Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

In Close Losses, The Netroots And Local Dems Often Stood Alone

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
LiviaOlivia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 09:28 PM
Original message
In Close Losses, The Netroots And Local Dems Often Stood Alone
In Close Losses, The Netroots And Local Dems Often Stood Alone
by Chris Bowers, Fri Nov 17, 2006 at 04:30:35 PM EST
http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/11/17/163035/06


I am going to move on after this, but I need to get one more rant on this off my chest on the whole Carville / Dean / close races thing. First check out how Hotline on Call breaks down Carville's claims seat by seat:

14 Democratic candidates lost by 2 points or less, but many of the campaigns were funded to the hilt by the DCCC. Lois Murphy certainly can't blame her loss in PA 06 on inadequate funding; the DCCC spent over $3 million on her behalf. Patricia Madrid (NM 01) also had plenty of money - her razor-thin loss came because of an embarrassing gaffe at a debate. Mary Jo Kilroy (OH 15), Darcy Burner (WA 08), Phil Kellam (VA 02), Christine Jennings and Tammy Duckworth (IL 06) were all among the top-funded candidates by the DCCC. (In Jennings' case, the money was funneled through the Florida Democratic party.)

And in some conservative districts, the DCCC strategically declined to spend money because they felt national advertising from Democrats would hurt their candidates. Gary Trauner, who narrowly lost to Rep. Barbara Cubin (R-WY AL), was the "victim" of such thinking.

That leaves 6 other races where more money could potentially have made a difference. Larry Kissell, who lost by less than 1 percent to Rep. Robin Hayes (R-NC 08), certainly would have benefited from some cash; the DCCC didn't give his campaign a dime. But it wasn't a lack of DCCC funds, it was a lack of strategic foresight in this case.

Linda Stender did better-than-expected against Rep. Mike Ferguson (R-NJ 07), but the DCCC would have had to enter the extremely-costly New York media market. Without the benefit of Monday morning quarterbacking, would that have been a worthwhile investment?

The losing Democratic candidates that legitimately could have a beef are: Tessa Hafen (NV 03), Dan Maffei (NY 25), Victoria Wulsin (OH 02) and Eric Massa (NY 29). These candidates ran in the type of third-tier races where the DCCC was only able to fund late. The New York environment was uniquely favorable this year, and another week of attack ads against Rep. Jim Walsh (R) perhaps could have brought him down.


I would like to add something to this. You know who was trying to fund the seats that the DCCC left out? The evil, barbaric, left-wing netroots. The Dailykos / MyDD / Swing State Project Act Blue page raised money for Gary Trauner (since August), Larry Kissell (since June), Linda Stender (since June), and Eric Massa (since March). And in 2005, we seriously helped pave the way for Victoria Wulsin in OH-02 by adopting Paul Hackett in the special election in that district. Altogether, in the 2005-2006 cycle via Act Blue, the netroots dumped more than $1.7M, or 10% of total Act Blue donations, into the seven districts listed above that were not heavily targeted by the DCCC. And if there is one major regret I have about this campaign season, it is that I personally didn't do enough to raise money and build netroots infrastructure for Dan Maffei in NY-25, the district where I grew up. One canvassing trip and a few hundred bucks is just not enough for me to feel satisfied with my contributions there. But at least I tried.

If Carville wants to complain about money being left on the table, I didn't see him jumping on board with the netroots fueled Use It or Lose It campaign, designed to drive more money into districts just like the seven Hotline listed above. I also don't see him criticizing Hillary Clinton despite the huge amount of money she left on the table and the three narrow losses we suffered in my homeland, Western New York. But I wonder how many big-money Democratic "leaders" even noticed what happened in Western New York this year, since it has been long ignored and inexcusably written off as a conservative bastion for some time. In three different seats, we were inches away form sweeping the region, and making the Rochester Democratic Caucus a reality. We had these seats. We should have won these seats. We were leading in all polls in the NY-25 and NY-29 heading into Election Day. Whoever is at fault for coming up just short there, it certainly is not the netroots. We were a major part of bringing what little noise there was to the region and to many of the other seats that the national party ignored. Along with Jack Davis in NY-26, who refused to campaign, I think some of the big-money people form New York City who are supporting Carville's efforts need to look themselves in the mirror for this one, and make certain that it is a high priority we do not come up just short in Western New York once again in 2008.

If Carville wants to blame someone for this, he should note that the netroots, the same people who give Howard Dean a 96% approval rating, could hardly be any more squeaky clean in our efforts in the close seats that we lost. We stepped up in these seats, big time. When Carville criticizes Howard Dean, keep in mind that he is using Howard Dean as a placeholder to attack the entire progressive netroots and the entire progressive movement on behalf of big donors and consultants who once again want to rule the party with an iron fist. But we were the ones fighting for these seats, tooth and nail, along with local Democrats on the ground. National Democrats from the corporate wing of the party were nowhere to be found in these races.

End rant.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
lcordero2 Donating Member (832 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. I like Dean
And I respect that he was doing his best and trying to live within his own means.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmejack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. From your keyboard to goddess's eyes!
As we learn we become increasingly formidable. We can use these computer tools and metrics quite well too, thank you! Outstanding Post, LiviaOlivia!

As an aside, I really was really taken with Dr. Wulsin, who was this person that was just so likable. I hope she runs again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
3. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
4. Thanks for the insight into netroots funding. Please write more,
Don't stop the rant. It's highly instructive on an important subject. :thumbsup: :kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zodiak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
5. By all means
Continue to tell the truth as you see it. This intranecene battle is for the future of this party, and we must not shy away from it if we want our results, our policies, and our win record to be different than the last 12 years.

The netroots and the local activists are taking this party back, and I think that is a good thing. Sooner or later, the consistent push to marginalize corporate influence will pay off bigtime, and all of America will be better for it.

Go Howard Dean!!! Go Demcorats!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
6. We can learn from this and take action
Right now we should all be beefing up for 08. While it's lots of fun to complain about not getting any funding from the DCCC or whoever, that will accomplish nothing.

If we were smart we'd work within our ignored districts as though there will NEVER be assistance. We should build our local parties and start fundraising NOW. It's going to be up to us to fund our candidates, not to mention up to they themselves. Someone in a traditionally red district should plan on no help. Work it like it's all up to you.

While I do agree that the various orgs should help as they can, I disagree mightily with many who have a sense of entitlement. The "I'm running therefore I am entitled to buckets of money" mindset has got to go. I've seen way too much of it here in the real world.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
7. Operations like Netroots is how
the people can get this country back. The agenda is driven by big money and big money is the only way to win for now.
Elections are big business and the Reich-wing controlled media is making a killing by raking in Billions each election cycle.

We need election laws that limit spending so that races can be driven by merit not money.


Elections are big business. We need to get BIG Business out of elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fermezlabush Donating Member (211 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
8. True that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheBaldyMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
9. Wasn't everyone taken by surprise by the scale of the win?
All across the political spectrum people were saying house yes, senate no. Right up until the polls closed.

I was hoping for both myself but that was more a wish than a prediction and even then I was steeling myself for disappointment.

Add to that the fact that the Republican electoral fraud skewed the result and you can begin to sense the real scale of the victory. I don't think even the most optimistic pundit expected that kind of a showing from the electorate.

Success has many fathers and failure is an orphan. That's what I see in all the controversy over the wrangling. Everyone is trying to play up their contribution to the success and downplay the contribution of others. I think that every part of the party contributed in some way to the win, a very big win that was denied full expression because of the fraud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiteinthewind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-18-06 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
10. Damn straight!! Fabulous rant!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC