More on that Jan Poll of the DNC Members

Political Wire had the actual numbers:

# First choice: Howard Dean (58 votes), Martin Frost (30 votes), Tim Roemer (8 votes), Donnie Fowler (4 votes), Wellington Webb (4 votes), Simon Rosenberg (4 votes), David Leland (1 vote), Undecided or refused to say (75 votes).

# Second choice: Martin Frost (20 votes), Howard Dean (16 votes), Donnie Fowler (13 votes), Wellington Webb (13 votes), Simon Rosenberg (11 votes), David Leland (4 votes), Tim Roemer (2 votes), Undecided or refused to say (107 votes).

Under the MyDD unorthodox method of polling methodology, we'll add 'em together:

Dean	  74 (40%)
Frost	  50 (27%)
Fowler	  17 (9%)
Webb	  17 (9%)
Rosenberg 15 (8%)
Roemer	  10 (5%)
The poll is of about 25% of the DNC members. Dean's to lose? Not quite, but 4/5ths of the way home its near enough that after a few rounds Dean could win. Does anyone see Roemer staying in the race? I don't, but I wonder what Nancy and Harry see in these numbers.

Tags: Democrats (all tags)



Unorthodox Methodology?
Is it even possible to use any sort of methodology? I was going to try to calculate what you did, but my understanding of the tabulating is that if your first choice was Dean and Dean was on the final ballot, your second choice wouldn't even matter, so without knowing each individuals first second and third choice, it's impossible to calculate.  Am I wrong?  I would really like to know exactly how the voting works if I am.
by AnotherUnemployedDNCStaffer 2005-01-14 01:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Unorthodox Methodology?
Yea, you are right, and wrong, sorta.  Your second choice matters once your first choice drops out. And the more that drop out, the more that the second choice matters. So by the time you get down to two candidates, second choice is likely to matter more than first for whatever becomes the margin of victory here.
by Jerome Armstrong 2005-01-14 01:04PM | 0 recs
lets discuss this in a broader context
regardless of this poll and the outcome, does anybody else see a serious issue with the slate of candidates that are vying for the title of DNC Chair? We have 7 men (6 of them white) - one of them anti-choice and for all intensive purposes, a Republican.

Why not, as Democrats, are we not pushing HARD for a truly progressive candidate? One that is reflective of the real values that underly this party? Why isn't there ONE woman candidate in this race??

As a Democrat, I am ashamed. Which is why -- I would humbly suggest that we DRAFT CECILE RICHARDS! She has the qualifications, the heart, the experience.

She knows how to bridge the progressive community and build coalitions. That is the challenge that faces our Party right now -Can we build a coalition that is strong enough to beat the GOP?

Not sure you can unite the base of the Democratic Party with yet another white male (and certainly not an antichoice candidate).


by dem50 2005-01-14 01:24PM | 0 recs
I like Frost...
I think he will make it to the final ballot with Dean... at least that is what the numbers liik like to me.  Although, I do think that Webb may place better than expected. And we all know (knock on wood) of Deans propensity to drop from front-runner to barely running.  I think Frost is a good man.  I wonder if he will seek the TX Senate seat in 2006?  If he does, do you think his strong run for DNC Chair will help or hurt him in his conservative state?
by NM Dem 2005-01-14 02:05PM | 0 recs
How 'bout this:
Dean for Chair

Rosenberg for Executive Director

by lisaeo 2005-01-14 03:07PM | 0 recs
Remember what happened the last time
Dean was in front?  It's still too early
by raddude 2005-01-14 03:20PM | 0 recs
Too bad they didn't run an IRV/Condorcet/whatever poll. But I think the number of "undecided" or "decline to state" would have made doing that not so helpful.
by DavidNYC 2005-01-14 03:31PM | 0 recs
This good news in general. Each time I see a poll of DNC members, the Washington-estabilishment guys fail miserably. Watch Pelosi et al to suddenly support Frost, as he is their second choice.

Texans will vote in blocks, but why do they get so much say when they have failed to have any statewide electeds and lost 4 seats in the House this fall?

