THE DCCC, THE BLOGOSPHERE, AND PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENTS: A SINCERE THANKS AND CHALLENGE

From the diaries, a welcome to John Lapp's & the DCCC's response to the challenge to the DCCC to work with the netroots to contest all the Republicans in the House in 2004. There will also be a report from the ground of Ohio 2nd regarding the DCCC's role in the race; and on TomPaine.com, I've an article posted, More Hackett Jobs, that continues the dialogue, Jerome

I first want to thank Jerome Armstrong and Markos Moulitsas Zuniga for taking the time to come by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.  I truly enjoyed the opportunity to hear their views and discuss our vision for the 2006 cycle.  

Let me reiterate here, as stated in our meeting and on MyDD.com, I will keep my commitment.  On our website, by the end of the year, we will list every single Congressional District and those candidates who have the courage to file for Congress.  And we will do our best to update it on a timely basis when new candidates have filed, with the latest contact information so that the grassroots and netroots can get involved.

For those of you who don't know me, I have worked in Democratic politics for over ten years.  After serving as Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack's Deputy Chief of Staff, I managed Vilsack's successful 2002 re-election campaign.  Before moving to Iowa, I worked in congressional politics, managing the open-seat congressional race for Kentucky Congressman Ken Lucas (a 32- year Republican seat), thereafter serving as Lucas' chief of staff.  Lucas' seat was one of those that would normally have been overlooked by the DCCC, but we ran a disciplined campaign, raised the necessary resources, and aggressively engaged our opponent, squeaking out an upset with the Committee's eventual support.  So I know what it's like to desperately want and need the Committee's support and live in fear of not getting it.  In 2000, I directed the successful effort to take back New York's Second Congressional District (held for eight years by former Congressman Rick Lazio, when he ran against Sen. Clinton), electing Steve Israel to Congress.  Subsequently, I served as Israel's chief of staff.  Before coming to the DCCC, I worked at the media firm Murphy Putnam Shorr. In 2003, I served as the Iowa State Director for Dick Gephardt's presidential campaign.  Dick Gephardt is one of the most decent people I have ever worked for in politics.  Despite a valiant effort and an impressive field operation, we came up short.  I find that you often learn more from the defeats than you do the victories.  I came away more resolved than ever to fight for what we believe in - that's what makes us Democrats.  

I have never worked at the DCCC before.  So I take more of a campaign operative's approach to campaigns - rather than an institutional one.  

I'd like to take this opportunity to share my view of the DCCC, netroots, grassroots, and progressive movements.  For those who don't know, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) serves as the official national Democratic campaign committee charged with recruiting, assisting, funding, and electing Democrats to the U. S. House of Representatives. We provide services ranging from designing and helping execute field operations, to polling, creating radio and television commercials, fundraising, communications, and management consulting. The DCCC is a committee organized to empower candidates - help them run successful campaigns and help candidates fight back against unfair attacks from their opponents and the National Republican Congressional Committee.  Help Democrats be the best campaigns they can be.  It is NOT about recruiting national candidates with a Washington message.

But we're just one committee.  One organization.  There's a lot we can do.  But so much more we can't.  That's why movements like MyDD, DailyKos, and others are so important.  We would love to fund every single race.  And when we say we want to expand the playing field we mean it - and we are.  At this time in the 2004 campaign cycle, there were four candidates filed in competitive districts.  This cycle we are well over thirty - not to mention the countless other candidates waging spirited underdog fights across the country.

We would love to fully-fund every prospect, every candidate, and fully contest every race in a meaningful way, but we do offer all candidates advice, training, and general consulting on message, fundraising, research, and organization.  Unfortunately, just as with any organization or enterprise, resources are not infinite.  That is why MyDD, the DailyKos, and the larger blogosphere are so important.  You are critical in the effort to expand the playing field well above and beyond the 30 or 40 districts typically in play.  I would be lying if I said we had the resources to compete in all 200+ Republican districts.  It simply isn't possible.  So I offer MyDD.com, DailyKos, and other progressive movements a direct challenge - help all Democrats.  Get involved.  Work hard.  Donate money.  Persuade.  Motivate.  Change minds.

Netrooters, blogs, and the progressive movement have the flexibility to pick and choose where they support, defend, and fight back.  And they can activate progressive Democrats at a moment's notice in a unique way - above and beyond what we can do.  To view the DailyKos, MyDD.com, and other progressive, activist movements as simply Internet-based ATM machines is to insult them and underestimates their power to inform, activate, persuade, and mobilize.  They are fully-loaded message machines.  Let me be clear - I value not only your financial support to our candidates, but also the larger role you provide in the Democratic activist community.  

Periodically, I send out a Battleground Brief to DCCC online subscribers.  In the brief, I feature candidates that have the best chance of succeeding in takeover opportunities.  We would be remiss in our mission at the DCCC if we didn't do so.  We also feature upstart candidates putting forth valiant efforts in underdog campaigns.  But we certainly do not have the monopoly on good ideas.

For instance, were it not for a strong grassroots and netroots movement, Melissa Bean would not be in Congress.  Thank you for your support in that effort and many other victories and near victories.  Campaigns matter.  The Democratic Party matters. And the progressive blogosphere matters.  There is too much at stake.  We must work together where we can.  Agree to disagree where we can't.  But at the end of the day we are family working together in a common cause.

I want to take a moment to discuss the recent special election in Ohio's Second Congressional District and the thoughts behind our strategy.  Here are the facts:

"Democrats nominated Iraq War veteran Paul Hackett.  But the August 2nd general election in this heavily Republican district was expected to be a mere formality."  -- The Almanac of American Politics, 2006.

Important Facts about the District:

  •     "The most Republican major metropolitan area in the nation over the longest time span has been Cincinnati" --The Almanac of American Politics, 2006.

  •     President Bush beat Senator Kerry here, 64% to 36%. --The Almanac of American Politics, 2006.

  •     In the 1998-2004 elections, former Congressman Rob Portman received over 70% of the vote. --The Almanac of American Politics, 2006.

