Message from Dean on 50-state Strategy & Organizing

Governor Dean just sent this message out -- it's an update on the letter he sent Monday about the 50-state strategy and putting our money where our mouth is.

The new state rolling out is Kansas; four more can be ready to go next week if the resources are there.

Full text below the fold.

Dear Fellow Democrat,

Monday I wrote to you about our progress growing the party from the ground up, and put the timetable in your hands. Democrats everywhere overwhelmingly responded to the challenge. The goal was $250,000 by Friday to add another state to the program -- you hit it in only 48 hours.

That means organizers and other resources can be immediately put on the ground in one more state: Kansas. It's a so-called red state where we know we can win. We have won state-wide before -- and building an organized, permanent grassroots base will help elect Democrats up and down the ballot.

Your response made it clear that you want to move fast. So I spoke yesterday with the staff leading this unprecedented national organizing effort. I asked them to speed up the process, and they told me that if we have the resources we could have four more states ready to announce as early as next week.

This means a bigger commitment to fund the program. But if we can raise half a million dollars through next week we can start hiring and training organizers in four new states:

www.democrats.org/challenge

Several of the organizers you have hired came on the payroll this week. They will be traveling to Washington soon for training. And they will be heading back to their home states to reach out to the state parties, grassroots leaders, and ordinary people who want to get involved.

We saw this week what we can do when we organize. Millions of Americans persuaded seven Republican Senators to abandon their leadership's drive for one-party rule. They joined Democrats to do what was right and protect check and balances.

Right-wing demagogues had declared their intention to win this fight at all costs -- this loss will loosen the death grip the right-wing has on the Republican Party.

We did this with organization -- with our petitions, phone calls and events. Most importantly, we reached out to each other and to people in our communities and mobilized them, too.

But we need to do more. It's not enough to stop the fringe GOP leadership issue by issue. Building infrastructure and organization in every state will help us do more to set the agenda -- and provide the base to elect Democrats.

Can we go into four more states as early as next week? It's up to you:

www.democrats.org/challenge

So far you have put this program to work in eight states: Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, West Virginia and Wyoming. Today you put a ninth into the program: Kansas.

Our mandate is to take every state to the next level -- building capacity, building experience, and building community among Democrats who want to make an impact.

Please make a contribution to get four more states moving now:

www.democrats.org/challenge

The faster we do this, the more prepared we will be for elections this year and next, and the more people we can bring into the process.

But the ability to make it happen is in your hands.

Thank you.

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.


Tags: (all tags)

Comments

65 Comments

well
I just gave another 25$.  That's 50$ in the last two weeks...being a student I think that's it for a while.
by JoelK in AZ 2005-05-25 11:18AM | 0 recs
I Gave
In honor of Dean's appearance on MTP, I sent in $25 and will be spending more to attend a Dean fundraiser in June.

Joe Rospars, it's always good to hear you talk Dean.

by donna in evanston 2005-05-25 12:45PM | 0 recs
Re: I Gave
Thanks Donna, great to hear from you!
by Joe Rospars 2005-05-25 12:55PM | 0 recs
Why
With the recent surrender of the D's on the judges after thier record of laying down on the Credit Card bill, the Conquest of Iraq, the appointment of Torture Gonzolez and to many others to mention why should I do anything for an organization that seems to be more interested in fattening the paychecks of consultants then fighting for the good of america.
The D's are behaving like the Washington Senators against the Globetrotters. They are putting on a show of competeing but we all know in the end if they get anywhere close to winning they will roll over and quit.
by Rational 2005-05-25 01:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Why
I'm with you Rational. I stopped giving to any Democratic organization. I'm saving my contributions for progressive Democratic candidates like Cegalis and Penacchio. Let the party fund their own organization effort. I'll help individual candidates that support my values and issues.

Dean's got the right idea, but the party keeps promoting conservative Dems and trying to force progressive Dems out of the primaries. I'm not going to encourage the party itself in any way, shape or form.

In addition to individual progressive candidates, I am making contributions to Move On and Frontier Pac. I'll consider giving to the party when Joe Lieberman shuts up and they get theirselves straight on Social Security.

by Gary Boatwright 2005-05-25 09:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Why
Dean doesn't control the Senators.  I'd argue that giving the money to Dean is actually a better investment than giving to an ideal candidate.  Giving it to Dean invests in a permanent ground network that will help the Democratic party in all elections.  Give it to an ideal candidate, and if they lose, the money wasn't as effective.

