DNC Chair CattleCall: New Year Edition

It's still a crowded race, with no clear frontrunner and each of the candidates putting together their own base of support; so as the field begins to shakeout, it leaves room for each candidate to grow their base of support.

Harold Ickes dropping out has been written on the wall since Orlando's ASDC meeting. He does so, saying he doesn't "think there's any frontrunner" in the race, and that he's not got enough time for the demands. Doesn't sound like he's backing anyone yet, and that he's going to keep his focus on furthering the 527 efforts-- that's good to hear. Ickes was a frontrunner a  couple of months ago, and with the second shoe finally dropping, it sets off a bit of a frenzy, especially inside DC and the Executive Committee, where Ickes had some support.

For Howard Dean, here's what Hotline says:

It's hard to call Howard Dean the frontrunner when it's still not clear he'll run, though he may be reinvigorated by the Ickes news. So if Dean decides '08 is more intriguing than the bureaucracy of 400 S. Cap, the eventual victor could end up being the candidate who offends the fewest people/interest groups.
That's basically in line with my take-- if Dean wants the job, damn the ABD's out there, it's his for the taking. Under the radar, Dean's campaign has the most persisent targeting of the party activists (where the votes are) with emails and phone calls. It's a campaign, and Dean's running. As for the other candidates, it will come down to Dean and some other anti-Dean alternative:
The conventional wisdom in the contest is that if Dean does decide to enter the race, the final choice for DNC members will be between the firebrand former governor and presidential candidate, and an anti-Dean candidate. Frost acknowledged that this scenario was the most likely but said the field was too amorphous to make hard and fast predictions.

That's Martin Frost, who's moving up fast as the 2nd (or 3rd or 4th, who's counting) choice now among the DC congressional leaders. Frost recognizes that to get to face Dean head-on, he's got to go through Tim Roemer. So, besides setting up a campaign team made of of DC pro's, and getting kind words from Pelosi's spokesperson ("Frost would make a solid chairman"), he's busy aiming to knock Roemer out of the race, saying, "While our candidates must always be able to run on a broad and tolerant platform, it is critical that our Party Chair believe deeply in our party's basic values. Our party cannot be adequately led by someone whose primary qualification to serve as Chair is his opposition to core Democratic beliefs" (from a Frost email).

That would be Tim Roemer's position against women's choice on pregnancy, and for privatization of social security, which seems to raise big red flags for everyone by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. But Roemer, along with Frost and the other main contenders, is planning to attend the first regional meeting, in Atlanta this Saturday (DNC regional meetings are also planned for St. Louis on Jan. 15, Sacramento on Jan. 22 and Jan. 29 in New York City). The longer Roemer "remains on the fence about a bid" though, the less likely his candidacy becomes, and it looks dicey at this point.

Simon Rosenberg, second to Dean, is the big winner with Ickes dropping out. It clears the way for him to go after support within Clinton's group, and other DC-based groups that support reform, which might have backed Ickes. On Thursday, Rosenberg is to formally announce his candidacy at a luncheon with the National Press Club. We're hopeful that BlogPac will kickoff it's interviews with the DNC candidates starting this week with Rosenberg, and then holding conference calls with the other DNC Chair candidates, stay tuned.

Donnie Fowler has top Democratic fundraiser Mitchell Berger on board, because Fowler “knows how to organize… and to win elections” and because “it is time to move” to a younger generation of Democrats. “It’s not like the party needs help in its fund-raising. It’s doing excellently in its fundraising. It needs help in its organizational aspects,” Berger said. Sure does. Fowler's father, Don Fowler, is introducing a couple of reform-minded measures to amend the DNC's charter. I've been able to get ahold of the amendments, and will post on them further in upcoming entries.

Wellington Webb has stayed in-house with his hiring of Denver strategist Paul Lhevine, who ran Hickenlooper's campaign for Denver mayor and Diana Degette's race for Congress (there's also a video interview with Webb at that link). Labor is said to have angst about Webb being the Chair, and at somepoint, it's worth wondering if Webb would back Dean (whom he backed for President) as DNC Chair, because if he would, it'd about clinch the deal for Dean.

Jim Blanchard is another candidate that is slightly bumped up by Ickes dropping out of the race. He's said to have the endorsement of the DGA as well, but how much they have in the way of pull among those voting is questionable, especially with every other Dem Org out there pulling in a different direction.

Is Ron Kirk the next one to drop out of the race? Kirk seemed hot in Orlando, but he remains timid, and word is circulating that "he's out." Does that mean that Mary Beth Malcom is in? Does it really matter?



Display:


Fowler is tanking (1.83 / 6)

The only reason people are talking about Fowler is because he is Don's kid.

After yesterday's flaming dog poop scandal Fowler's is tanking.

Enough of this monarchy BS. We're looking for a Chair not letting somebody ascend to a throne.

by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 02:13:30 PM EST

Re: Fowler is tanking (3.00 / 1)

Funny since he was the first with the guts to say "I want this job" while everyone else pondered.  He has provided more specifics than any other candidate.  He has spent more time on the ground for campaigns than any other candidate.

It is revolting, if you are a Dem, that you would stoop to such low insults.

But I suspect you are a Republican that knows this is one candidate that gets it.

by fightforamerica on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 03:17:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you crack me up (2.00 / 2)

You've been here long enough to post two other comments and now you're saying that I'm not a Democrat. I'll let my history here speak for itself.

But as for Fowler tanking, the fact that your other two comments consist of 19 softball questions for Fowler -- unanswered rainbow pitches -- proves my point that Donnie doesn't take advantage of opportunity.

by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 03:37:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you crack me up (1.00 / 1)

You've been here long enough to post two other comments and now you're saying that I'm not a Democrat. I'll let my history here speak for itself.

Blogswarm is a liar!  I know Blogswarn is a liar because of the previous sentence, which says, and this quote is accurate, 'Blogswarm is a liar!'

He's also a Republican.

by SocialNetworker on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 05:04:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you crack me up (none / 0)

Ahhhh, so you do think low insults are unfair.  Just checking.
by fightforamerica on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 06:46:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

and you troll rated me? (2.00 / 2)

Sorry for getting creative with my online communication.
by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 03:41:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: and you troll rated me? (none / 0)

I'm gonna ditch that whole troll rating thing. Make it so that you can only rate as 3's, a super post.
by Jerome Armstrong on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 04:27:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fowler is tanking (none / 0)

Funny since he was the first with the guts to say "I want this job" while everyone else pondered.  He has provided more specifics than any other candidate.

Specifics?  Get rid of the aristocracy of consultants?  That's real specific.

What about changing the pay structure so consultants are paid flat fees instead of incentives based on how much media they buy?  That's specific.  It's also what lots of bloggers have mentioned.  But Donnie has chosen to demagogue about those evil consultants.  I got news - some consultants are good, some aren't.

From Donnie's site:

He has advised dozens of companies, policymakers, public advocacy groups, and political campaigns on how to manage their media, policy, business development, & technology agendas.

That's called consulting.

Donnie's plan for the DNC is what you call a consultantese.  No specifics, all initiatives and phrases like 'project metrics'.  Dilbert anyone?

He has spent more time on the ground for campaigns than any other candidate.

Approximately three aggregate years of experience as an operative spread over twenty is not the same as, say, Wellington Webb's entire career running for every local and municipal office that exists.

by SocialNetworker on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 05:03:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

How about Ed Gillespie? (none / 0)

He did a good job for the RNC.  Maybe he's bored.
by SocialNetworker on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 02:30:04 PM EST

Frost's web site rocks! (none / 0)

www.martinfrost.com is under construction.  I bet he's building something really cool.

One thing I'd like to know is where the power center or group of power centers resides in the DNC.  I'm not sure how much power governors have, or Congressional leaders, or the netroots, or state chairs, or, well, who's deciding this thing?

by Matt Stoller on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 02:31:54 PM EST

Re: Frost's web site rocks! (none / 0)

All that's missing is a contribute link -- then he can take down the under construction banner.

Tim

by Tim Tagaris on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 02:34:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Frost's web site rocks! (2.00 / 2)

Good point! When he gets the contribution page finished he'll probably think he's Howard Dean.

Frost is just smart enough not to use a "print out this contribution form and mail a check" page but not smart enough to do anything more than accept money online.

I wonder if he'll yell at his staff when he doesn't raise millions overnight...

by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 02:39:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Frost's web site rocks! (none / 0)

State Chairs represent about a quarter of the vote but they aren't necessarily going to vote as a block.

I thought you were a Rosenberg guy? Promoting Frost to knock down Roemer? A little on-line electioneering going on here? :)

The 10,000 Things
by Andrew C White on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 03:35:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Frost's web site rocks! (none / 0)

I am a Rosenberg guy.  I'm just having a little fun with Frost's web site.  Check it out at www.martinfrost.com.
by Matt Stoller on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 04:53:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tim Raemer's web site rocks! (none / 0)

Tim Raemer (???) also has a new website, very informative... Tim Raemer's site.
by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 06:09:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tim Raemer's web site rocks! (none / 0)

That made me laugh.

He is obviously the patriotic choice.

Tim

by Tim Tagaris on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 06:36:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tim Raemer's web site rocks! (none / 0)

Until his site opens, people can visit the un-official Tim Roemer DNC Chair website or find out more information on how his campaign is being received at the other un-official Tim Roemer DNC Chair website.

If memory serves me, Chris Bowers has also discussed Tim Roemer.

by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 06:51:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Frost's web site rocks! (none / 0)

Yer right! His web site rocks. Tells me everything I need to know about Mr. Frost and his netroots.

Roemer's got him beat though. The subliminalinal messagings first rate!

The 10,000 Things
by Andrew C White on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 06:44:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Where and when? (3.00 / 1)

DNC regional meetings are also planned for St. Louis on Jan. 15, Sacramento on Jan. 22 and Jan. 29 in New York City

I have looked around on dnc.org and haven't been able to find the location and times for these events.  Are they only for party insiders?  Any chance part of the meetings would be open to the public?

Want Blue States? ActBlue!
I work for ActBlue.
by KansasNate on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 04:04:42 PM EST

I just heard... (none / 0)

Last week I wrote and mailed (snail mail) the three DNC people from where I live.  Today I got an E-mail from one of them.  She said that she had met Mr. Dean and was impressed with him but was also seriously considering Mr. Frost.  She did not plan on making a decision until after the regional meeting.

In my letter I supported either Dean or Rosenberg.  I E-mailed her back and said I wasn't familiar with Mr. Frost, and reiterated that this was a very important decision.  

So who is Frost?  Where did he come from?  

Grandma Jo

by JWC on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 05:33:03 PM EST

Rep. Frost (D-Tx) - undistricted (none / 0)

Martin Frost is a long-time Congressman from Texas. He was redistricted out of a job (couldn't beat Pete Sessions) by Tom DeLay and his illegal manueverings during this last election.

When Dick Gephardt stepped down from his house leadership position Frost ran against Nancy Pelosi for minority leader and lost. I had heard his name before that but didn't know anything about him.

Apparently he is a solid fund raiser, a very moderate Democrat, nothing really bad about him that I know of but nothing to excite me either.

The one thing that stands out for me was some of the comments he made about Pelosi and the liberal wing of the party when they were running against each other for Minority Leader. He really turned me off with those comments.

The 10,000 Things
by Andrew C White on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 06:48:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

sudden flash of insight... (3.00 / 2)


I just realized something.

Dean is playing a game.  He doesn't want the DNC job himself - he wants to make sure that some other reformer like Simon gets the job.  Dean is trying to be a Kingmaker.

If Dean weren't in the running for DNC, then all the status-quo candidates would still be around.  But when you compare them to Dean, they look hollow.  So Dean is causing reform just by threatening to be in the running.  But here's my guess - if it comes time for a vote and Simon is in the lead, Dean won't even apply for the job.  He will simply step aside and let Simon take the job.

As long as Dean is a free agent, he has the power to intervene in all kinds of different democratic establishments.  As soon as he locks himself down, his power is concentrated but limited.

by joshyelon on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 05:51:46 PM EST

Re: sudden flash of insight... (none / 0)

That Dean fella sure is clever sometimes....
Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 06:50:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Donnie Fowler Rocks (none / 0)

I'm pretty far out of the closet as a big Donnie fan, but I'll jump in here anyway. I think he is still the smartest, hardest working canidate in the race so far. He is a stand up guy who is willing to take on the people who have been leading the party down the rat hole of defeat for the last few years.

I fought alongside Donnie in the Gore campaign and saw him organize around the "aristocracy of consultants" to help Gore win 500,000 more votes than Bush.