I am still gunning for Fowler to sneak into the second round and gather support.

by DaveB 2005-01-14 04:56PM | 0 recs
Do the math?
By the numbers posted at daily kos Dean has 58 votes out of a total of about 222 needed to get the nomination. That's 26% towards a needed 50%. This leaves Dean needing about 164 more votes or 64% of those DNC voters who have not expressed an opinion to vote solicitations. That is a big hill to climb given that Dean only got 31% if those expressing an opinion in this "poll"

This means Dean is in the driver's chair? Hmmm....Someone show me where my math is wrong but while this looks good prima facie but I wouldn't start getting too comfortable if I were a Dean supporter. He still has a lot of hard work in front of him.

by lobejammer 2005-01-14 05:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Do the math?
I have read Mydd for the last two weeks now, and this is my first blog.  I signed up because of the discussion on the next DNC chair.  Clearly, some passionate folks on this blog!  I decided to sign up and put my two cents in when the tabulation of this Mydd "poll" came out.

Jerome Armstrong wrote that the poll included 25% of the DNC members?  Is this really true?  I really find that hard to believe.  Even so, I certainly agree with lobejammer.  Dean still has a long road ahead of him.

I am not a Dean supporter for DNC chair.  Don't get me wrong -- I contributed to his campaign early last year and was captivated by his passion.  But I travel a lot and wonder if Dean will help all the Democrats in ALL of the districts as DNC chair?  In other words, Dean is an asset to the Democratic base but may be prone to tension with moderates and the important independent voters.  

Correct me if I am wrong (and I am sure you all will), but it seems that MYdd bloggers are pro-Dean and anti-most others.  Nothing wrong with that.  Every opinion counts.  But Dean lost his opportunity to be the nominee because of the tension, and sometimes fear, he created with moderates and centrists.  So why risk further tension when November 2006 is now so critical to the future of the Democratic Party?    

by Bill70 2005-01-14 08:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Do the math?
Good observations, yea, about 75% here support Dean.
by Jerome Armstrong 2005-01-15 08:19PM | 0 recs
the numbers are encouraging...
in that there is a clear preference for a "reform" candidate (Dean, Rosenberg, Fowler) and little support for DLC types (Roemer, Frost)

(btw, who the heck is Webb? <g>)

personally, I think that Dean made a bad decision in discouraging his supporters from getting in touch with DNC members from their states.   I spoke with a DNC member from my state, and her attitude was that she was completely unaccountable to rank-and-file democrats (and I have the feeling this attitude is shared by most DNC members.)  In other words, this decision will be made in the classic "smoke-filled backrooms" of yore.  Dean is at a decided disadvantage there, because reform is a threat to those with seats in those backrooms.

I think Dean should mobilize his supporters, and show the DNC members that they have two choices -- either embrace reform, or face a grassroots revolt.  

by p lukasiak 2005-01-15 12:41AM | 0 recs
&quot;America Votes conclave&quot;?
"Dems regroup:

As y'all must know by now, former Rep. Tim Roemer did not show up at yesterday's America Votes conclave, provoking much tittering. We checked the Roemer camp's explanation, and the weather out of Albuquerque was very not good. Which is a shame, because many America Votes members really wanted to question Mr. Roemer, particularly about social issues.

According to America Votes, either CEOs or political directors from all organizations were represented at the meeting -- about 50 people in the room. They'll meet in 10 days with a full board to discuss again.

Several sources say that the assembled AV folks thought former Rep. Martin Frost and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean came off particularly well.

The AP Noted Joe Andrews' endorsement of Simon Rosenberg, interpreting it as a slight to his fellow Indianan. LINK

The granddaddy of DNC chairs (and we mean that in the prestige sense) Robert Strauss endorses his old Carter-Mondale North Texas Chairman, Martin Frost.

After their second forum in St. Louis on Saturday, several DNC candidates have meetings with caucuses of Democratic mayors in Washington, D.C. next week.

Also yesterday, the Association of State Democratic Party Chairs announced their executive committee would meet with the candidates in New York on Jan 29.

The problem of endorsing late, as labor, the governors, and ASDC seem wont to do, is that "Howard Dean could have already won by then," according a senior adviser to a leading candidate."

by lisaeo 2005-01-15 04:46AM | 0 recs
Polling for DNC chair is just silly.  They are not like regular voters.  Plus there's still a little under a month for the members to decide on chair.  

If you really want to make a difference, write your DNC members.  Go to to find how to contact your state's DNC voters.

by Scott82 2005-01-15 07:24AM | 0 recs
Roemer For DNC Chair Does Not Look Good
Posted on Sun, Jan. 16, 2005  

Sylvia Smith (reporter)

Does Roemer have a chance with DNC?

WASHINGTON - Democrats have to pick a strategy and do it quickly.

The 400-some members of the Democratic National Committee will meet in Washington early next month to select a chairman from among seven announced candidates, including former Hoosier congressman Tim Roemer.