Get a more powerful Democratic grassroots army in place in all states, and you'll see more powerful progressive candidates.  They'll be able to better compete against the corporate-financed Democrats.

by tunesmith 2005-05-26 01:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Why
i'd have to agree with tunesmith here.  at least i know that my dnc donations will be well spent with dean at the helm.
by annatopia 2005-05-26 07:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Why
Blaming Dean for what Senators do is like blaming Galileo for veneral disease.
by Phoenix Woman 2005-05-26 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Why
Arrrgh.  The word is "venereal".
by Phoenix Woman 2005-05-26 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Why
I think when it comes to Senators the correct term is venerable venereal disease.
by Gary Boatwright 2005-05-26 12:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Why
LMAO
by yitbos96bb 2005-05-27 04:57AM | 0 recs
We have the power
Here in Washington state we are not only fighting to keep our democratically elected governor Gregoire safe from the GOP trial lawyers and Sorelooserman Rosi but we need to focus on turning the eastern parts of the states blue. I can't believe why some of the eastern parts still vote republican since the farm economy and manufacturing were gutted by Bush and co. We need to focus on winning the three house seats that are occupied by Republicans. Two are freshman and one was pretty close. We also need to keep our majority in the state house and state senate but we need to build the Democratic party in the non urban areas in the state.
by Democracy For Puget Sound Dot Com 2005-05-25 01:35PM | 0 recs
are you still w/ dfa or now dnc
by jasmine 2005-05-25 03:16PM | 0 recs
Re: are you still w/ dfa or now dnc
Well now that the former head of DFA is the head of the DNC I don't see a problem volunteering to help both Democracy for Washington and The Washington State Democratic Party. Most of my local PCOs and officers are also go to the DFA meetups.
by Democracy For Puget Sound Dot Com 2005-05-25 08:03PM | 0 recs
Dean in Georgia
Dean is visiting all 50 states in turn... just bought a ticket for the Georgia reception.  What a nice change for one of the redder of the red states, actually getting noticed by the DNC.  
by evap 2005-05-25 04:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Dean in Georgia
you're right. the key to really bad government
is to assume that states and people
are out of play just because a policy wonk
somewhere says they are. that was the
problem with communism too: some
person in the politburo decides
a state doesn't need something and
they just dry up when they have to change.

Dean never really visited Ga when he campaigned.
thanks to said policy wonks surrounding him.
Only Kerry visited, and he rocked pretty
hard. He spoke at the tabernacle.

I imagine this meeting Dean is going to be surrounded by a little clique of people
that will tell him where to go and
what to do. Sigh..

by turnerbroadcasting 2005-05-25 05:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Dean in Georgia
Dean never really visited Ga when he campaigned.

YES HE DID!!!

DEAN went to Georgia about three times... this DNC strategy is his presidential strategy... A 50 State campaign

by Parker 2005-05-25 10:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Dean in Georgia
Just for clarification (not doubting you, I just don't know)... when did he go.  Provide a like or something, work to strengthen what you say.
by yitbos96bb 2005-05-27 05:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Dean in Georgia
I'm not sure what the total numbers of visits were, but I know that the folks in Georgia put together one of the best grassroots organizations the campaign had.

As to specific events/rallies, I do remember that Generation Dean launched with a series of events in Georgia (gotta love that 2 a.m. timestamp on the blog post, too).

by Joe Rospars 2005-05-27 07:36AM | 0 recs
Georgia & the DNC
I'm going to the Dean reception in Atlanta, as well.  Against my better judgement, as a matter of fact.  After last election cycle I swore I wouldn't line the pockets of the DNC again until they showed up here in Georgia for more than a cash grab.  Alas, I do always credit Dean for reviatlizing my activism so I broke my rule this time.  Let's hope this is just the first of many visits to Georgia.  And, let's also hope that sometime he'll come down to speak to the people, not just the checkbooks. A thirty minute rally in a park would be fantastic for the not-yet-ready to pay folks.
by CatherineAtlanta 2005-05-25 04:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Georgia & the DNC
Ever since the Dean campaign blew all that
money on UPS'ing everything instead of
union printer and emailing the materials,
and those awful commercials and ran through
40 million in one month and a half, in Iowa -
I've held off.