  •     Out of the 18 districts Ohio districts, OH-02 is one of the three most Republican districts in Ohio, where Bush won overwhelmingly. -- The Almanac of American Politics, 2006.

  •     In the 2005 primaries, 45,000 Republicans voted compared to just 13,800 Democrats.  -- CNN Morning Grind, August 2, 2005.

  •     Yet ... the NRCC spent over half a million dollars to hold this rock-solid Republican    -- FEC Reports.  

    In nearly the biggest political upset in recent history, Democrat Paul Hackett came within just a few thousand votes of defeating Republican Jean Schmidt in Ohio's Second Congressional District.  This is considered by many to be an early sign of widespread discontent with the Republican Congress around the country.  

As DCCC Chair Rahm Emanuel said, "This election is a shockwave of voter discontent that will be felt all across the country.  Tonight we have seen rock solid Republicans say that they have had enough of a Congress that is in the grips of the special interests, roiled by ethics investigations and doing nothing to help solve the pressing challenges facing the middle class.  Every Republican in Congress should consider himself put on notice."

We at the DCCC bucked the conventional wisdom and stood by Paul Hackett.

In an overwhelmingly Republican District, the Republicans were in the fight of their lives.  The NRCC dumped over a half million dollars into this race - one that just went for Bush 64%, only nine short months ago.  The combination of Governor Taft's fiscal mismanagement and ethical problems - not to mention the ethics problems facing Jean Schmidt had the Republicans pulling the fire alarm, emptying out their coffers, and spending over a half million dollars.  The National Republican Congressional Committee was so worried about defections from the base that they even took the extraordinary step of contacting every Republican household with robocalls from President Bush.  We stood by a guy who stood by his country in battle.  All along, we knew this had to be one of the districts where everything had to go right.  Because of what we were picking up on the ground, there were trends making it more competitive than the usual partisan generics ... people angry about the problems Ohioans are facing - Governor Taft, and even Schmidt herself.  And it speaks to the anti-incumbent, anti-establishment, anti-Republican climate all across the country. Everyone talks about the Democrats losing because of exurbs, and fast growing areas. That is one the principal talking points about the 2004 election.  This district includes all of Clermont and most of Warren, which are two of the fastest growing exurbs in Ohio. If Democrats can gain, even minimally in the exurbs, they will be able to score major gains in 2006.  Take a look at Paul Hackett - how much he outperformed Sen. John Kerry in these suburban and exurban counties:

Adams County
Kerry: 36 percent
Hackett: 52 percent

Brown County
Kerry: 36 percent
Hackett: 56 percent

Clermont County
Kerry: 29 percent
Hackett: 42 percent

Pike County
Kerry: 48 percent
Hackett: 63 percent

We are proud of what Paul Hackett accomplished ... what we all accomplished.  We knew if this race simply became weeks and weeks of Spy vs. Spy/NRCC vs. DCCC, it would become a Republican smear campaign of national liberal vs. Bush conservative, and we would lose that fight.  This needed to be a local race about local issues - pitting a principled Iraq War veteran against an ethically-challenged typical politician.  So we tracked, worked under the radar, and planned for a last-minute television and mail campaign.  That it was this close, in such a Republican District, should have Republicans worried - from coast to coast - particularly Ohio Congressman Bob Ney who is facing the possibility of an ethics investigation of his own.  The Republicans should have been able to put this away - without spending a dime.  That they had to spend over $500,000 in one week - speaks volumes.  That it was this close, in such a Republican District, should have Republicans worried - from coast to coast.

And we are targeting other historically rock-solid Republican districts currently occupied by the likes of GOP Leader Tom DeLay and Congressman Bob Ney.  Allegations of ethical improprieties ... pay-to-play ... casinos ... and outright intimidation has left these members and many other Republicans much more vulnerable than they should be.  And we have good candidates who have filed against them or are on the verge of filing to run for Congress.  The only way to get more Melissa Beans in Congress is to take on the conventional wisdom and expand the playing field - challenging more incumbents and competing in more open seats.

After ten years of Republican control of Congress, House Republican Leader Tom DeLay and his allies in Congress are determined to undo all that we have accomplished. The GOP wants to eliminate Social Security; privatize Medicare; dramatically scale back needed investments in education; ignore our national energy challenges; and open up our air and water systems to industry pollution and consumption for profit. And internationally, President Bush and the Republican leadership would have the United States "go it alone" in dangerous conflicts around the globe ignoring the small interconnected planet on which we all live.  We cannot let Tom DeLay and the Republican Congress continue to derail and intimidate in their quest to overrule our American priorities.  Their abuse of power is shocking.  Their open contempt for what we believe in is astounding.  We can stop them.  But only with your help.

With only 15 seats to go, the DCCC is prepared for a very competitive 2006 election cycle. The failed economic policies and misplaced priorities of President George W. Bush and House Republican Leader Tom DeLay have improved the political climate for Democrats and created an opportunity to achieve significant Democratic gains.

We are counting on you to help us. The DCCC is supported by the contributions of individuals and other groups from throughout the country who are committed to returning the People's House to the people of this country. I welcome your comments.  And hope we have the opportunity to meet in person and online often during this campaign cycle.  And most importantly - work together.

Please be sure to visit us at dccc.org often.  Blog.  Criticize us when we're wrong.  Maybe throw us an occasional compliment if we're right.  If you haven't been there yet, please visit dccc.org and our blog at blog.dccc.org.  And I will be sure to continue to visit MyDD.com, DailyKos.com, and other political blogs often as well.

Thanks.


Display:


Maybe Bean (none / 0)

was not such a good example... considering that she bit the hand that helped her and voted for CAFTA.

This is not a one way street... nor an ATM. Candidates are funded and supported to uphold Democratic values. Bean and others may have damaged some of that trust in the actions in Washington.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 02:37:19 PM EST

agreed (3.00 / 1)

yea, you really don't want to use melissa bean as an example right about now.  

if you read the blogs, then you should know she is an object of our ire right now.  i don't give a crap whether she has a D next to her name; she voted for CAFTA and therefore she isn't getting a dime from me.  and she certainly won't get any "wow we gotta help bean get re-elected" posts either.

she sold us out.  screw her.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!
by annatopia on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:45:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not ATMs (3.00 / 6)

This is certainly not a one way street nor an ATM.  And again, I want to reiterate that is a mistake and an insult to treat MyDD, DailyKos, and others as ATMs.  

by John Lapp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 02:40:11 PM EST

Re: Not ATMs (3.00 / 2)

Thank you for your reply.

We are desperate for strong Democratic representation in Washington. However, to me that does not mean "any Dem will do". I concurr with your assessment of the Hackett campaign. The one thing that stands out is that Hackett is PROUD to be a Democrat and did not throw overboard the Democratic Platform in order to "win at all costs". This is also why so many netroots and grassroots (Democracy for America played a big part in funding and feet on the street for Hackett.) came out in numbers.

Hackett shows integrity and pride in being a Democrat not a lite version of the GOP. According to popular myth this should have spelled disaster in such a "red" area... but it didn't. I hope that the folks at DCCC take notice and stop the knee jerk reactions of putting up GOP-lite Dems in reddish areas. As we see a Dem who is confident in being a Dem and is proud of the Democrat platform and who is qualified and has strength of character ...can run anywhere.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 02:55:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

dccc is just one part of the team (none / 0)

this is a key point. Democrats should challenge every seat - but that doesn't mean the DCCC, with its finite resources, should do so. Blogs, the DNC, state and local organisations, DFA, all these groups must jump in as well.

I am encouraged, however, that they are at least expanding the field beyond what it has been in past cycles.

by swatdem on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 02:57:00 PM EST

Why wait? (3.00 / 1)

A bit complaint I'm getting is that the DCCC waits too long--I get your point above about entering the race early and entirely agree, but a lot of activists both on-line and off don't understand the dynamic between the Party's committees--could you explain a bit more why the DCCC waited?

And it's entirely fine to not do it today, but another point is explaining to such folks more transparently how decisions are made by the DCCC and the competing pressures.  

Thanks,
Larry Handlin

by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:07:37 PM EST

Expanding the Field for Real... (none / 0)

So glad to hear that.  We'd love to play in every Republican District.  Unfortunately resources are not unlimimted.  But we will have the resources to be competitive.  But with more help, more support, more strategy, more mobilization, more ideas.  The more the merrier, in my opinion.  More players, more candidates, more battles.  MORE.  Go, fight, win.

by John Lapp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:09:14 PM EST

Re: Expanding the Field for Real... (none / 0)

We'd love to play in every Republican District.  Unfortunately resources are not unlimimted.

There are Democrats everywhere.  You're just making the same bad choices and claiming a lack of resources as the issue.

by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:18:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Expanding the Field for Real... (none / 0)

I would like to see all the seats in the House disected into 5 categories by the DCCC and the blogsphere. People living in these districts know better than someone in DC the dynamics that could make a solid Republican district vulnerable.  For instance,  KS-1 is a seat that it would probably be foolish to challenge, because Rep. Moran is a moderate and defeating him in rural Western Kansas would be impossible.  However, KS-2 & KS-4 are both districts, that with the right challenger and a good campaign are doable. KS-2 maybe more than 4, but both are less Republican that OH-2, and given a straight talker with a good organization, they can be had.  

I would argue that on the outside looking in, most would say that are a lost cause and time shouldn't be spent recruiting candidates and organizing.  If you believe that, then Democrats will continue to be in the minority.  Right now, people everywhere need to assess their own congressional district and decide whether it is in one of five places.  Solid Democratic, Lean Democratic, Swing, etc..  From that analysis, the progressive blogsphere need to organize around the districts that can be won and help find more Paul Hackett's and give them to help they need to win.  We won't win them all, but we can make Republican's defend themselves and in return have less opportunities to help other engandered Republicans.  2006 is the year to do this and it is incumbent on all of us to make sure it happens.

by sandzen on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:51:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

help candidates start (3.00 / 1)

>Unfortunately resources are not unlimimted.

You don't need unlimited resources to give $10k seed money to all Republican districts.  A small chunk, $200-300k would ensure that voters have a choice in every area of the country.  Obviously, you can't spend $1 million on every district.  But a small amount could go a long way towards helping the Democratic party.  Who knows?  There could be 4-5 Paul Hacketts in the 150 "not competitive" districts and a couple of them could win.

by hotshotxi on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:09:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Expanding the Field for Real... (3.00 / 1)

We'd love to play in every Republican District.  Unfortunately ...

Will you please wrap your goddamn head around this simple concept:  THERE ARE NO REPUBLICAN DISTRICTS.

There are districts that, for now, have to make do with one of Tom Delay's cronies representing them in Congress.  There are districts where, in the past, Republican politicians haven't been called to account for their incompetence and corruption.  But there are NO districts that belong to the GOP.  

Language matters, and if you are content to describe a congressional district -- which almost certainly is home to tens if not hundreds of thousands of Democrats -- as a "Republican District," then you're talking the language of defeat.

We're fighting a political insurgency, and insurgents don't ever win by restricting their area of operations to a few limited districts here and there.  That just makes it easier for the government to concentrate its superior firepower and wipe them out.  

You may not be able to win everywhere, but you HAVE to be willing to fight everywhere.  Where we won't fight, we can't win.

I don't expect to see victory everywhere, but I'll tell you I damned well do expect to see us conceding nowhere.

by Californian on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:19:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Expanding the Field for Real... (none / 0)

Yeah right. Try running a blue candidate in Utah. Your point of view is clearly californian.
http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/
by Vote Hillary 2008 on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:32:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Expanding the Field for Real... (none / 0)

Have you ever heard of Orange County? That's where I live. You talk like conservatism is a foreign concept in California.

Orange County is home to B-1 Bob Dornan and Dana Rohrabacher. California has large swaths of very red counties. Rep. Bill Thomas has a safe seat. David Dreir has been re-elected for about 20 years now. Duke Cunningham had a safe seat until he got too greedy.

Like most large states our major cities and population centers tend to be blue with very big chunks of red and dark purple in between.

by Gary Boatwright on Sat Aug 06, 2005 at 03:27:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Expanding the Field for Real... (none / 0)

Ah yes. Those large swaths of red California territory. The state of stem cell funding, gay marriage, and plenty of legal good icky sticky kind buds. How republicans always lose the state's electoral bounty when it is the very bosom of conservativism, the world shall always ponder.
http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/
by Vote Hillary 2008 on Sat Aug 06, 2005 at 07:02:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Expanding the Field for Real... (3.00 / 1)

You don't need unlimited resources to run a candidate in every district. Set aside $200,000 and give $10,000 to get a Democrat on the ballot against every Republican held seat. It is not always about the chance of winning as Chris and Jerome have said over and over. It is about getting the message out and showing Democrats everywhere that the party cares about their votes whether it is in swing state Ohio or red state Utah. In fact, I bet if the DCCC held an internet fundraiser to raise $200,000 for this stated purpose, it could be achieved in a weekend.
by Matt42 on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 05:55:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Candidate Recruitment (none / 0)

Another great bit--whether you can do it today or not, is to describe candidate recruitment.  Another constant refrain I hear is that the DCCC doesn't recruit very well.

The flip side of the complaint often made at the same time is that DCCC tries to sabotage legit contenders for their preferred candidates in open seats---obviously these contradict each other, but when I attempt to explain how the DCCC works and often defend decisions you all make, these are some of the biggest issues.

And yes, I can be critical of DCCC from time to time, but generally I'm rather amazed at what you can do with relatively limited resources.  

by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:10:59 PM EST

Re: Candidate Recruitment (none / 0)

Recruiting is going extremely well -- with recruits in competitive districts all across the country.  And helping find good candidates is just the beginning.  We need to get these folks the resources they need to have strong first quarter showings, go toe-to-toe with the Republicans.
by John Lapp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:20:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Candidate Recruitment (3.00 / 1)

Recruiting is going extremely well -- with recruits in competitive districts all across the country.

This is loser mentality.  Who determines competitive?  You do.  Are your metrics good?  Who the fuck knows?

by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:50:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

this really is a good question (3.00 / 1)

it would  be nice if you would lay some nuts and bolts out for us john.

like... what criteria do you use to categorise districts into "competitive", "non competitive", "on the edge", etc etc?

what is your threshold for backing a candidate financially?  for example we all know that sometimes the dtrip sits on their hands and lets a longshot or "on the edge" candidate prove they can raise money before the dtrip gets involved.  me, i think you could help more by raising the candidate's profile.  i think logically that once a candidate gets publicity it is easier for them to raise money in many cases.

i just don't get your criteria.  can you please elaborate?

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!
by annatopia on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:54:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: this really is a good question (none / 0)

I'd say this would be a great topic just for transparency--and maybe not today, but on the Stakeholder.  
by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:06:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

i don't care, as long as we get answers (none / 0)

i just want to understand how their process works. i can only pontificate on what i see from out here in the hinterlands.  but once you know what's really going on you get a better perspective.  that's all i'm asking for.  hope they respond.
Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!
by annatopia on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:12:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: this really is a good question (3.00 / 1)

My position entirely.  It seems that the DCCC focuses on the races they deem important, while ignoring others that may be more important.  I think the people in  the state and districts have a much better feel for the vulnerability of a particular incumbent than someone in DC.  The progressive blogsphere need to help identify districts they feel would be competitive and help find candidates.  If the DCCC won't help, then let the netroots do it.  Many of these supposedly Goliath Republicans can be taken down with the right challenger and campaign.  
by sandzen on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:11:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

While I do concur, (none / 0)

I also know that nearly every person running thinks that they will win.

I mean... I would, were I running.  I also know that the DCCC has to decide, at the end of the day, where to put your power.

I'd just like to see some 'riskier' races get some love.

McCain sucks!
by teknofyl on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:14:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

oh yeah, "competitive" (none / 0)

How do you know what's a "competitive" district?  By your stupid analysis, Paul Hackett wouldn't have a chance and therefore, because of "resource constraints" wouldn't deserve any help.

Give me a break.  Fact is, there hasn't been a serious challenge to Republican control of the House  at all over the past decade, and the way you're going, there won't be one next year.

by hotshotxi on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:05:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Candidate Recruitment (3.00 / 1)

What kind of candidates are you recruiting?

I live in CA-19 and if I'm not mistaken, the DCCC is going to run Lex Bufferd agian. Why?
That guy crashed and burned last time and was hardly worth the vote.

by Houston on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:43:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And Dave Loebsack says hi (none / 0)

He was my college advisor.  
by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:12:36 PM EST

Re: And Dave Loebsack says hi (none / 0)

Say hello to Dave Loebsack for me as well.  I have been getting all of his e-mail updates.
by John Lapp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 05:37:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why we waited... (none / 0)

We made a strategic decision.  In order for Paul Hackett to have a fair fight, this needed to be about Hackett vs. Schmidt, not the Spy vs. Spy/DCCC vs. NRCC "national liberal" vs. "Bush conservative," typical NRCC playbook smear campaign.  Waiting until the very end (we monitored this closely and weighed in right at the last moment -- had prepared our ad and mail for a long time), allowed Hackett to establish a dialogue on his terms, as the straight talking vet vs. the typical, ethically-challenged politician.  After establishing the race on his terms, we provided him with air cover to tell the true story about Schmidt.  We were proud to stand by our guy who stood up for us.  Loved the contrast.  Paul Hackett is a great American.
by John Lapp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:14:33 PM EST

Re: Why we waited... (none / 0)

No, you waited until the blogs created a huge upswell and started generating massive revenue and interest in the campaign. Sorry, but I don't believe you for a second John. Your bragging about that sellout Melissa Bean is all the reason I need to doubt the effectiveness and good intentions of the DCCC. Knowing her traitorous voting record on issues so important to Democrats, will the DCCC look to run someone against her in the primary?
by Prison4BushCo on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:55:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why we waited... (none / 0)

Median voter theorem might be one reason. Do you want Dave McSweeney or Kathi Salvi as the next representative of the IL-08?  I can guarantee neither of them would have gotten drilling in the Great Lakes permanently banned.  I can also guarantee that the will pursue a right wing social agenda.  

Bean's inexcusable vote was on the Bankruptcy Bill, but every other vote fits that District well.  Of all the anger out there, why not target those in safe seats who didn't have specific electoral reasons for voting for it?

by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:03:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

sorry, but i don't trust you (3.00 / 3)

Melissa Bean and candidates like her IS the problem.  Forget about CAFTA - you still don't get our argument.

If you examine House patterns, you'll find that big shifts change the balance of power, but picking up seats here and there doesn't.  This is a House-specific trend (the Senate is different, but you guys are the DCCC).  This is because people won't vote against their local guy unless they think that there's a problem with the majority in power.  They'd prefer the pork.  We have to make a convincing case that giving up the pork is worth it.  Your strategy hinges on picking off seats here and there with local issues, but the Republicans will always have more to use to fight this battle.  We have to fight smarter and better, not make this an issue of resources.  The reason the netroots is different is not because we raise money - we really don't raise that much - it's because we leverage what we do have.

You guys don't do that.  And you should.

So I offer MyDD.com, DailyKos, and other progressive movements a direct challenge - help all Democrats.  Get involved.  Work hard.  Donate money.  Persuade.  Motivate.  Change minds.

If you want to not condescend to the blogs then don't condescend to the blogs.  We already DO this.

My problem though is that you're still looking at this as a resource issue, and it's not.  It's a commitment issue.  Sure you're willing to praise us, but we don't want praise, we want you to start acting competently.

Oh, and by the way, if you were acting in 'secret', why didn't you tell anyone in the blogs about it and ask them to keep it quiet, sort of like a registered letter?  I just have to take your word that you were secretly working on this fight despite an institutional history of fucking over competitive Democrats in non-targeted states.

by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:16:12 PM EST

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

Sorry to hear that.  Please look at the FEC Reports.  As I said in my opening, this is my first time working at the DCCC.  I'm proud of what Paul Hackett did.  He's proud of the work of the DCCC.  And couldn't be more appreciative of MyDD, DailyKos, and other efforts.  I'm hoping we can use our energy in more constructive ways, helping each other ... instead of eating our own.  Makes me sad to think how much negative energy is being spewed out there ... resources squandered ... opportunities lost.
by John Lapp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:23:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (3.00 / 3)

That you are implying that I am not helping and that criticism is just negative energy shows just how much you have to learn.

If you want me to look at FEC reports you might want to be clear about what the hell you are talking about.

And why should I help you? I do remember the ads Gephardt's people launched against Dean in the primary.  Have you ever apologized?  Has Gephardt ever apologized for selling out the country and the Democrats in the approach to war?  I know what he did, swapping that resolution so he could stand with the President.  Why won't you admit fault?  What is wrong with you people that you call incompetence roses and then expect us to trust you?

by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:30:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (3.00 / 0)

He wants you to look at the FEC reports because they will contain a written record of what assistance the DCCC provided and when they provided it to Paul Hackett, as well as to any other Democratic candidate.

And his point is that you don't have to just trust him on it. You can look it up.

by Kagro X on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:34:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

Why is he making me do the work to explain his behavior?  He came here, remember?
by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:40:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

What, you want him to read them to you?
by Kagro X on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 05:45:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

I want him to explain the facts.  He didn't do that.  He just said 'go to the FEC'.
by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 05:48:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (3.00 / 0)

That's where the facts are. And you'll be able to read them at your leisure, and mull them over without having to have you both be at your computers to yell at one another for hours on end.

You want to know what the DCCC did and didn't do, and it's all going to be there in black and white. Why you think it makes you look more serious to insist he spoon-feed it to you, I don't know.

by Kagro X on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 05:58:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (2.00 / 0)

Oh fuck off and stop lying about what I said and what he said.  It doesn't suit you.
by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 06:03:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

Gee, that sounded awfully tough. Are you going to beat me up now?

Talk about not suiting...

by Kagro X on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 06:23:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

This is kind of not relevant, but I think it's kind of funny that two dudes named Kagro X and Socialnetworker are quasi-threatening each other on a blog about politics.

Could this get geekier?

by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 06:56:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

It certainly could. One of them could realize how geeky it looks and try to put a stop to it, and the other one could say so out loud.

Anyway, so I did your homework for you. The DCCC spent almost $285,000 on the race.

by Kagro X on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 07:18:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

I don't see how that changes anything.  I never claimed that the DCCC wasn't in the race, just that their claim that they were in early and were secretive about it was suspect.
by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 09:01:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

Ah, see, now this is one of the reasons you shouldn't have other people do your research for you. Only you can keep straight what you're looking for. How many times over by now might you have retrieved the information yourself?
by Kagro X on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 10:35:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (3.00 / 0)

I'm sorry, but I know IL-8 relatively well, and I don't see what other kind of candidate you would have get elected from there---is a pro-choice woman who just worked to ban permanently oil drilling in the Great Lakes worse than Phil "the Fossil" Crane?

Beyond that, if you haven't noticed, one of the more effective issues DCCC has been concentrating on is corruption and using the DeLay and Cunningham scandals as a framing tool for 1994.  While the press talks about the Contract on America, I believe 1994 was more about scandals than policy.  

by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:31:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

Archpundit is spot on.

It is critical that the story of pay-to-play, abuse of power, ethical scandals ... all at the expense of working people -- higher gas prices, sham prescription drug plan, stagnant wages ... is told.

We have a moral obligation to tell this story.

by John Lapp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:45:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

Argh.  Stop giving me talking points and address my argument.
by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:48:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (3.00 / 1)

Oh come on.  Don't tell me that the only kind of Democrat that can win there is a pro-business Republican-lite.  Paul Hackett, by all measures very progressive, came within less than 4 points in the most conservative district in Ohio.  He didn't do that by triangulating and "moderating" his message or "moving to the center," he did that by telling it how it is and standing proud to be a Democrat.
Rudy Giuliani hates firefighters. And puppies.
by Fran for Dean on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:58:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

And how many Paul Hackett's are there that can be that dynamic?  

Beyond that, the infrastructure in that area for what few Dems there are like Bean.  Jack Franks is the prime example, but it's also much different from Hackett's district. The population in IL-08 are suburban moderates or exurban voters--no serious rural areas and no urban African-American areas even to be a base.  

by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:12:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

And how many Paul Hackett's are there that can be that dynamic?

As many as we create and recruit.

by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:24:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

You missed my point entirely.  I was making a strategic argument not ragging on Bean.
by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:49:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (3.00 / 0)

No, you miss my point which is also strategic.  Ignoring local issues and local concerns is just as stupid as only paying attention to them as you are accusing the DCCC of doing.  Bean fits her district pretty well. I think her vote on the Bankruptcy bill was a shame, but I get her votes in the other cases even when I disagree with her.  

We aren't going to get a Jan Schakowsky clone in IL-8.  

The DCCC is framing the debate more effectively than any time I can remember on corruption and that's an incredibly powerful issue in all districts, but also candidates who can first establish credentials as concerned about local issues have to be in place or they won't connect with a District.

by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:54:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

WE CAN NOT BE JUST AGAINST THE GOP

DAMN IT!!! we need to stand up for something. and hell yeah that means we have to have an ideology...not just committed to wining elections at any cost.

I keep seeing this meme floating on the blogs that the Dems new raison d'etre is to fight corruption...

FUCK THAT

We have a hell of a lot more to do including protecting womens's reproductive rights, arming a defense for the renewal of the Voting Rights Act in 2007, strengthening the economc, protecting the environment.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:51:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (3.00 / 1)

Last I checked running government above board is an issue and it's one that's worth fighting.  It's not the only issue, but it has many advantages.  

First, throwing the bums out and doing it based on being on the take has a long history of winning campaigns at every level.  

Second, it connects the entire party.

Third, the Republicans seem hell bent on leaving it for us to take and run with...never get in the way of a good self-immolation.

Fourth, it's the right thing to do.  

You are right it can't be the only issue and it isn't, but it sure provides a great frame to run on--and you'll notice it was used very effectively in Hackett's race.

by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:59:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

It is a RUSE!!!

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:00:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry, but i don't trust you (none / 0)

What do you think caused the 1994 wave for Republicans?  Ultimately, reallignment was going to hit, but it had to be helped along by a specific strategy--attacking incumbent corruption.  
by archpundit on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:04:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (3.00 / 0)

You're done with Melissa Bean because of CAFTA.   What issue would have made you done with Paul Hackett?  Is CAFTA your only issue or is there an whole litany that every Democrat must support every time to be worthy of your support?

by InigoMontoya on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:53:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (none / 0)

This was down right pathetic and not necessary. Since the DLC/NDN is prying our Dems away from a Democratic IDEOLOGY they just sell their votes to the higest bidder.

Bean's actions were disgraceful and LOW!!!

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:56:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Curious (3.00 / 0)

Your response suggests that the only explanation is a cynical one, that it is impossible for a Democrat to disagree out of conviction, and that corporate money is the only explanation for such a vote.

Obviously, this is a hot-button issue for you.  

But I ask again:  what other issues are you willing to impose a "my way or the highway" approach for support?  

Should I have not given money to Hackett because his is pro-gun?   Because he is not as environmentally liberal as I am?  Because he's tepid on healthcare?

Do you vote for someone to vote as you would or do you vote for someone to exercise their judgment?
 

by InigoMontoya on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 07:57:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Do you want a laundry list? (none / 0)

Here are my top favorite reasons to oppose the DLC and related Dem organizations:

CAFTA
Bankruptcy restrictions
Class Action lawsuit restrictions
The Exxon Welfare Bill
The Inheritance Tax

by Gary Boatwright on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 11:07:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

glad to see you trying for relevance (2.16 / 6)

My perspective on the OH-02 election is that the DCCC was fucking irrelevant because you were too cowardly to fight early. When Hackett came to you at the beginning, you blew him off. When he won the primary, you looked at the numbers and sat on your ass. When you did come in, it was great -- but way too late.

I love the ad you did, it would have been nice for people to see it before the final weekend. The DCCC sent some serious people at the end and they kicked ass, but it was too little, too late.

You fucked up, the blogs stepped up, and EVERYONE saw that your cowardly targeting was total fucking bullshit.

Right now, I think the DCCC is totally fucking irrelevant (members of the media can quote me on that as some of your colleagues already have). Get your shit together, but until that happens I don't think a single god damn dime should go to the DCCC and when I get home tomorrow I'm going to be working the phones, calling big donors with that exact message.

The DNC is kicking ass with the 50 state strategy and the contrast between the DNC and the DCCC couldn't be clearer.

If people want donate to some Fighting Democrats, here you go.

Thanks for posting on MyDD, this is a good start. But institutionally I think the DCCC is FUBAR. I could really care less whether you get your act together, because as OH-02 showed everyone, we'll step up and do it ourselves.

by blogswarm on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:18:04 PM EST

Re: glad to see you trying for relevance (none / 0)

Are you kidding me right now?  BLOGS DO NOT WIN ELECTIONS.  They are like yard signs; they do not vote!  If you're going to take credit for the Hackett race, you better be able to prove that you did something besides sit at your computer and fucking BLOG about it!
by Fancy McGee on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:21:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Kiss my ass (3.00 / 2)

The netroots outspent the NRCC and if you just want to look at hard numbers, the netroots were three times as relevant as the DCCC.

More importantly, when Tim and I were on the ground, the campaign had the ability to communicate in real time. When Schmidt lied about Noe, who do you think found the info that let Hackett hold a press conference on the courthouse steps and call bullshit?

Tim and I are putting together a longer piece on the race, it will be up on Swing State Project soon.

by blogswarm on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:29:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kiss my ass (none / 0)

I'm fucking in for $100.
by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:32:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

your giving to the DCCC (none / 0)

Didn't you see I just put up a virtual picket line?
by blogswarm on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:34:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: your giving to the DCCC (3.00 / 1)

I'm giving to blogpac.
by SocialNetworker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:39:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: your giving to the DCCC (none / 0)

not until I understand where its "ideologies" lie. There has been some scary stuff floating around by some of the founders of BlogPac about "any Dem will do"... don't think so.
Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:42:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

eh? (none / 0)

what are you reading?  links please?
Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!
by annatopia on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:47:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: eh? (none / 0)

this
Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:52:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

gotcha (none / 0)

i don't claim to speak for markos, but i know exactly what he's talking about.  he's talking about the qualities that hackett embodied: strength, pride, and a willingness to fight.

honestly, at this point, that's about all it's going to take for me to support someone.  i can even write off crappy votes if the candidate or representative will just stand up and fight (ala dean, hackett, etc).

obviously you hope that said candidate will also be "right" on the positions (for me, that'd be pro choice, pro personal liberty, anti corruption, pro environment, just to name a few).  but you can't always be assured of that.

what we at blogpac have in common is the willingness to fight. we are not all ideologically on the same page, but we all agree that we have to fight hard to win and challenge every race that we can.  we won't support wimps, and i'm sure it's acceptable to the other board members if i say that out loud.

i dunno. if you have any more questions, feel free to get in  touch.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!
by annatopia on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:05:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: gotcha (none / 0)

At blogPAC we know that the only viable alternative to the current admin in Washington is the democrats.

One step at a time.

Action for Reaction
by hfiend on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 04:16:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: gotcha (none / 0)

There is no right or wrong.

The fundalmentalist are attacking women reproductive rights in an unpresidented manner. This is not the time to niggle about who's right or wrong on this issue... there is only ONE way that is acceptable. We stand up for Roe or you can kiss this party good bye.

Because it doesn't just stop with Roe, is what these foolish idiots don't seem to grasp. They are already going after womens rights to use any and all contraception. They won't stop until are barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen...preferably wearing a shador.

College campuses have emerged as the latest battlefield in the nation's war on women's reproductive rights. Wisconsin has passed a bill entitled UW Birth Control Ban-AB 343. This bill prohibits University of Wisconsin campuses from prescribing, dispensing and advertising all forms of birth control and emergency contraceptives. Wisconsin State Rep. Dan LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, introduced this bill based on the belief that "dispensing birth control and emergency contraceptives leads to promiscuity."

So Kos, can cut deals with his own life and healthcare and leave mine and other women out of his losing "political strategy".

ROE IS NON-NEGOTIABLE

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.
by Parker on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 09:31:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

thanks (none / 0)

I have to go catch a plan (because unlike John Lapp I flew into district), but don't worry, I'll have much, much more...
by blogswarm on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:56:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks (none / 0)

Bob -- so glad you flew in.  I hope you had a good experience with the DCCC staff on the ground.  As you may know, I was working on the Independent Expenditure side of the DCCC -- therefore prohibited by law from coordinating with the campaign.
by John Lapp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 05:30:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks (2.00 / 0)

Ah, I see. You're just a "staff puke," because you weren't "on the ground."

Where have I heard that ridiculous charge before?

by Kagro X on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 06:00:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks (none / 0)

Sorry Kagro X. I think you may be reading a little too much into that statement. We have enough legitimate beefs with the party apparatchiks without manufacturing dittohead accusations.
by Gary Boatwright on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 08:47:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks (none / 0)

I think I'm not.

There are legitimate beefs, and there are legitimate beefs. In the fabulous age of the global Internets, where you park your hindquarters is among the weakest possible beefs to put forward.

Yet, here it is, front and center. Because weak as it is, it's also one of the very easiest.

by Kagro X on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 08:55:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks (none / 0)

Kagro the snarkiness in your comments is hilarious, do continue.
http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/
by Vote Hillary 2008 on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 02:56:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks (none / 0)

I like sly snark as much as the next guy, and I probably engage in it more than I should have, but this was actually meant to be taken seriously.

This was a low-down, baseless complaint, at least as it applies to Lapp. A cheap shot in the midst of what could actually be a substantive listing of grievances. Lapp's "rear echelon actions" put $285K into this race, and while there might have been more, or it might have come sooner, or what have you, it came. And from what latitude and longitude he signed the checks makes no difference to me.

But it was near at hand, so it got used.

by Kagro X on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 09:44:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks (3.00 / 0)

Just goes to show some people are simply ungrateful babies. Some of them are questioning why there is a DCCC at all? I guess all that money should have stayed in the bank of donors.

I'm curious...is Hackett also complaining about the DCCC? Nah, didn't think so.

http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/
by Vote Hillary 2008 on Fri Aug 05, 2005 at 03:52:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thanks (none / 0)

Let's just say that it goes to show that some people haven't yet discovered the ways in which they can work constructively with the DCCC. And maybe those ways haven't been invented yet.

I'm not very happy with what's going on right now, and I think it refelcts a fundamental misunderstanding of what the DCCC is, what it isn't, what it can do, what it can't, and how to change what we can change about it.

The chest-thumping is irritating to me, but I also recognize that it's a tactic for attracting support, without which those engaging in it will have even less leverage than they have now in seeking to change the way the institutional arms of the party approach challenger races.

Working this out will require that they back off some. But it'll require the same from those on your side of the fence as well.

Me? I'm, uh, a superior being, or something.

by Kagro X on Fri Aug 05, 2005 at 09:52:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kiss my ass (none / 0)

metonym, nowhere did I see Bob Brigham take credit for OH-02. He did take exception to Mr. Lapp coming out of the DCCC offices and taking credit and challenging bloggers to do something that they've been doing very well.