The key decision the committee members need to make is whether they want the DNC chairman to function as a shadow president, articulating the party's position on a host of issues President Bush will push or resist in the next few years.

Or do they want a guy (it's only men in contention at this point) who is skilled at the mechanics of running a party: the fund raising, the technologies?

These aren't mutually exclusive talents, of course, but it's the rare person who is brilliant - or even skilled - at both. No one has made the case that Roemer or any of the other top-tier candidates is that unusual blend of policy-articulator, prolific fund raiser, technological geek and loyalty-inspiring manager.

Roemer left Congress in 2002, he said at the time, because he wanted to devote more time to his young family of four children under 8. The fact that a fierce Republican competitor, who had held Roemer to 52 percent of the vote in his South Bend district in the 2000 race, was planning to challenge Roemer again surely didn't influence his decision. Yeah, right.

Roemer's re-election in 2002 would not have been a sure thing in part because Roemer was never fond of aggressive fund raising. He raised enough to win his races, but not enough to scare off potential challenges. So when millionaire Republican Chris Chocola decided he'd like to be a congressman, Roemer did not appear invincible.

That less than wholehearted interest in asking people for money is not a characteristic you'd think would be cherished in the chairman of the DNC. The party did a bang-up job of raising money in the 2004 presidential race, and the shift to online fund raising has somewhat replaced the hat-in-hand variety.

Nevertheless, although the emphasis on personal fund raising by the DNC chairman may be somewhat muted, now is not the time to backslide.

Although John Kerry lost the 2004 race, the Democratic Party had some real successes in raising money, both as a party and within the 527 organizations, and in getting out the vote. In each case, taking advantage of the Internet culture helped the Democrats' success. The next chairman must not just tread water in those areas. The party may not need a technogeek to head it; those sorts can be hired. But the leader must have a vision and thorough understanding of the potential of the arena. If this is Roemer's forte, it's a newly acquired one.

Part and parcel with money raising is traveling. A party chairman is on the road constantly. Roemer's children are only a few years older than when he said he needed to be around more and that the life of a congressman was incompatible with his desire to "be a T-ball coach" and be more involved with his young'uns.

Another reason Roemer gave for leaving Capitol Hill was the "atmosphere of partisan rancor and bickering." He was active in creating a centrist coalition, bipartisan group in the House of moderate Ds and Rs who said there were some areas (such as education) that they could work on together. A party chairman is, by definition, not someone whose modus operandi relies on reaching across the aisle.

Where Roemer might excel in the nuts and bolts of being party chairman is candidate recruitment. He is evidence that the Democratic Party has room for anti-abortion, pro-trade, tax-cutting candidates. If you subscribe to the theory that the Democratic Party is doomed unless their candidates come from the more conservative wing of the party, you might conclude that Roemer would be a good image to project. But not everyone in the party agrees with that approach.

But I suspect the appeal of being DNC chairman, for Roemer, is the idea that he could be a player on national policy. While having a single voice and a single leader might make the Democrats a stronger foil for Bush until a 2008 nominee emerges, it ain't going to happen.

If Roemer is chairman and Howard Dean is not, will that make Dean shut up when he disagrees with Roemer's view? Will Hillary Clinton or Ted Kennedy or Nancy Pelosi take their cues from the DNC chairman, whoever he is? Hardly.

Roemer has already demonstrated why the DNC chairman should not be a policy setter. His anti-abortion views make for excellent big-tent chatter, but the fact remains that Roemer will hit a firewall of women's groups who think his would be the wrong face to put on the national party. If he puts forth the argument that his high-profile 9/11 Commission work helps make the case that the Democratic Party is just as strong on national security as the GOP, then he has to accept that his anti-abortion views would also be a reflection on the party if he were its chairman.

The head of any national party needs to be a great political strategist. Roemer is telling folks that one of his credentials is that he won six congressional races as a Democrat in a Republican state. Roemer won in 10 percent of Indiana; he never ran statewide. So to say he knows how to turn a red state blue isn't a claim any of the 447 Democratic National Committee members is likely to put much stock in.

Surely all the other candidates for the DNC chairmanship - Dean, Rep. Martin Frost and Simon Rosenberg are the other front-runners - have flaws. There is no ideal candidate, and a column picking apart Roemer just because I know him better than the others does not negate the good qualities he has to offer his party.

But the questions remain, and as the Democratic National Committee members evaluate the candidates, no doubt they'll be asking them.

by Democratic Dad 2005-01-16 06:31AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads