In our contemporary political era of message control, bland party platforms, and a media that loves to play "gotcha!" with any politician who is unfortunate enough so say something that is neither bland nor on message, it may be difficult for elected officials and major candidates to realize that the simple act of saying what many of your constituents believe can generate a lot of love on your behalf. This is especially the case for Democratic politicians, who for too long now have been trained to act as though the ideas, beliefs and hopes of the activists and the base of their own party are a liability when discussed in public. In fact, since 1992, Democratic politicians have learned that they can actually be loved in the media and rise within the ranks of their own party if the publicly repudiate the beliefs, statements, and ideas of their activist supports and their voting base. The conventional wisdom is that all potential Democratic leaders need a "Sista Soulja" moment where they distance themselves from one constituency in their own party or another. In order to get elected or loved by the established news media, Democrats are supposed to argue that their own party is too soft on defense, is not respectful enough of religion, that we don't understand the South, that we are too liberal, that city elites run our party and disrespect the traditions and values of rural and small town America, etc. Not only are we not supposed to say what our voting base and activist supporters believe, we are actually supposed to only repudiate those people.

Much of the mystery surrounding how the netroots choose both their favorite and least favorite Democrats can be solved by understanding the problem I described in the paragraph above. While it is depressing to think that it has become a rare event for a Democratic politician to actually utter what is on the mind of progressive activists, it should not be a surprise to anyone that when activists hear a Democratic politician say what is on many of our minds, that politician will quickly become a favorite among the netroots. Whether that politician is left, right or center matters little. Robert Byrd is a favorite among the netroots because of what he said in the Senate during the debate on the Iraq war vote in September and October of 2002. Jack Murtha remains an online favorite because of his willingness to publicly declare a full withdrawal plan from Iraq. Paul Hackett became popular online for his blunt speech about "chicken-hawks," the Christian right, and his aggressive posture toward those who tried to smear his service record in Iraq.

Hackett, Byrd and Murtha are not exactly a progressive trio, but they are still favorites within the online community. Certainly, many progressives are also favorites online: Barbara Boxer, John Conyers, Russ Feingold, and Howard Dean (although I recognize it is debatable which group Howard Dean is closer too in terms of ideology). However, when anyone looks at this list of netroots favorites, the obvious connection between them is not an ideological stance, but instead a willingness to take public positions that have wide support within the Democratic activist and voting bases, but which very few prominent Democrats are willing to publicly sign on with. For example, public surveys have shown roughly 70% self-identifying Democrats supporting the censure of President Bush, yet few Democrats in the Senate came out in support of censure. For nearly a year now, public polling has shown between 80%-90% of self-identifying Democrats in support of either partial or total withdrawal from Iraq, but getting Democrats to come out in support of Murtha's withdrawal plan was like trying to pull teeth on a cow. In fact, in both cases, more Democrats in congress came out publicly distancing themselves from Feingold and Murtha than came out supporting them.

I bring all of this up because on Monday evening, I was able to meet, observe, and chat with Ned Lamont for over two hours. During that time, I was consistently filled with the same feeling of joy and liberation that I distinctly remember experiencing numerous times during Howard Dean's campaign in 2003-4, and that I have often felt over the past year as Russ Feingold has led on one issue after another. Listening to Ned conduct a radio interview as we drove to an event in Hartford that evening, I felt a sense of joy and liberation at hearing Ned say that he was glad more Democrats in Congress were starting to speak about the need to withdraw our forces from Iraq, but that he wished as a party we could speak with more unity and clarity in favor of Representative Murtha's plan. I felt a sense of joy and liberation when he stated said that President Bush had broken the law with his warrant-less wiretapping of American citizens, and believed that Senator Feingold's censure resolution was an excellent means of holding him accountable for his actions. I felt a sense of joy and liberation when he argued that the war was an incredible waste of our national resources, and how the $250 billion could have been spent investing in our citizens to guarantee universal early childhood education and universal health care. I felt a sense of joy and liberation when he stated that we needed to take action so help insure that people have more confidence in our election system, and that the many problems people experience with voting, including vote counting, needed to be fixed.

