DNC CattleCall: Thanksgiving edition

CattleCall time for the DNC candidates. Rankings by MyDD, italicized commentary from Richard S. Dunham, Business Week, The Democrats Go Scouting For A Savior:

Tom Vilsack flirted, Kerry proposed, Vilsack ditched. Was it NJ's "second place" Hotline poll that gave Vilsack cold feet? John Kerry, who brought VP runner-up Vilsack to DC for the DNC dance as the "Anyone But Dean" candidate, finds himself left standing alone at the altar, with a potential '08 Iowa opponent now in waiting.

Howard Dean is favored by insurgents who want to clean house. If the party wants bash-Bush, man-the-barricades liberalism mixed with the latest in Internet-fueled fund-raising and organizing, it can tie its fortunes to former Vermont Governor Howard Dean." "It's time to do some risk-taking," says former party chair Steven Grossman, CEO of MassEnvelopePlus in Somerville, Mass. But the Clintonistas will only allow such a takeover "over their dead bodies," says one DNC veteran."

Dean hasn't yet openly announced his intentions. With the dropout of Vilsack, don't look for Dean to assume the frontrunner position, or garner much publicized endorsements anytime soon. Remember last December? He'll have to decide if he wants to put aside '08 Presidential ambitions-- tough choice.

Update for Dean-- Eleanor Clift writes that a DraftHoward.com Web site has sprung up, and a Democratic source says Dean is planning a series of speeches “to position himself as a centrist.” Outside of his opposing the invasion and occupation of Iraq, he's always been a centrist; just a radical centrist now given Bush.

And if the party is convinced that only the Clintons can save it, the man for the job could well be former Bill and Hill consigliere Harold Ickes. Harold Ickes, a driving force in the 527 committees that proliferated in this election, is often seen as a stalking-horse for his close friend Senator Clinton. That could be a problem for those who want a party-builder.

Ickes is saying he'll decide whether he wants to run by early December, seemingly the in-waiting candidate of the Clintons.

If Dems want to emphasize minority candidates who won big in "red" states, it could turn to ex-mayors Wellington E. Webb of Denver or Ron Kirk of Dallas.

Webb, being a current Vice Chair within the DNC has some insider traction, mentions of a Dean-Webb alliance help, and there are many DNC members determined not to elect anyone within the DC establishment as Chair.

If it seeks a hard-charging centrist who reaches out to swing voters, including the growing Latino population, it can embrace Simon B. Rosenberg, founder of the New Democrat Network.One veteran activist says Rosenberg, a fave of Demo-bloggers, starts out as "everybody's second choice" and could eventually win if no other contender catches fire. A dark horse is the relentlessly disciplined Rosenberg, who has worked for a decade to steer the party toward the center while building a new generation of tech-savvy activists." "The world has changed," says Rosenberg. "We need a new strategy to take on modern conservatives."

Simon is said to be making a decision in early December whether to run or not. Rosenberg's and Dean's candidacy's together will likely split the internet's influence; but an either/or with the two would also be the best case scenario for Reform.

If the party wants its chair to raise wads of money and build bridges to business, it has a contender in longtime telecom exec Leo J. Hindery Jr. For Democrats who long to see the DNC run more like a business, there's Hindery, an ex-Tele-Communications Inc. president and AT&T Broadband & Internet Services (T ) CEO. But some worry about Hindery's later tenure at scandal-plagued Global Crossing Ltd. (GLBC ), a company to which McAuliffe also had connections.

With backing by Daschle and Kerrey, don't under-estimate the 7% Corporate Wing of the Democratic Party, they are used to running things in the DNC. Oh yea, those GX shares, remember those Terry?

Terry McAuliffe proved that raising money isn't enough," says Democratic moneyman Andrew S. Rappaport, a general partner at August Capital Associates LP in Menlo Park, Calif. "[He] is the person who is most responsible for the predicament the Democrats are in.

He's out. But let's all admit that Terry correctly spent some of that money on much needed technological advances for the DNC.

Whom would Andy Rappaport choose? Did John Edwards decline John Kerry before Kerry asked Vilsack? Or, now that Visack has busted Kerry's kingmaker role, is it Edwards turn? Jeanne Shaheen, Jean Carnahan, who else might be floated? Kerry, Harry Reid and the rest of the "status quo" have played their "Stop Dean" card already. Notice how the 'smarter' Nancy Pelosi kept her cards down, while her DCCC bagman Bob Matsui did the Dean-bashing... whomever they emerge behind is going to have a tough row if it's another no-vision-runnerup-anything-but candidate.



Display:


Message Discipline (none / 0)

Dean is great. But does he have message discipline like Gillespie or Mehlman?

Remember the Confederate flags on pickups comment and the fallout from that? The comment on the day Saddam was captured that it did not enhance our security. OK, he was right, but his timing was terrible.

Dean just kept saying things that stepped on his message and destroyed his momentum. Don't anyone forget out this.

A lot of people have said its not a matter of moving left or right, but one of communicating, framing, etc. Gillespie, Rove etal. are masters of this. Dean has shown he can be very inspirational, but his carelessness has turned off a huge sector of the public.

At the worst, Dean would become the party's message, the face of a party in continual downward spiral. I also suspect the Rs know this and are just licking their chops for the chance to exploit it.

by mysteve on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 12:25:12 PM EST

Re: Message Discipline (none / 0)

I propose Jesse Jackson Jr. This guy really has shown he really gets what the problem is. He understands the importance of minority outreach, of course, but also how to mobilize other important parts of the base, as well as reaching out effectively.

I posted on this on Kos, I think, a couple of days ago, and people commented that he is too young, and its not his time.

That is a problem with the Dems. They think people have to wait in line until other less qualified people serve their time and fall by the wayside.

The Rs bring people up from out of the ranks. How else did Gillespie and Mehlman get their jobs. They are no older than Jackson, really. And Jackson has been a congressman for at least six years.

Jesse Jackson Jr. for DNC Chair.

by mysteve on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 12:30:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Message Discipline (none / 0)

I would rather see Rep. Harold Ford Jr. become the chair. He is articulate, intelligent, and conveys a sense of inclusion and stability. He also has the pedigree w/o any of the potential baggage.
by xpat on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 01:25:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Message Discipline (none / 0)

Ford is running for Frists seat in the senate in 2006 can't be DNC head...
by Davinci on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 03:11:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Message Discipline (none / 0)

Glad to hear it. Maybe that can be a pickup for us in 06?
by xpat on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 05:57:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WHO???? for DNC (none / 0)

Ok -- this suggestion comes off the deep Democratic Bench.  Before you knock about names, I think the critical question is what the DNC needs to do in the next few years?  In my mind, it is to build Healthy State Parties in all the states, and this is much more of an "organizer" job than either fund raising or public relations.  There are many ways to find a public face for the party for TV appearances and all -- but what we need now is to get State Parties in shape to "make a difference" in Senate, House races in 2006 -- and then we can think about 2008.  

So I would nominate Jeff Blodgett for DNC.  (Who you say????) well, Jeff was Paul Wellstone's campaign manager in 3 Senate races, and since Paul's death, he has been heading Wellstone Action, which is dedicated to training campaign workers, technicians, and potential canidates for entry level offices.  Since WA is a non-profit, Jeff did not take sides in 2004's primary -- which might be a great advantage.  

by Sara on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 01:27:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WHO???? for DNC (none / 0)

That's not a half bad idea.  
by Bean on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 02:53:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WHO???? for DNC (none / 0)

He's the kind of person I'd like to see working for DNC...don't know about chairing.

My hope is that reform of DNC means really refining the methodologies of organizing and training...and making this work the ongoing work of the base.

Whoever is running the DNC can't see it as solely some electoral marketing task; it needs to involve the real building of grassroots movement.  We're at a time where this is truly possible...not in the name of a grand social vision, but in the endeavor of saving our country and resurrecting the meaning and signficance of government.

by heymister on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 03:55:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WHO???? for DNC (none / 0)

This thought (Blodgett) also crossed my mind recently while pointlessly musing during a morning run.

But I agree with "heymister" that while his party buiding approach to organizing is much needed, Blodgett's model of organizing is only really appropriate to certain regions -- and they are the ones where we are already competitive.

And, as we saw in 2002, he's not really a message guy; he had a huge platform from which to project the Democrats as committed to ideals of community and country as embodied by Wellstone but fumbled it away. (Granted the realities of a hasty organizagion and a hostile media but still....)

Finally, like it or not, we need someone who can raise big, big bucks like McAuliffe did ... and that will have to include a mix of corporate money
as well....

For those reasons, I prefer Ickes. I don't believe he's really such a "Clintonista"; recall that he was odd man out in much of the first term but he was also the one who came up with the strategy that delivered an easy re-election that, in early 95, appeared impossible.

by desmoulins on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 01:29:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Message Discipline (none / 0)

Bullshit.  You must have missed all those appearances Dean made on the Sunday Talk Show circuit.  