Dean is going to have to convince me that he
truly is the kind of numbers guy his
record says he is, when it comes to a
national scene. All of Vermont runs
less money that Cobb county.

by turnerbroadcasting 2005-05-25 05:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Georgia & the DNC
do you just pull this shit out of your ass
by Parker 2005-05-25 10:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Georgia & the DNC
parker how do you have this much time to blog with Dean's dick securely in your mouth at all times?  How can you see the screen?  give it a rest.  let someone speak about dean without immediately hopping in and yelling and carrying on.  jesus.
by Brendan UFCW 2005-05-26 09:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Georgia & the DNC
It's an honest question, if poorly worded. Is there a source for what turnerbroadcasting says in his comment, or are we just supposed to take the word of someone who has clearly blogged while stoned in the past for gospel?

And just because Parker insults people, that doesn't mean that you should, too.

by craverguy 2005-05-26 09:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Georgia & the DNC
Your beef is partly with Joe Trippi:

-- He had DFA use his own ad company and overcharged for crappy ads

-- He let Gephardt suck him into an expensive scorched-earth match while failing to notice the push-polling and robocalling being done by Kerry's people until it was too late.

by Phoenix Woman 2005-05-26 11:56AM | 0 recs
Infrastructure
Rebuilding the party is going to take a long time, but getting party infrastructure in every state is a good first step. Dean is delivering on his promise. I'm looking forward to 2006.

BTW, Rospars, where you been?

by michael in chicago 2005-05-25 05:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Infrastructure
Been here all the time, man.
by Joe Rospars 2005-05-26 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Infrastructure
Then post more. I like your writing. You were one of the first I looked forward to reading back in the Dean days.
by michael in chicago 2005-05-28 11:36AM | 0 recs
Defined targets, fun with graphics, etc.
Hi, Joe -- echoing what Donna said above, it's great to see you here!

It was great to get an update from the Gov in 48 hours saying that enough funding had come in for Kansas.

Since you know some of the practices that worked well for DFA1 - having a set $$$ target, graphical updates, interaction with blog posts - I'm just wondering why that's not being done for this campaign.  If the DNC disclosed the next four states in line, for instance, you could have people pick what states to donate to and make it a bit of a contest...or integrate posts on the DNC blog with updates about how the fundraising campaign is going.  For instance, now that Kansas is being funded, maybe you can have guest posts from people from Kansas, etc.

I think reaching out to people here on MyDD and elsewhere is great, I just miss some of the more interactive features of the old DFA1 fundraising taht really made people feel like they were part of something important.  I'm hoping you can bring that spirit to your work with the DNC!  Thanks for everything you're doing.  :-)

by Maura in CT 2005-05-25 05:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Defined targets, fun with graphics, etc.
Agreed; whenever I do a fundraising email (on an admitedly smaller scale, but still a lot of people and money) having a set money goal, breaking down what you get for your donation, and updating folks as you raise the money makes a big difference.
by Steve P 2005-05-25 06:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Defined targets, fun with graphics, etc.
Maura's idea is great that would give people incentive which state they would try to donate and maked the fundriasing interesting. I donated $50 last Sat. Hopefully, the DNC will provide some updates on how the infrastructure building is progerssing.
by ayoosilver 2005-05-25 07:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Defined targets, fun with graphics, etc.
Well Maura, it seems that the magic of the Dean campaign pretty much evaporated when it was over... That same spirit which you and I got intoxicated by does not seem to be alive at Dean's new DNC or at DFA 3... But my nostalgia for the promise of those heady days is still very strong...

How can you keep lightning in a bottle?

by Vermonter 2005-05-26 09:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Defined targets, fun with graphics, etc.
yeah right...

DFA after Dean fizzled into one of the most powerful Democratic organizations.

by Parker 2005-05-26 12:53PM | 0 recs
Powerful? Compared to what?
DFA is not really leading anything...

They may have a big email list and sure they helped funnel some notable chunks of cash to candidates in the last election cycle...

And they're commited to funding campaign trainings, and helping to grow the grassroots... But is it really for anything more than to be used by the DNC?

There's little magic in it anymore...  

Partly, that's related to the fact that only a Presidential race gets people really amped up...

And partly, it's because DFA has ditched some of its personality and its most effective gimmicks...

Remember the bat?

by Vermonter 2005-05-27 05:03AM | 0 recs
They still have the bat.
The bat:

https://secure.democracyforamerica.com/modules/outreach/login.php

(For some reason, I can't make it a link.)

by craverguy 2005-05-27 05:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Powerful? Compared to what?
That's rubbish.

