationships.  You can have connections and relationships without being part of the establishment.

Dean was an insurgent with solid regional and perhaps even national connections in place as a Vermont Governor and as an MD with an "established" family practice.  He didn't come out of the woodwork -- and in fact you can make the argument that Dean is actually an establishment candidate given his family background.  Which is why he is so threatening to the powers that be.  

[ Parent ]
Completely misses the point.
It is not about supporting "establishment candidates-quite the opposite in fact. Rather it is about how we vet our candidates and the expectations which we reasonably have of them to establish themselves in their communities, among voters in the district over the long term so that they can run credible and not merely symbolic campaigns.

If our leadership (meaning you) doesn't do this job for us, we will be forced to look elsewhere for those who are capable of realistic assessments.  In particular, they will need to recognize the difference between success in the literary sphere (where G has indisputably distinguished himself) and that of real politics.

Incidentally, nowhere in any of your previous postings did you describe Geoghegan as a longshot.  Furthermore, I made several postings requesting information as to your (and other's) assessment of G's chances.  You ignored these.

You made a mistake.  Mistakes happen and you should admit this and move on.


[ Parent ]
meh, "a mistake" ? not so much.
Heres something called the manifesto of done.
Its fantastic. But before you read that, the candidate Bowers Sirota, and a large number of other brilliant progressive analysts decided to back got more than 1/3 of the votes that the winner got.
That's a more than respectable ratio. I knew from Bowers writing, and from Sirota's "uphill battle" that it would be hard for Geoghegan to win.

I hope it makes for more similar efforts as we all move forward. Not less.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
Pathetic
This is just straight up pathetic. I didn't make any other case for Tom other than that he's a progressive hero worthy of movement support based on his career. I didn't pretend to be some election prognosticator or predictor. If you want someone to serve as an election handicapper for the sport of elections, that's fine - but I've never pretended to be that. Ever.
[ Parent ]
Lame and Pathetic
No one is "worthy of our support based on their career".  They are worthy of our support if they have shown that they have done the work that is necessary to establish themselves as a credible candidate and to run a viable campaign.  And- to pick up on the obvious point which you have apparently conceded-this does not mean an establishment candidate.  

By not making any effort to acquire or share with us this information, you made a mistake.

What does it take to get you to understand this trivial strategic point?

[ Parent ]
What is the proper ratio
of donation to vote?

How about donation to legislation?

How about volunteer hours to progressive speech act?

I knocked on doors for Obama, and I'd like to know exactly what he owes me.

He owed you what you got
A credible, serious candidacy.
[ Parent ]
Yeah, but you're trying
to quantify that. So quantify it.
[ Parent ]
See Northcountry's post above.

[ Parent ]
I spent 1.2 cents per vote
in my 2006 US Senate Primary race v Herb Kohl. Herb spent $12  per vote.





This is a Test of the Emergency Free Speech System. This is only a Test. In an actual Free Speech Emergency, I'll be locked up.

[ Parent ]
Unfortunately, the progressive
vote was splintered.  SEIU and AFL-CIO backed tow different candidates, and many in the netroots backed a third, Tom Geoghegan.

I gave $25.  1/4 of a vote.

Sometimes we lose.

I think there are lessons to be learned from this.

It's funny that you say that
Our incumbent mayor in St. Louis just won a landslide victory in a primary by spending $100 per vote.  
Geoghegan hired
a team of people with a record of losing. It's no wonder he lost. He thought that getting endorsements from nationally syndicated columnists was a strategy for getting elected to Congress.

Quigly on the other hand didn't focus on TV ads, fundraising, yard signs or anything like that. They focused on canvassing, phonebanking and IDing solid suporters.

And guess what? They won.  

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power

Exactly.
This has nothing to do with Geoghegan. But the first question for anyone who wants to highlight a progressive candidacy should be "do they have a plan to win - have they crunched the numbers, can they raise the money needed, can they recruit enough volunteers?" A track record, a competent staff, some particularly motivated allies - all these things can take the least credible candidate across the finish line. But the lack of all these things can knock off the most entrenched incumbent.

Alternately, you can highlight someone as a protest candidate, and the rest of us can donate money accordingly.

Again, I'm not saying that has anything to do with this race, which I didn't follow very closely. We've got our own Quixotic primary challenges to think about down here.

[ Parent ]
Ah, thank you. Just as I suspected
He had no clue how to organize.

[ Parent ]
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