I attended a Cegelis event on Tuesday, and she delivered a forceful speech wherein she discussed a desperate need for leadership in Congress.  No more centrists, no more triangulators, she said.  Poll after poll supports her position, and voters become energized when they hear her progressive message.  I believe Christine is right, and we should congratulate her for implementing Dean's 50 State Strategy before it became a fashion.

I dont' think we can wait from the leadership on high.  The solution has to be and must be from the bottom up.  Sacrifices need to be made on the local level.  We have fantastic communication tools now that can link small pockets of activity across the country.  The Republican playbook isn't secret.  We  know what they do and how they do it.  Democrats on local levels need to start building social networks.  Social networks are the core of the Republican dominance.  It's about getting involved in bowling leauges, PTA, etc.,  Putnam was right.  

isn't necessary.

All we have to do is run against D.C., period.

What percentage of the country even knows that Congress is completely GOP-controlled? Not enough. But in this case that might work to our advantage.

"Throw the bums out."

I think Dems need some simple fun activities so politics isn't just doom and gloom. Fun. Not fun at the expense of Republicans but fun that builds you up, fun that makes more of yourself than less of your opponent.

The GOP wants a warped politics because the issues are against them. When the can poison the atmosphere to the point when Democrats turn off they have already won.

I don't know if it's face painting for children or oompah bands or having activist bowling leagues. But it's got to be something - I get burnt from all the complex and deadly hard issues and the tepid and mendacious response of so many in D.C..

I agree 100% that we have to run against DC Dems.  I've mentioned Marcy Winograd running against Jane Harman, for example.

It's amazing that we have people complaining we "shouldn't waste our resources" challenging someone like Harman--who co-engineered a coverup in the House Intelligence Committee the week before the Republicans engineered one in the Senate.

Look, if the issue is defending the Constitution, and that's something that even draws significant Republican support, not to mention the moderates, then Harman is on the wrong side, and she has to be be challenged.

Indeed, it's all too easy to see how giving money to Rahm Emmanuel is "wasiting our resources," if by "us" you mean non-DC Democrats.  i.e. 99.94% of the party.  We do not need another 25 Jane Harmans in Congress.  We need another -25 of them!

BTW, Marcy is President of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles.  Organizing progressives within the Party is clearly part of the solution as well.

Beyond that, we need to develop our infrastructure outside the party as well.  Washington will be the last place to change. The very last place to get the message.  So we need to look at a multi-pronged approach that takes a wide variety of forms to build up from the grassroots.

(1) Read "Crashing the Gate"
(2) Do everything it says there

Seriously. It might not be a perfect plan, but I think we'd be much better off.

the eunuchs on the right NEVER give up. We can not either, period.

Taking back our party from those out of touch politicians will take time and a concerted effort. So, let us be realistic and just say this is a four year plan and get comfortable.

In the mean time, vote Democrat, give money to Lamont, get active locally, and get active in the state. Our first priority is to work with what we have; a plethora of weak national "leaders". Let us achieve victory in November despite these "leaders" worst efforts. First and foremost we must keep focused upon the viral GOP this year.

Running against those bums in DC -- in your party and the other party -- sounds like a good way to go.  Even Bush likes to pretend to be a DC outsider, ludicrous as that is.  And when disapproval of Congress is so high, a straight-talkin', DC-bashin' candidate can excite people enough to bring them to the polls.  (One of the problems with Ciro Rodriguez was that he could in no way be considered a shake-up to the status quo in DC; he was just a better DC insider than Cuellar.)

People aren't dumb and apathetic because we're born that way.  It's a slow gradual process.  Democrats need to wake-up and realize that republicans have been waging war on the idea of good government for the past 40 years.  Apathy is grounded in the concept that there is nothing of value.  Look at the themes republicans use.  Government is bad, it is too big, it is dumb, it can't compete with the private market, it is inefficient etc.,  What pride is there in the country we live in?  Aside from sanctimonious flag waving, yellow ribbons etc., how much good feeling is there about our national government, state government or local government?  People aren't happy about the current status.  Dems can offer a better vision.

I think the key issue in Matt's post is whether or not people will show up to vote. Having a candidate that inspires people to show up at the polls is one part of the equation. Having the infrastructure to reach people is another. All of us are part of that infrastructure.

The next time you go to a speech or a rally - BRING A FRIEND. The next time you read a great article or blog post - SEND IT TO A FRIEND. Are you planning on walking your neighborhood knocking on doors for you your favorite candidate? BRING A FRIEND.

People are most likely to be swayed by a friend or family member. If you have friends or family members who are dissaffected and disinterested then change their minds.

Your analysis of TX-28 is incorrect. Rodriguez did not lose because his base failed to show up. In fact, San Antonio was up 4-5% from 2004. He lost because Cuellar stole some of Ciro's voters, for whatever reason, probably because Ciro was and still is a very poor candidate (although a fantastic guy).

The base may be disappointed in DC Democratic aggressiveness right now, and I agree that running against DC is a great strategy for challengers, but we also have a lot of incumbents who need to win as well. So it's kind of a self-limiting strategy.