Dean did a lot better than you give him credit for.

by KimPossible on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 11:57:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Message Discipline (none / 0)

Maybe Rosenberg would be the best alternative.  He might not have as much baggage in the eyes of the party establishment and that might give him the freedom to clean house and to redesign our strategy.
by KDMfromPhila on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 02:27:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Message Discipline (none / 0)

Rosenberg is my choice at the moment. He is a centerist but understands the changes that need to be done. In my view he is the howard dean mold without having been defined by the media. Also he is young in political terms and we need to have the energy and drive of youth.
by Davinci on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 03:14:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

additions (none / 0)

Edited the post a bit, for readability. Also, the DNC Executive Committee meeting is Dec 11-12th, not what the article states.
by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 01:51:01 PM EST

Re: additions (none / 0)

Might I suggest one more edit? In "John Kerry . . . found himself left standing at the alter alone," please change "alter" to "altar."
I can't help myself. I worked as a newspaper copy editrix for 12 years, quitting only in October when my superiors gave me a choice between my job and continuing to volunteer for K/E and other Democrats.
by aparker54 on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 11:03:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: additions (none / 0)

OK, copy editrix, that's your freebie, no more of those allowed!  We believe in creative use of grammar and spelling around these parts of the shpere.
by Jerome Armstrong on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 11:35:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Leo Hindery is interesting... (none / 0)

...another former AT&T exec that ought to be courted is BETSY BERNARD.
by paxpax on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 03:34:36 PM EST

Leo Hindery is Great Choice (none / 0)

Leo is a fantastic choice. I know him extremely well through his work at YES Network. He is extremely engaging, very well-spoken, and has fantastic business connections. He is a staunch supporter of Democratic causes, but will be more than just a fundraiser. He has a personal appeal that appeals to people from all parts of the country.

In terms of his Global Crossing background - he has virtually no taint from the issues at Global Crossing. He is credited with turning the company around after the problems that it confronted, and he  is widely regarded as a straight up professional.

He is a perfect candidate, and I urge you all to do more research on him and really get the blogosphere on board.

I know there is a visceral reaction to elect Dean, but that is just not the right choice, particularly given the strong possibility of a Hillary nomination. We will look far too out of touch, and we will absolutely not win with that combination. Hillary alone surrounded by moderates has a slim, but a very real chance - Howard Dean, though a great Democrat who I salute,  will be detrimental to that cause paricularly with her on the Ticket.

by mdp4d on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 05:53:35 PM EST

Re: Leo Hindery is Great Choice (none / 0)

he has virtually no taint from the issues at Global Crossing. He is credited with turning the company around after the problems that it confronted

The article states that Hindry has connections with Terry Mc, through GX; are you saying that Hindry wasn't there when Terry got all those GX shares he dumped before GX went under?

by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 06:39:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Leo Hindery is a "great" choice... (none / 0)

...if what you want is simply "more of the same." No, thank you.
by JDWalley on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 07:23:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Leo Hindery is Great Choice (none / 0)

given the strong possibility of a Hillary nomination.

I don't think HRC has a snowball's chance in July of winning the nomination.  She's got it too good where she is right now and she's a very polarizing candidate.

Hindery may have great business connections but frankly, I don't think he can unite the party.

by KimPossible on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 12:18:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Leo Hindery is Great Choice (none / 0)

We need someone who will lead a popular uprising against corporate control of our democracy.  Not another cheerleader for it.
by aenglish on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 03:10:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Simon Rosenberg for chair (3.00 / 1)

Mysteve (in comments, above) nailed it: Howard Dean is a great man and should continue to lead the netroots towards change, but he has the wrong public image (people who DON'T know him well see him as far-left), the wrong history, and maybe the wrong skill-set for this particular job. Simon Rosenberg has already managed an effective national partisan organization (New Democrat Network) designed to elect Dems, "gets" the netroots, understands the demographics ahead of us, has no particular regional bias or baggage, and has shown relentless message discipline, before the election and afterwards. He's not the only good candidate, but he seems to me by far the best one of the names out there so far.
by accommodatingly on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 06:29:46 PM EST

Re: Simon Rosenberg for chair (none / 0)

My personal pick (if I were a voting member) would be for Simon Rosenberg. Why?

Mainly because he realizes that in order for the Democratic party to win the White House and the House and Senate again we need to build a majority coalition. To do not is not to run to the left and become a protest party, but rather build a center-left coalition that reaches out to our traditional constituencies but also new ones. If the 2004 election has taught us anything, simply counting on our own to turn out is not enough. We much get a critical 2-3% of the vote that Clinton did in 1992 and 1996 but we did not, in large part, in 2000 & 2004. Also being Internet-friendly he can take advantage of this emerging force in politics as well as Howard Dean might.

by southerndemnut on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 07:59:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Simon Rosenberg for chair (none / 0)

Rosenberg is just more of the same: He won't go far enough to differentiate the Democrats from the Republicans and we'll just end up yet again as Republican-lite.

Rosenberg doesn't "get" the grassroots, either.  He expressed a disdain for all of the fundraising emails sent by the Kerry campaign, and scoffed at the idea of raising money online -- favoring, apparently, a more esoteric relationship between campaigns and their grassroots supporters. While admirable, it ignores the fact that over 2/3rds of all Kerry's funds came from such contributions.

90% of the contributions to the NDN came from contributions of $1,000 or more. He seems to believe that the millions of us who have found a way to wield real political power with our $50 contributions belong back on the sidelines while fundraisers like Rosenberg bring in the "serious" dollars.

Rosenberg has done little online.  Sure, NDN has a blog--but so did Bush.  Rosenberg blased Kerry for not doing enough to court the Hispanic vote but what was NDN's Hispanic effort all about?  I live in DC area--with a sizeable Hispanic population--and I didn't see a damn thing.  What he only advertising on Univision?

Rosenberg can't do what Dean can: Dean's got hundreds of thousands of supporters that he can still tap for contributions.  Dean invested a lot of effort in promoting and campaigning for downticket candidates.  One-third of the Dean Dozens won their races as did hundreds of others who were inspired to run by Dean.

Actions speak louder than words, folks, and while Rosenberg may say all the right words, I don't think he can back them up.

by KimPossible on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 12:07:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Simon Rosenberg for chair (none / 0)

Rosenberg was one of deans early supporters. Also he agrees with deans vision that we need to run in every race regardless of outcome. We also need to have a unified message. We need to unify the party but we need to tap new ideas as we improve the things we support. I think the lack of vision in the party and the way that we eat our own is one down fall we need to over come. The first thing is that if you are going on tv as a democratic Rep. then you need to nock down the B.S. frame of the right and reframe the issue. You don't agree you diferentiate yourself. The problem we have is that we view the other side as honest but different. They view us as repulsive and wrong. We need to play the ugly game just like they do but better.
by Davinci on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 03:23:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Simon Rosenberg for chair (none / 0)

I will vouch that indeed, Rosenberg does "get" the netroots. Back in the Summer of '03, he was one of the first to reach out to Markos and I with our DC visits, and he obviously saw the potential. NDN is a 503c & 527 group, look at ACT, same way, mostly big donors, but is that going to disqualify Ickes, Rosenthal & Malcolm for ya?  Rosenberg understands Demzilla, and has been one of the individuals pushing the use of it into campaigns. But yea, Dean is able to get a lot of money from small donors, so was Kerry though... anyway, no need to beat up Simon for Dean's sake, he's not another Vilsack.
by Jerome Armstrong on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 05:38:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Simon Rosenberg for chair (none / 0)

I'm still unconvinced Rosenberg is the man for the job, and I don't say that because I back Dean.  Everything I know about Rosenberg (which is not much compared to you) is that the man is a centrist at heart.  

Centrism will not put the Democratic Party back on solid footing.  Nor will compromise since Denny Hastert has chosen to lead by "a majority of the majority."

Can you see Rosenberg making the "What I Want to Know" speech?  I don't think so.

Didn't Rosenberg say on tv--on Fox, no less--that invading Iraq was a good idea?  How much mileage will the GOP get from that? What other video landmines await?

The next DNC chair has to build the Democratic Party into a strong, opposition party and what I know about Rosenberg doesn't lead me to conclude he's the guy to do it.

by KimPossible on Mon Nov 29, 2004 at 09:36:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Simon Rosenberg for chair (3.00 / 1)

I think the "disdain" wasn't because Kerry was sending out fundraising e-mails, but rather that the only thing Kerry sent e-mails about was fundraising, rather than a mix of things like fundraising, canvassing, how to get lawn signs, etc.
by Patience on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 05:54:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What does the chair of the DNC actually do? (none / 0)

Is there a link somewhere here that actually enunciates what the actual powers are for the chair?

I like Wellington Webb for a variety of reasons including: he's a man of color  who was (or is currently -- I moved away a while ago) mayor of Denver.  Denver is not in the usual power places and would indicate an interest in the rest of the country that isn't on a coast, and isn't in the frigging south, and isn't iowa or new hampshire.  Webb also isn't a gay bigot, unlike the rest of the Dem leadership. I like some centrist policies and am not a flaming liberal all over, but think that the Dem policy against gay people is abhorrent.

by sheilerama on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 11:45:48 AM EST

Re: What does the chair of the DNC actually do? (none / 0)

WaPo notes this morning that Webb is disliked by some in organized labor because of clashes with unions when he was in office. I think Webb is already a vice-chair of the DNC, which may or may not give him some traction.

But you ask a good question: The duties of the DNC chair aren't really defined in the bylaws of the DNC.  So perhaps the right question, as Atrios once posed, isn't who is the right person to do X; it's who has the right ideas for what X is all about?

by KimPossible on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 12:13:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No one associated with Clintons (none / 0)

Am I the only person who remembers that Clinton "triangulated," governing as though libereal Democrats were hos effing opponents? With any Clinton, it's always all about thgem, not about party-building. Despicable people.
by expatjourno on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 12:58:08 PM EST

DNC Chairman (none / 0)

I am finding it extremely diffiult to comprehend that the Democratic Party is still kowtowing tot the Clinton party line/ Nominating Hilary Clinton would be the kiss of death for the party and would undo all the good the disaster of the Republican handling of the the economy, the war in Iraq, the culture et al - you name they'll screw it up - will do!.  Doesn't anyone learn anything from history, even recent history. The first thing the Democrats need to do is to both decide and DEFINE who they are and attempt to include everyone from far left progressives to only just left of centre. That would include Dean who is articulate and centrist as well as capable of going off half cocked and actually saying what he means. I think it would also include Simon Rosenberg, who from the little I have see of him appeasr reasonable. But perhaps we don't need reason anymore? it has not got the Democrats very far - maybe we should just wait and see what happens in the Ukraine and then have Yushenko nominate someone. I remember one of the reasons for nominating Kerry was that he would fight for us?  where are the fighters? what does being a Democrat mean? why are you all so keen on winning and being right? why don;'t you bloody well stand up and say what you stand for. You don't deserve to win. And keep your paws of Blair, the alternative is worse. Clean your own house first. I vote for Jesse Jackson Jr, at least his daddy will teach him to remember how to fight in the streets.JR
by jrguthrieryan on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 01:34:26 PM EST

Dark Horse (none / 0)

Dr. Dean would seriously damage his future aspirations if he took over the DNC. Trading in his insurgent outsider status to become the top insider seems to me to be counter productive. I personally like him right where he is working on building a parallel structure that can be a home for the not quite party faithful.

I'd like to see the job go to Wes Clark if he'd take it. Just having Russert et al introducing General Clark for the next several years chips away at the Republican's advantage on military concerns. He also brings the kind of skill set I think is required to revamp the party structure.

Just a thought.

by Judeling on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 04:51:14 PM EST

Re: Dark Horse (none / 0)

This is a serious query NOT a snide comment. What parrallel structure is Dean working on? educate me?
by jrguthrieryan on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 06:11:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Leo Hindery - Fully Assess (none / 0)

Fully assess Leo's candidacy - again, I know him extremly well, and his charisma and intelligence are fantastic. I respect this site, but the election of Dean is absolutely the wrong choice here - it is just a visceral reaction. We do not want more of the same, but also do not need worse - it is fallacy to think anything different from current is better.

Leo is different - he is a responsible corporate guy, with a history of staunch and eloquent support for Democratic ideals. Please explain to me how he is "more of the same?" This is a gut reaction to his "profile" which is largely inaccurate as portrayed here - simply give him a fair chance, that means reading about his background (which is tough to assess, of course, as he has to this point been a behind the scenes player in Democratic circles), and try to find instances of him speaking.

He is charming, yet ruthless when he is fighting for what he believes strongly in. He is not at all a yes man to anyone, and he has strong and correct views on how to win elections.

He has taken over struggling company after struggling company, instilled his vision, and in all instances where he was the leader, he has brought his companies to dramatic success (Global Crossing was not really his baby, and is not fairly pegged onto him nor has it been by any authorities). He is a strong leader who can execute a vision, and I urge you to consider him for DNC chair.

by mdp4d on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 05:42:28 PM EST

Re: Leo Hindery - Fully Assess (none / 0)

It's interesting, there's one corporate PAC out there that's given above 60% in donations to the Dems:
Only one Corporate PAC gave more than 75% to Democrats - Cablevisions Systems Corp gave 77% to Democrats.
From the bit of research I did, that's Hindery's, so I give him credit for that one. But still, is he or is he not responsible for getting Terry those insider GX shares to dump for millions?  Because if he is, Hindery need not apply.  Thousands of ordinary people lost their shirts in that kind of crap 2000-2002, and that pig just ain't gonna fly, no matter what the lipstick, if Hindery was involved with those GX shares that Terry dumped.
by Jerome Armstrong on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 05:52:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Leo Hindery - Fully Assess (none / 0)

In terms of Terry M's settlement, Leo Hindery was not directly involved at all, but I am not sure whether it was done on his watch.

I must correct you however - Cablevision is not affiliated at all with Leo Hindery. In fact, at YES Network (Yankees Regional Sports Network), Leo and YES waged a 2.5 year battle against the Dolans at Cablevision, and a three judge panel ultimately ruled unanimously in favor of YES. Leo and Cablevision are not great friends for business reasons, though both have been very supportive of the Democratic Party in their political pursuits.

by mdp4d on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 09:29:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Leo Hindery - Fully Assess (none / 0)

OK, as I said, it was "just a bit" of research. When I was looking into it, I ran across his name, thanks for the clarification.
by Jerome Armstrong on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 11:37:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why Two Hats? (none / 0)

We need two people doing these jobs--a fundraiser in there and an idea man.  Hell I'd be fine with McCaullife still working on bringing in the big donors, while reaching out to the new Internet source.

I don't exactly understand why, but for some reason, I feel good about where the party is at right now.  We've started to tap the forces of the future in a way that the other side can't.  When we harness these forces, we will roll big.

by Robwaldeck on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 06:18:33 PM EST

Overlooked possibility (none / 0)

I think Al From from the DLC would be an excellent DNC chair.  He seems to have both the administrative skills and the understanding of political dynamics to rebuild our party in ways that will not only frame the issues that we believe in, but extend our base to attract moderates as well as progressives.
by DrKen on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 07:07:07 PM EST

Re: Overlooked possibility (none / 0)

He seems to be as much a lightning rod for the liberals, as Dean is for the moderates.
What about Henry Cisneros? He may have too much baggage to face the voters, but he has all the necessary qualities to grow the party.
by xpat on Sun Nov 28, 2004 at 11:18:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

DNC Chair (none / 0)

Sir/Madam,

Since GOP has made Ken Mehlman as the Chair, should not there be a discussion on who can compete with him at that level. This guy is young, full of energy, and on message.

I thought Dean to be DNC Chair during the primaries. I guess my analytical thinking is ahead of others. But, that was because Terry is/was a loser. Now, I am not sure if Dean is a good guy. He once said that he wants to be the first gay president (to copy Bill Clinton as first black presdient). Can he help in red-states? No. Therefore, he should not.

Richardson is the best person. He may not know but he will never be a president. He is foul-mouth. But he could be a VP. So, if he were the DNC chair, then he could become more known (help Hispanics/Latinos get back into DNC), etc.

I also think Edwards and Bayh want to some role. Both of them are planning for 2008.

Richardson will be non-threatening to all. He wil help DNC.

Ali Karim Bey

by alikarimbey on Sat Nov 27, 2004 at 10:40:58 PM EST

DNC (none / 0)

Please no Shaheen nor From (or anyone the DLC wants).

Trying to court the center and losing more of the base seems to be the direction the establishment wants to take us.

How many of the Union members opted out for Kerry? Besides losing Union members, they are no longer assured Democratic voters.

How many elections have to be lost before people wake up and take the party away from the power brokers.

by xerico on Sun Nov 28, 2004 at 01:32:24 AM EST

Re: DNC (none / 0)

I don't have numbers at hand, but from what I've seen, Kerry lost many of the union households to social issues(gay marriage, abortion)as well as the sweeping term "terrorism".
The unions once were the warhorses of the democratic party. Kerry had many additional unions declare for him this time. Did it make any difference?
I don't want to alienate any of the base. We need to expand and include. How do we do it?
by xpat on Sun Nov 28, 2004 at 11:08:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.