Ned was absolutely rock-solid on the phone interview, and just concerning what he said, but also how he said it. His words were not forced--you had a strong sense that whatever he said, he meant it. Both on the phone and in the quick breaks he had to chat with us, he was pretty funny, making jokes about the Monkees, cell phones, and the disastrous car they had for another reporter who came up to follow the campaign. He was clam and sure of himself, smoothly answering each question without a stumble, and not panicking when the cell phone gave out for a few seconds during the interview. He finished the interview in the parking lot of the event, and less than a minute later was already out shaking hands and talking up people in the crowd that had gathered to hear him speak.

The event that night was the forty-fifth event Ned had attended since mid-February meeting with local party activists. As you will be able to see from the video Liz and I are putting together, it was well attended (thirty or forty people) and Ned was very well received. The anger against Lieberman is palpable among activists in Connecticut, and considering how much applause he received, I sensed that everyone else in the room felt the same sense of joy and liberation upon hearing Ned's message that I had felt in the car. There was a wave of joy and liberation sweeping over the room, even over the simple belief that there is nothing wrong with contested primaries, and that as Democrats we are allowed to hold a kitchen table discussion within out own party.

At the event that night, and during the car ride back to Meriden, one thought kept going through my mind: this is it. This is what I believe. This is the candidate for me. This is a campaign for me. Even though Ned has already given $300K of his own money to this campaign, it is still being fueled by the sort of grassroots politics that I uphold as an ideal. While Lieberman runs TV ads, and racks up big-name endorsements, the Lamont campaign is holding numerous local events, signing up more than 2,500 volunteers in Connecticut alone, and using the petitioning process to build a massive ground game. While Lieberman appears on Sunday shows and Fox News, the Lamont team is building a huge online presence.

Even though this is only one Democratic primary, it can make the sort of changes in the progressive movement and Democratic Party that I so strongly desire. It will go a long way toward ending the practice of taking the activist base for granted. It will go a long way toward teaching Democrats, especially those in blue and purple districts, to not facilitate Republican narratives and policies. It will show that the netroots have matured to the point where we can work with many other forces in the progressive ecosystem at once to create positive political results on a very large scale. It also has the potential to create a new leading voice for Democrats and progressives, as Ned Lamont takes his place among the list of netroots favorites I gave a few paragraphs above.

Actually, in some ways, this campaign has already achieved those goals. All you really need to do in order to change the behavior of politicians is to convince them that you represent an important constituency that can bring real media, real resources, and as such can cause real headaches. With Lamont raising hundreds of thousands of dollars, signing up thousands of volunteers, and with a powerful new media on his side, it is pretty clear from Lieberman's behavior that he is already quite scared. He wouldn't be trying to strong-arm delegates at the Connecticut state convention if he wasn't scared. He wouldn't be going on the air four months from the primary if he wasn't scared. He wouldn't be lining up establishment support if he wasn't scared. He definitely would not be threatening to leave the party if he wasn't scared.

This is it. This is a huge opportunity to change the Democratic Party and the progressive ecosystem. No Democrat is going to want to become the Joe Lieberman of 2008. This will change the behavior of a large number of Democrats. It fact, it probably already has changed the behavior of some Democrats. And it is all wrapped up in a real grassroots and netroots campaign, a strong candidate who speaks well and is easy to like, and a truly progressive vision that is unafraid to show itself.

Liz and I look forward to sharing some video with you soon. In the meantime, I hope that you will continue to give your much-appreciated support to the Lamont campaign. Your support for Ned Lamont has changed, and will continue to change, the Democratic Party. Keep showing them that you have something to offer, and it won't be long before they start taking you more seriously.

Volunteer for Ned Lamont
Donate to Ned Lamont