The heart of DFA is empowerment politics. People took "you have the power" quite seriously. And now we see the impact.

DFA is not just Burlington. DFA is thousands of energized activists from coast-to-coast reminding us all that politics is ultimately local.

DFA has spawned hundreds of groups across the country that are actively involved in progressive change and Democratic Party activities. Just as one example (of many), DFA Meetups have proliferated since November 2.  

DFA --- not just Burlington --- is the most vibrant energy right now inside/outside the Party. Can you name a more effective group, BOTH locally AND nationally?

That's what I thought.

by Fiat Lux 2005-06-02 12:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Defined targets, fun with graphics, etc.
Maura, The DNC has a totally different set of resources and technology than the campaign did, or DFA has. On some counts that's a huge advantage, on others it means there's some work to be done -- it's just a different situation.

Your point is a good one -- it's well-taken and well-known, and you will see results as things evolve in the coming weeks and months. The important thing for right now is that the folks at least understand what's happening -- even if it's only in plain text! And thank you for everything YOU'RE doing -- you all are doing great work in VA.

by Joe Rospars 2005-05-26 02:04PM | 0 recs
Who's running the field and who are you hiring?
Call it professional curiousity, but who's the person running these field folks and what's their background?  And what's the background of the people you're hiring?  It's a tough job - particularly when you're one organizer in a big geographic location - with a good amount of turnover, so I'm curious to know who these folks are that are being sent out into the states.
by Steve P 2005-05-25 06:18PM | 0 recs
And how is the $$ being disbursed?
Having seen 200 interns hired in Iowa for the Dean presidential campaign without great field leadership managing and training them, it makes me nervous to see all these states rolled out so fast.  I know we don't have time to waste in building the party, but I sure hope it's being done well.

I would like to see the DNC operate like a venture capital firm or a foundation -- the DNC could ask states to submit applications for funds and could coach states on those applications.  The applications could require grassroots input from across the state and a specific grassroots plan for building the local party.  Just that process would do a lot in each state.

by susan 2005-05-25 10:06PM | 0 recs
Howard Dean Screwed Up in California last month
I completely agree with you.  Rebuilding makes a lot of sense, when it is done on a project basis. In fact, I can't imagine any other strategy that would work on a State level.

I am not giving to the DNC because I don't agree with what I saw Howard Dean doing in California last month.  

Most States in the Far West give the real power in a local political party to its voter base, and not to professionals who run a party organization. In the last fifteen years, California party professionals have found a way around this. They solicit much larger contributions from corporate donors than they used to -- this lets them literally purchase their way free from their voting base. As one consequence, voter turnout has dropped steadily because voters increasingly feel powerless to affect what their party is doing.  THIS is what needs to be reformed in all Far Western States.

When Dean came here last month, he talked only to office-holders, major candidates and large donors. He  made himself invisible -- literally invisible -- to the voting base of the Calfiornia Democratic Party.  This strengthens exactly what needs to be weakened, and weakens exactly the people who save the party organization from itself.

Dean also did this in Washington State and in Nevada. Bad plan; Howard.

SO:  No money for Howard until he sees the light.

sc

by scribble 2005-05-26 11:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Howard Dean Screwed Up in California last mont
Can you prove this?  

The DFAers out in California tell a different tale.  TOTALLY different.

Is it just because he didn't talk to YOU?

by Phoenix Woman 2005-05-26 11:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Howard Dean Screwed Up in California last mont
I'm a California DFAer. As I recall there was a video conference webcast that we listened to from somebody's house. I can't say I was terribly impressed.
by Gary Boatwright 2005-05-26 02:07PM | 0 recs
Whatta crock.
Well, I am sure Howard personally is going to miss your ten bucks, scribble.

However, you are totally off base with regard to the CDP, but then again, that is pretty much what one hears from PDA folks these days, even as they attempt to coopt Dean people.

by nanorich 2005-05-26 04:52PM | 0 recs
and another thing...
By the way, I have been active in the CDP for at least 12 years, NOTHING you have written in your post coincides of how the CDP is structured.

The California State Democratic Party is THE model of a grassroots run state party...and if you can pick your nose, you can have a say in state policy.

by nanorich 2005-05-26 05:24PM | 0 recs
So fast?
Heh -- I know people who are whining that we should already be in all fifty states by now.

Considering how the best part of the existing DFA organization stayed together long after the primaries and is still ready to go, I expect that getting these first few states set up wasn't all that difficult.  (Oh, and it helps that the people who were largely responsible for the Iowa debacle -- like Joe Trippi -- aren't in charge of anything anymore.)

by Phoenix Woman 2005-05-26 12:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
I can't recall the person's name offhand. She's a woman who worked at the DGA previously. From what I've heard inside the DNC, she works well as a figurehead, but what I've heard inside the beltway is criticism about her because she's pretty hands-off.

If that's the case, it's probably the best course of action. I don't think hiring a national field staff in the DNC gets us anywhere. I'd rather see it happen inside the state organizations. So if they screw up, the accountability is at the point of where a change of leadership will make a difference.

by Jerome Armstrong 2005-05-26 03:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
Exactly.  If we are really committed to building state parties, a national field staff would be redundant now, and it really could be built at the last minute with no ill-effects (as opposed to our current strategy of building EVERYTHING at the last minute).

Here's an offensive statements, but one I believe: the kind of people who make good field organizers are exactly not the kind of people who do a good job climbing DC career ladders.  I hope like hell this project is being staffed with young, wild-eyed provincial types who can't wait to work 90-hour weeks.  If the DNC is doing the hiring (and not the state parties) I hope they're not screwing it up.

by Patton 2005-05-26 07:05AM | 0 recs
Those were the kind of people who ran...
...McGovern's primary campaign. Press at the time often compared them, in a positive way, to Mao's guerilla warriors. McGovern's primary campaign was possibly the best ever, in terms of how he went from having zero chance to win to being the nominee without significantly enhancing his cash flow or moving to the center.

Obviously, his example (in this regard) is one that bears following.

by craverguy 2005-05-26 07:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Those were the kind of people who ran...
And those kind of people are out there in abundance right now.  I worked with dozens of them in the 2004 election, and they're all over in peace and environmental orgnizations.  They are not, however, interning in their uncles' K-Street firms.
by Patton 2005-05-26 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
That's good info, but from a practical perspective it also raises more questions.

Are they hiring really experienced people who know the ropes?  If not, a one time training at the start isn't going to cut it; who checks in with the organizers in a state, helps them out and shares experience, and holds them accountable for the work they're doing?

And then who checks in with the different states and makes sure everybody is on the same page?

by Steve P 2005-05-26 10:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
Are they hiring each others kids? I wonder if paternalism isn't a big problem. Do these positions get filled with relatives and kids with B.A.s in Political Science? I interviewed for one of these jobs once. About ten minutes into the interview I was asked where I pictured myself in ten years. I just stared at them for about ten seconds. Stood up, grabbed my resume and left.

I've learned that places who use inane questions to hire people end up hiring inane people. I don't do well in those environments. Are these organizations dumping grounds for unemployable relatives of politicians?

by Gary Boatwright 2005-05-26 02:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
I'm not to concerned about this.  Field organizing isn't an easy job.
by Steve P 2005-05-26 08:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
I think the key part is that folks aren't being "sent out into the states". They will be local people mostly, not outsiders coming in from DC or somewhere. The idea is to help build a permanent infrastructure that doesn't have the high turnover usually associated with campaigns (there's work for a few months every 2 or 4 years, and then the whole thing disappears). The other goal is transparency -- as folks come on board in the first few states, they will be working with the state parties, reaching out into the community and telling the story of what's going on to the rest of us.
by Joe Rospars 2005-05-26 02:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
Is the DNC building state parties, or is the DNC building an additional organization in each state? Who do these people answer to, the DNC or the state parties, or does that depend on the state?  
by nascardem 2005-05-26 05:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
The needs in each state are different, so the program will be different in each state -- that goes without saying. There's no one size fits all. That's why teams of folks, and the Governor, are taking the time to talk to the state and local people to find out where the national party can help. It's also worth mentioning that it's a "state party partnership" program -- this isn't some superstructure that comes down from Washington or Mars or anywhere else. Different pieces of the total party infrastructure fighting with one another or duplicating work won't get us where we need to go. The key is cooperation with and support for the state parties and the grassroots.
by Joe Rospars 2005-05-27 07:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
I am kind of surprised people who were really involved in the race for Chair aren't aware that this program was the cornerstone of Dean's campaign.

In the meetings I attended, he made it very clear that while it was great having volunteers come from out of state, but it would be much better to organize within the states themselves....down to the precinct level.