As far as your statement:
"I believe mobilization and organization wins a campaign.  I also believe a more egalitarian approach where real coalescence occurs instead of finger pointing, profanity and self-aggrandizement will win an election.  Blogging as I say it on the Swing State Project was comprised of statements about Bob Brigham's location and proximity to Hackett.  That is not valuable information, and frankly, no one cares.  What we do care about are locations for meetings, talking points, instructions for bombarding the media, instructions for doing productive research, organization brainstorming, etc."
 If you don't think that diaries on Swing State Project, Daily Kos, MyDD and others didn't provide mobilization, boots on the ground, useful information, links to media sites, loads of cash, etc., then I think you have had your head buried in the sand. (I'm being polite as I'm sure others will say you had your head somewhere else). It was various blogs that brought national attention to this race. As a matter of fact it was Tim Tagaris' blog "What a difference a day makes" that motivated me and many others to make their first of many donations to the Hackett campaign.

by Prison4BushCo on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 06:29:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Flaming bag of horse shit (none / 0)

a springboard for their own vulgar bourgeois aspirations.

What kind of ridiculous accusation is that? Was There Is No Crisis and ego trip? If Bob Brigham is a huckster then he's my huckster.

by Gary Boatwright on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 08:53:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Flaming bag of horse shit (none / 0)

Hold your horses! Is this harsh language coming from the same guy who was troll rating people for using "vulgarity" in other posts? Shame.
http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/
by Vote Hillary 2008 on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 02:59:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What an ass (1.00 / 0)

This is a flame war you dip shit. Different rules apply and when did horse shit become profanity? Your snark is as lame as your comments.
by Gary Boatwright on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 11:12:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What an ass (3.00 / 0)

Tsk, tsk. Anymore personal attacks and I will be forced to zero them out in the interest of upholding higher community standards.

A flame war! Ah, how juvenile. That explains why you would assume that "shit" is not profane -- indeed, likewise explaining why it is used so expressly on Nickelodeon.

Rules? Perhaps you'd like to point out the official MyDD rules that distinguish between levels of profanity and when such rules apply? Oh, there are no such rules? Conspiracy! It must be related to the DLC baby-eaters!

http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/
by Vote Hillary 2008 on Fri Aug 05, 2005 at 04:06:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What an ass (none / 0)

Btw, I know you're pretty slow on the news, but perhaps you noticed the recent uproar regarding Novak's "bullshit" outburst on CNN live tv that got him suspended. Perhaps you would like to argue that "horse shit" and "bull shit" are two very different things? Oh I know! If only Novak had said "that's horse shit" instead, we could all go about our business as usual.
http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/
by Vote Hillary 2008 on Fri Aug 05, 2005 at 05:49:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What an ass (none / 0)

If you want to be the PC Profanity cop who rags on anyone who uses a variant of "shit" be my guest. It will keep you very busy. Since you object to horseshit, how about bullshit? Is bullshit on your PC Correctness Radar screen?

Is it acceptable to ask someone "No shit?"

Jeesh.

by Gary Boatwright on Sat Aug 06, 2005 at 03:21:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Split personality? (none / 0)

It's about time you migrate to sensible netiquette. Next time keep this conversation in mind when you think about troll-rating someone for using profanity, Mr. PC Profanity cop.
http://operationyellowelephant.blogspot.com/
by Vote Hillary 2008 on Sat Aug 06, 2005 at 07:06:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

let us know (3.00 / 0)

Bob, in your piece, I hope you will explain what you and Tim did for the campaign. That is, and I'm sure this will be perceived as unfair, my sense from reading your posts is that you were not actually knocking on doors or organizing in the field at any point. Now thats fine, not everyone does that in a campaign; you were obviously working hard to raise a lot of money and encourage others to volunteer.

But where I'm going with this is, to put in perspective for those of us who were not there, why the hostility towards the DCCC? My understanding, from your writing and other stories on this campaign, is that the DCCC helped Hackett set up his field operation and office after he won the primary and then waited to see if it would be competitive before committing more money, which it did then.

So I wonder how accurate all the claims are here about how the "netroots" made this race competitive and others did not.

I mean, all those DC surrogates, that 300k ad buy, those 200 - 500 volunteers depending on whom you read, whose work was all that?

EVery campaign is full of folks who hang out, report to the outside world how great they are doing, and claim all credit and pass on all blame at the end. I'm pretty sure you're not one of those guys but to help us move past this divisive debate, and work towards a Democratic majority, can you give some perspective on who did what and why you expressed such hostility towards the DCCC and why you think you and Tim deserve so much of the credit?

Thats not intended to sound snarky; its to try to get a sense of whom to believe and whom to support in the future.

I've always made my donations to the DNC and the committees; last year I started donating to individual candidates. I'd like to know if supporting the committees is counter-productive, as you seem to suggest, or if some of the rhetoric here is overblown due to the tension of a close election?

by desmoulins on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 02:17:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: glad to see you trying for relevance (none / 0)

Fancy, you are absolutely clueless. You must have been out hiking in some remote place like outer Mongolia for the past flippin month if you didn't see the massive positive effect the blogosphere had on the Hackett campaign. No shit blogs can't vote, but the blogs sure as hell raised a shitload of money and put plenty of boots on the ground in OH-02. BTW, you wouldn't happen to be a staffer at the DLC or DCCC by any chance, would ya? Your attitude towards blogs leads me to believe so.
by Prison4BushCo on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:48:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: glad to see you trying for relevance (none / 0)

Please refer to my comments about the importance of this being a Hackett v. Schmidt race and not a DCCC v. NRCC race.  If we had gone in any earlier, NRCC would have drowned out Hackett's message.  By allowing Hackett a chance to establish himself (and raise his name ID to an amazing 70%+ in a few short weeks), he had an opportunity to define himself before others defined him.

Thanks for disagreeing in such a respectful manner.

by John Lapp on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:26:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: glad to see you trying for relevance (none / 0)

Thanks for disagreeing in such a respectful manner.

Your failure to admit fault and attempt to claim credit for what we did is awful.

But ohmigod Bob cursed!

by SocialNetworker on