I don't think we need to do much. Just hang in there, make everything we say as candidates national in nature, emphasize that we're Democrats, and above all else don't spend any time or effort slamming each other.

Ken Salazar is perfecting it. He doesn't seem to realize he'll never please the reactionary [R]'s here in CO, but he can't pull the trigger on doing the things that will build his support among progressives and independents: standing up for the rule of law and competence in government.

I also remember Kerry on MTP prior to the election when Tim Russert asked him if he was liberal.

Kerry hemmed and hawed.

I don't have any answers right now, just complaints.

By all means, if the candidate represents your values sufficiently, give her or him your support.

In my case, my "litmus test" involves roughly a dozen issues, and if a candidate makes the right noises about 2 or 3 of them, they'll get my support. Hit half of the buttons and they get my little bit of money and, if local, time too.

On the other hand, if they are not doing so, look for someone who is and reward that person, who is doing you a huge service by volunteering to represent your values in the public, civic domain during election time, with your support.

In my case, locally these people tend to be Greens. But I understand the Social Democrats have some very good and thoughtful people out there, sometimes drowned out by some of their more marginal supporters. At the very least, they speak to our values, unlike the vast majority of Dems.

It doesn't get better by playing GOP-lite. It doesn't get better playing the dog-eared incrementalist card, cooperating with moneyed interests and getting crumbs from the table or, as is most recently the case, crap once the table's meal has been digested. (How else to characterize Democrat complicity in the GOP assault on working Americans over the past 6 years...)

You'd think 30 years of ZERO progressive accomplishment in Washington on the part of the Democrats would have taught that hidebound party something, but it hasn't. They won't shit, but they won't get off the pot. There's only one way to get 'em off the pot, and that's to not humor them with your support anymore.

We, the non-elected members of the Democratic Party, can make statements of what the Democratic Party stands for by writing letters to the editor, calling in to talk shows, etc., and stating that these are the "core values" of our party:

-  Equality of opportunity;

•  Jobs for those who can work;
  
•  Security for those who need it;
  
•  The ending of special privilege for the few;
  
•  The preservation of civil liberties for all;
  
•  The enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress;
  
•  Widening the opportunities for adequate medical care;
  
•  the principle of tax payments in accordance with ability to pay;
  
•  a returned commitment to freedom of speech and expression;
  
•  freedom to worship, or not, as the person chooses;
  
•  freedom from want, by way of economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants;
  
•  freedom from fear.

This radical set of ideals was postulated by one of the most popular Presidents in US history--Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

It is because our Party leaders, in their quest to react to polls and pressure from corporate donors/handlers/sponsors, have strayed so far from these ideals, that we find our Party to be divided, ineffective, cowed, and corrupted.

It is up to us to re-make this Party.  We've started--Dean is assisting with the reformulation of the Party at the state and local levels.  In Colorado, we elected a state Chair who is anything but an insider.  Candidates who are far more progressive than those of 10 years ago are more frequently stepping up and running serious campaigns for office.

The Party machinery has a certain bureaucratic inertia which will resist this change mightily.  DLC types, and self-aggrandizing hacks like James Carville, will try to insist on business as usual.  But, the Netroots, provided we do not wallow in our own depression, can make the Democratic Party once again into a party of the people.

Matt et al. -

Have you checked in on the Online Progressive Caucus lately? Remember Matt front-paged a post on it encouraging everyone to sign up. Matt is also a representive.

Well the Online Progressive Caucus is in danger of becoming a lot less progressive and a lot more mainstream Dem. They rejected endorsing Cegelis in IL-6 (despite the wishes of their constituents including those living in the district), they still haven't endorsed Ned Lamont despite support that reaches their threshold (despite not having the support of the leading representitive, Garret Gruener), now the latest thing is that there is opposition to formally saying that intelligent design shouldn't be taught in science classes.

We talk a lot here about grassroots organizing. Well here is an organization that is simple to join and that doesn't require anything more than sitting at your computer and registering your opinion and STILL the progressive voices are not being heard there.

If you are a member please reevaluate your participation. Let me also suggest that you vote for wegerje. He, at least, is committed to making the OPC something that is meaningful and progressive.

First we have to realize that at best we make up a quarter of a very big and diverse country.  Second, I think that in their hearts, many Senators agree with much of what we say but keep bumping up against point #1.  Third, I personally believe there is a quantum change in behavior between having 49 votes in the Senate, and 51.  Right now, Harry Reid has no committee chairs to offer or withhold to enforce discipline.

What we really need is a way for our leaders to communicate to us, "We know what we're doing, we agree with you, and we've got a plan and you may have to wait three or six months."  If there were such plans, and there were such communications, and we could trust them, episodes like this would go much more smoothly.  Of course, point 1 is: there has to be a plan.

The Republicans long ago mastered speaking to their base in code.  Maybe we should think about it.  Not as pure "me-too-ism", but because it's a sound strategy.