Having permanent precinct capts with organizations modeled on "Neighborhood Watch" is the ideal.  When walking precincts, it is  it is fun when you knock on doors, and people are shocked to find out they aren't the only Democrat on the block.

by nanorich 2005-05-26 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
That's exactly right -- in a society where fewer and fewer people talk to their neighbors, there's something that happens when people reach out and discover that even right here on my own block, we can get together and do something to make things better.
by Joe Rospars 2005-05-27 08:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
Sorry if whether people were from in state or out of state came across as the main thrust of my question.  I wasn't asking about that.

Are you hiring experienced people who know the ropes?  If so, tell us about them.  I'm sure people would be excited to hear their stories, I know I would be.  Plus, it would be a concrete way of being transparent about what's going on.

If you're not hiring experienced people - and that's fine too - who's helping them out, talking to them and sharing experience, and making sure they're on track?  This goes toward the idea of building something for the long term, since field organizing is hard work with high turnover, so what's being done proactively to deal with that.

nascardem asks some good questions, though if you're approaching it from a different angle that's cool too.

by Steve P 2005-05-26 08:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
I think it will depend on what existing resources an individual state has, so it will probably depend. I think you're right that both can and will be good to have. It's still very early in the process -- the first few people will be in DC for training soon -- but we will all be learning more about them very soon.
by Joe Rospars 2005-05-27 01:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Who's running the field and who are you hiring
Fair enough, thanks for the info and keep letting us know more!
by Steve P 2005-05-29 04:11AM | 0 recs
Some Letter ...
Howard, I don't like what you did in California last month.  You ignored California Democrats in order to talk with the people who have caused the State Party all the problems in the first place -- candidates annointed by the party organization, together with their large (mostly corporate)  donors.  

I want to know where you are spending my money.

I want to know how you are deciding to spend my money.

I want to know what you intend to achieve, with each line-item expenditure you decide to make. I am not your ATM machine.  

I want to know these things, because I think you are in political trouble in the Far West.  I don't like your strategy here, and so I want to take a much closer look at what you are trying to accomplish and whether you really posess the knowledge of Western politics and the political skills to accomplish the specific goals you have set for yourself.

sc

by scribble 2005-05-26 11:13AM | 0 recs
Name some names, please
Your story is not the one I've heard actual California Democrats and DFAers saying.  

Who didn't he meet with, that you wanted him to see?

by Phoenix Woman 2005-05-26 12:05PM | 0 recs
Specifics please.
I'm a California Democrat who is active in my local democratic party organization plus two DFA groups and I have no idea what you're talking about.  People in my circles are energized and squarely behind Governor Dean.
by sukeyna 2005-05-26 03:03PM | 0 recs
Name some names...
In my experience, I have no problems getting into meetings with Dean.

I guess you backed the wrong horse in the last election.

by nanorich 2005-05-26 04:55PM | 0 recs
Necessary Discussion
It's clear this conversation needs to be held right now. There seems to be alot of mistrust floating around in Dem circles about how money will be raised and how it will be spent given how much money Dean and Kerry raised last time and how we still lost. Also percolating are serious questions about who should be raising it and who should have power over how it's spent. The decisions that are made on these questions may well make or break us in 06 and 08, locally and nationally.

Here in New Mexico there's an ongoing and often heated discussion going on regarding Governor Bill Richardson's ability to raise large sums of money from big donors, ostensibly for his 06 governor's race, and how he's spending it. This is against a backdrop of comparative poverty at our state and county parties.

Turns out Richardson himself is funding regional field coordinators and a statewide director out of his campaign funds. In fact, they've been on the ground for months now and have vigorously been reaching out and building grassroots connections. For the most part the staffers are well respected and liked by ordinary Dems activists and vols here, but many people see a serious potential for a conflict of interest given that Richardson, and not the Party per se, is funding their activities.

The Democracy for New Mexico website that I operate took up this topic when I posted a critical item on Richardson's early and very successful campaign fundraising. It prompted a detailed personal response from the governor's political director and a passionate blog debate on matters to do with how the Party is funded and operated at different levels and how accountability can be built in today's atmosphere of popular candidates raising their own war chests rather than the Party itself getting the donation.

I'll hope you'll check out the discussion and perhaps add a comment or two:

www.DemocracyForNewMexico.com

by barbwire 2005-05-26 01:30PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads