Fowler took the stage and got right into his pitch.  If you have a chance to listen to his podcast, listen for the second half on "conceding" and you'll have the flavor of the opening.  Democrats have spent far too much time conceding, far too much time (and money) listening to consultants, and far too much time watching polls.  We do not need to move to the left or right; we simply need to stand up and fight for our principles.  When Republicans play dirty, we can't just go to the American public (usually via Russert) and say, "that's not fair" as we explain it away.  We have to fight back hard and swiftly.

None of this is decidedly new, particularly if you've been paying attention to the grassroots/netroots.  But it would be new to Washington politics, and it's paramount the next DNC chair embrace this.  If our new chair goes in search of positions the polls say will help us win "values voters," we can kiss the immediate future goodbye.

At one point Fowler asked the audience if they knew what the Democratic Party stood for.  Very few (possibly even zero) raised hands.  A moment later, he asked why we were democrats, and virtually everyone had an answer.  Again, the observation is not new, but it's one Fowler gets and clearly means to address.

He in strong terms stressed a fifty state strategy (and six territories, he observed.)  A key part of this strategy (which should have been obvious but somehow the ball keeps getting dropped) is working with state Democratic Parties.  He mentioned Colorado and Montana, everybody's favorite examples, and the need to learn from them.  But more than that, he cited from his extensive experience in the field.  Often, he said, he and others on the ground would scream at the DNC for resources, telling them what they learned from local voters, and too often the response would slow or nonexistent.  State parties are a central part of his vision.

Earlier, there was a minor "scandal" concerning his netroots credentials (could he format a hyperlink?), and I am embarrassed to say I bought into it just a bit.  I was concerned whether Fowler (and the other candidates as well) truly embraced the netroots or just the value of a few buzzwords.  That's not a knock on Fowler, I just did not know.  After last night, I am convinced Fowler is a grassroots kind of guy.  Never was his passion more evident than when he was talking about grassroots issues.

At one point (possibly during the Q&A - my notes are sketchy), he mentioned he felt the swift boat ads were the single biggest reason Kerry lost (though clearly far from the only reason.)  That's potentially a good debate, but I essentially agree with Fowler here.  Someone asked Fowler how he would have responded, and he answered without the slightest hesitation, "swiftly."  He felt the response should have been swift and hard, and said he and others in the field begged the campaign for such a response.  They saw first hand how much it was hurting Kerry's standing with voters.  When a response was finally announced, it was received with applause by those working with him. (Again, this was an issue where he was most passionate and where he best connected with the audience.)

He used the swift boat to exemplify a Rovian strategy we seem to miss.  Rove does not target our weak points; he goes after our strengths.  There is a strong need, he said, both to protect our strengths and attack theirs.

Also during the Q&A, he discussed Barbara Boxer having the balls (my word, not his) to stand up.  This was met with spontaneous applause.  That's the kind of leader the grassroots wants, and that's the kind Fowler wants to be.

After the session, I spoke with him for a few minutes.  During his speech, he mentioned his position on abortion (pro-choice.)  He did so only in passing as part of a larger point on how we discuss values. As some frequent readers of my site may know, I have been using the phrase "reproductive rights" wherever possible over "abortion" for some reframing issues.  I mentioned that to him, and he immediately responded that NARAL often uses that terminology and with the phrase, "keep your laws off my body."

Donnie Fowler gets it.  I do not know enough about Fowler (yet) to speculate whether his organizational skills are up to the task, but I can say his vision fits in well with the netroots.  By my mind, we have three solid choices for chair: Dean, Fowler and Rosenberg. Of those, I support Howard Dean but have reason to respect all three.

With any luck, I will be able to attend Dean and Rosenberg events and offer a similar accounting.  Only next time I will learn from my mistakes and bring a recording device rather than rely on my sloppy notes.