He has now put togther a real finance team and has the most coherent message to challenge DC so we can take the party back to the people.

by JamalSimmons on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 07:08:46 PM EST

Re: Donnie Fowler Rocks (3.00 / 1)

I see this is your first comment, welcome.

Couple quick questions:

  1. You've gone on TV and said the Democratic Party should sell out the gay movement. Does Fowler share this stance?

  2. In the same interview you said, "what's more important is to get the party out of the hands of the D.C. and New York insiders" and Fowler has made similar statements. Since you are one of those Washington DC insiders in the aristrocracy of consultants, aren't you part of the problem?

  3. FOLLOW-UP: Since both of you are saying we should stop listening to the advice of people like you, why should we follow you in supporting Fowler?

  4. How do you respond to this:
All he succeeded in the Clark Campaign was to insure chaos and an unprepared candidate with astoundingly weak staffing...which just compounded the errors.
Imagine a nascent, last minute Presidential Campaign with an inexperienced political candidate, (who has the ENTIRE Media Spotlight, a compelling history with substantive viewpoints, significant strategic strengths against the Republican Machince) yet the first non-pro Press Secretary and Campaign Manager Fowler don't prepare the candidate for the most obvious of questions about Iraq?

by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 07:24:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Donnie Fowler Rocks (none / 0)

1) Read what I said about Gay Marriage:

"what we're for is what most people in America are for. We're for making sure people have the ability to share property, making sure people who are sick can visit each other in the hospital, making sure -- trying to encourage long-term relationships of whatever nature. But we wouldn't call it marriage. Most people in America are for those things. They just don't want it to be called marriage.

"And so I don't think we'll alienate people by talking about that. Even the human rights campaign was against having gay marriage as an issue during this election. So Democrats have got to speak up and be strong about our values. And then we can start talking to people about the other things that are important, like healthcare, Social Security, education and the rest."

  1. I grew up on Dexter in Detroit (ask somebody from there what that is like), went to college in Atlanta, and spent most of the last 4 years living in Nashville, Atlanta, Miami and Little Rock working for strong on security Democrats. Donnie grew up in South Carolina, is a veteran of Silicon Valley, worked in 14 states on the ground on campaigns, including winning Connecticut with Bill Clinton and Michigan with John Kerry. That's very different than sitting in Washington DC, giving advice to candidates about what Americans want after reading polls on your way to have drinks on K Street with some lobbyist.

  2. see point #2.

  3. Ask John Hlinko who was a founder of the Draft Clark movement about Donnie. He blogged about it on www.act4love.com. Donnie fought for the Draft movement to be at the table in that cmapaing. he fought to keep it based in Little Rock and not in DC and he helped raise millions of dollars faster than any other candidate only in the race for a few weeks. I lived through the struggles and successes of the Clark campaign and the problems were not Donnie's fault.

by JamalSimmons on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 08:09:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Donnie Fowler Rocks (3.00 / 1)

  1. That is what you said when asked if your position on gays would alienate a voting block. That question was asked because when asked what was missing from the Democratic message, you said, "Well, for instance, Bill Clinton apparently, according to all press reports, advised John Kerry to give a speech about being against gay marriage. Instead of giving that speech about being against gay marriage, John Kerry played defense on gay marriage." You were suggesting that what was missing from our message was offense against the gay movement. Would Donnie had given the speech? Will Donnie engage in the Gray Davis triangulation technique of trying to appear more moderate by attacking the base?

  2. On your business card, what does it say you do and in what city?

  3. So when Donnie talks about breaking the party free of the "aristocracy of consultants" -- he is only talking about some Washington DC consultants? How do we know which ones? Can you prove you are one of the good DC consultants? I know it gets difficult to sort out the good from the bad when people make sweeping statements, but I am confused about why a candidate who claims to be against the DC consultants is being supported by a DC consultant. Could this be a case of Fowler just wanting the control to go to different DC consultants? What's in it for you?

  4. OK, if the infamous Iraq blunder wasn't Fowler's fault, then who should be held accountable?

by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 08:36:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Donnie Fowler Rocks (none / 0)

Sometimes parts of the Democratic base ARE dumb.

They can be rather tactless and absolutist and do not understand that their actions are uniting the opposition more than gaining support. Occasionally, the Democratic Party needs to tell its liberal friends to STFU when they are doing more harm than good. A Sistah Souljah moment or two can do wonders.

People are increasingly supporting gay rights. In case you forgot, Lawrence v. Texas struck down state sodomy laws just this year. The GOP is now where the Democratic Party was a decade ago. The idea of civil unions is gaining support and people are becoming more supportive of allowing gays to serve in the military openly.

However, bring the m-word into the debate and people start acting strange, mainly due to the religious connotations of that word. People will accept equal rights for homosexual couples, but they do not want to redefine marriage.

by wayward on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 10:09:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Donnie Fowler Rocks (3.00 / 1)

Sometimes parts of the Democratic base ARE dumb.

Good point. Look how many seats we lost in the south last time we stood up for civil rights.

We should follow the polls instead of changing them. Like we did with Iraq. Not opposing the war was very effective in taking it off the table so we could focus on our issues. Now, Americans are opposed to the war, so this is the time for us to speak up. Sure some people died, but we needed our "Sistah Souljah" moment more than we needed to do the right thing.

When it comes to the gays, we should make sure we debate the issue from the standpoint of the "m-word" instead of making it an issue of equal rights. We should have bashed our base under a GOP frame and if the people asking for equality had a problem we should have told them to STFU. Democrats probably should have said that to blacks, too. And the women.

Because after all, leadership is following.

by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 10:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If we lose, we can't lead either (none / 0)

Sometimes you have to pick your battles.  I support gay marriage (seperate is inheritly unequal), but the public doesn't, and some polls show they don't even support civil unions.
by Geotpf on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 07:32:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If we lose, we can't lead either (none / 0)

I say give all couples, heterosexual or homosexual, civil unions.

"Marriage" is a basically religious term that should not apply to any form of legal recognition of relationships. The confusion between the contract of legal marriage and the religious/spiritual connotations of marriage (I'm looking at you, Britney) has caused more harm to the institution of marriage than homosexual relationships ever could.

by wayward on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 12:24:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree with this also (none / 0)

However, there are people who are not religious who want a "marriage" (to be called that), plus this will never fly in the real world, unfortuantly.

Marriage is a religious institution, therefore having the state reconize it is a violation of church/state.  But, again, this is a complete and utter loser of an arguement.

by Geotpf on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 05:14:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Donnie Fowler Rocks (none / 0)

What I'm saying is that many liberal groups fail to take into account the effect of backlash. They end up taking one step forward and two steps back. That, my friend, is NOT progress.

What is particularly tragic is when it's done for essentially meaningless things. Insisting on gay "marriage" instead of civil unions and equal rights, fighting to remove/change a dumb flag from Southern state houses, and campaigns to remove "under God" from the pledge cost liberals a lot of support for NO REAL, TANGIBLE, GAINS. That is what I mean by dumb. The Democratic Party needs to distance itself from these dumb, pointless, and unpopular actions.

The Onion summarizes this idea much better than I can with it's article "Gay Marriage Proponents Hope to Send Message to Religious Right Before Election"

http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4101&n=1

You have to pick and choose your battles. So far, many on the left have done this very poorly.

by wayward on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 12:16:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Donnie Fowler Rocks (none / 0)

Nice to see that there are others out there who get what I am saying. First, there are consultants, and then there is an "aristocracy of consultants" that controls the party -- not the same thing. Donnie's position -- and mine -- is that the consultants should WORK FOR the Party. The Party should not be CONTROLLED BY the consultants.

Secondly, political parties and politicians have a responsibility to uphold. That responsibility is to win elections to advance more of the positions of our constituency than our opponents. That's a messy business. It means conflict and compromise -- often at the same time. It also means prioritization.

Should we sacrifice our entire progressive agenda to get reparations for black people because a few black scholars and activists thinks that that is just? I am a descendant of those slaves. In a perfect world, I believe that companies and individuals who profited from the free labor of my ancestors should have to pay back wages and benefits for that. Am I willing to bet the whole house of Democratic-led government on achieving that goal? no. But I do fight to get better health care and educational opportunities; more capital for home ownership and business start-ups; and more enforcement of laws banning discrimination to benefit those same people? Yes.

That is why Kerry should have been OPENLY opposed to gay marriage -not defensive. Because the perception that he was for something he already said he was against put the goals of every other progressive in jeopardy and when you are playing in the NFL of politics you have to make tough decisions to win the game. He could be opposed to marriage while still advocating the expansion of rights for gays.

Millions of Americans who will never see the discussions that take place in these blogs or rarely ever use a computer except to take orders at McDonald's are counting on Democrats to figure out how to win elections. They vote for us every time and lately we have been letting them down.

by JamalSimmons on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 03:26:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Keep the party together, then expand it. (3.00 / 1)

Dean's a great guy, but he tends to shoot his mouth off and can scare off the moderate wing of the party.

Roemer is way too conservative to head the DNC.

Frost is an old time Texas Democrat. Texas is now a solidly Republican state. Still a better choice than Roemer.

Fowler has some good ideas and good potential, but I don't know if he's ready for the job.

by wayward on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 09:58:09 PM EST

Kirk calls no joy (none / 0)

Kos has the latest, including a solid rip on Frost for announcing without anybody noticing. Ouch.
by Bob Brigham on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 11:19:14 PM EST

Interesting (none / 0)

First, I love the idea of Simon Rosenberg as either the Chair or COO/CEO of the DNC... I am dismayed that Ron Kirk has withdrawn from the race... where is the diversity in the field of people (men) vying to be chair of the party?  

Just asking....

by myhumbleopinion2006 on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 11:22:02 PM EST

Re: Interesting (none / 0)


My bad... forgot that Mayor Webb was in the running... I liked him as a candidate until I heard/read the  reports of his presentation and presence at the Orlando Winter meeting

Still where is the diversity?  Why not a draft Alexis Herman movement... she is an awesome organizer and strategist...

by myhumbleopinion2006 on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 11:41:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Donnie's making waves (none / 0)

I can tell by the irrelevant and/or personal attacks that Donnie's attracting that beginning to make an impact on the DNC race, at least insofar as it concerns the blogosphere. Without going negative on other candidates, here's are three reasons why I'm leaning towards Donnie right now:

+Donnie is willing to speak the truth about the elitism and lack of competition within the professional Democratic consulting class. This is hurting us as a party because it's limiting tactical and strategic innovation in candidate campaigns, party-building, and off-cycle party message communication.

+Donnie is a "field" guy, which makes him more inclined to pay attention to building the grassroots organizing infrastructure. Have you often wondered why your state party doesn't have a permanent voter registration or GOTV program in place? Well, Donnie's the only one running with experience in putting one together.

+Donnie's prepared to lead the reform of the way our party "frames" its message, especially to red-state swing voters with whom we will have to become competitive if we are going to rebuild a winning electoral majority.

by bi66er on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 12:05:17 AM EST

Re: Donnie's making waves (none / 0)


Nothing personal but Donnie Fowler does not have the institutional experience to run the multi-million operation that is the DNC.  Ken Mehlman RAN the re-elect operation for Bush the Second.  He has a proven track record of being able to operate a multi-million dollar operation (much less a successful one).

On the other hand, Simon Rosenberg is the co-founder and president of an organization created to foster new Democratic leadership.  Hmmm... let's see, Donnie has been working for a campaign software management company while Simon has been finding people to use the software.  

Oh, by the way, Simon Rosenberg has a field background as well as Donnie Fowler.  Not only did Simon help create and implement the general election strategy in 1992, he was one of the major field directors during the primary season.  Specifically, he was field director in markets  (Wisconsin and SoCal to name a couple) where Jerry Brown was a real threat.  

by myhumbleopinion2006 on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 06:35:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Donnie's making waves (none / 0)

I hit the wrong reply button, see the "elitism and lack of competition within the process" post, upthread for reply on this.
by ElitistJohn on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 11:53:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

elitism and lack of competition within the profess (3.00 / 0)

Jawdrop.

We're talking abount Donnie Fowler, right?

I mean, Donnie Fowler, the son of Don Fowler? Son of party bigwig running for Chair of said party? And you make this a point?

Hmmm...yep, in the fine, upstanding, competitive and open spirit that gives us Senator Kennedy, brother of President Kennedy, related to Representative Kennedy. Serving in the Senate with Clinton wife of Clinton (and Mom of the ever so common 6 fig income straight out of College Clinton), and Bayh son of Bayh.

Uh...you wanna re-think that one?

by ElitistJohn on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 12:25:52 AM EST


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.