Message to SDEC Members

Correction (0.00 / 0)

It's inaccurate to lump past TDP chairs Malcolm and Soechting together as "insider-elitists." as Van Os does.  Simply not true.  Yes, Malcolm ran the party as a fiefdom for failed consultants.  But Soechting got rid of all the losers and, with few resources, turned the battleship around in 2004.  He showed Democrats how to win again, something a lot of people are rushing to take credit for this year.

---

by: Cafe Tortoli @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 09:19:41 AM CST

That's Van Os' characterization (0.00 / 0)

not mine.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 09:42:10 AM CST

[ Parent ]

"And showed Democrats how to win again." Really? (0.00 / 0)

I guess we did pick up some House seats under him. 

---

by: Cody Yocom @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 10:16:26 AM CST

Question... (3.00 / 1)

And I mean this as an honest question before I get flamed...  Who is smartypants?  He says he's a consultant, is that true?  If so, how much money will he see out of a different chair?  Could it be the case that he's just bitter that he's not seeing money now?  Otherwise, what is his motivation for this vendetta against the party? 

As far as a credible statewide slate, we didn't have it.  Period.  It's not the party's job to dump good money into awful/losing campaigns.  It's the party's job to pursue the best chances for victory.  If a candidate wants to be viable, perhaps they should raise money and get some polling that shows they have a snowball's chance of winning.  Once they are credible (money and a win condition) THEN we should get behind them.

All in all, this was a GREAT cycle for Democrats in Texas.  We won two Congressional seats!  We won a relatively HUGE number of state house seats.  Anyone who thinks this was a BAD performance doesn't realize what an awful situation we were in and how dark things really looked!  You cannot expect a person on life-support to get up and be ready to run a marathon in a day! 

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 10:48:31 AM CST

It was good, not great. (5.00 / 1)

And there were a lot of things left undone by the state party that would have cost little to no money-communications in support of the duly nominated being the least of these.

From a purely pragmatic standpoint, if you do not, as a party, speak out in support of your candidates, (and actively in opposition to theirs) you diminish the brand you're trying to build.

TDP wasn't in life-support, but in rehab, if you insist on a health metaphor while we wait for the news on Senator Johnson.

And in rehab, one of the things they do is push the patient to do more than they think they can.

Past the comfort level is where progress is made.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 11:24:00 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Come on... (0.00 / 0)

You're using an attack on my metaphor rather than addressing the central point.  I can assure you we're all praying for Senator Johnson (who is a good/honorable man).  If you care to use the rehab metaphor, would you possibly be able to explain what, exactly, we were addicted to?  I think life support works because we had no money, no infastructure, and no system in place to do much of anything.  We're building our donor lists, building an amazing voter file (the VAN), and building a legal structure to challenge the Republicans unethical/illegal behavior.  All in all, I think we're headed in the right direction.

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:25:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Physical rehab (5.00 / 1)

If you want a dependency metaphor, then try this one. Addicted to the idea that the Republicans were too strong to be beaten in Texas.

But my metaphor was specifically to physical rehab-learning to walk again.

2004 may have been a life support year.  2006 should not have been.

As indicated by the screen name I've chosen, I think we need to fight. Fight every battle.  There are resources to hand and it's not necessarily a finite set if it's applied creatively.

And you ignored my point that there were things that wouldn't take much money but would have supported the challenger campaigns this year.

Also that undermining your party candidates will have the effect of undermining the party itself.

If the TDP doesn't take its own nominees seriously it makes it much harder for donors to do so, and damn near impossible for voters to give a crap either way.  It's its own voter suppression campaign.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:33:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Voters aren't stupid... (1.00 / 2)

The voters and media all knew our candidates were a joke.  No amount of talking by the party could POSSIBLY change that.  Had the candidates raised money, perhaps THEN they would have been taken seriously.  If you fight every battle you end up bloody VERY quickly.  If you fight the battles you can win, you end up successful.  It's a choice.

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:00:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You can either reinforce a perception (3.67 / 3)

or you can fight it.

And your philosphy was debunked all over the nation in 2006.

In Virginia. In Idaho.  In Colorado.  In Montana.  In Wyoming.

But not in Texas.

Because of the decisions made in 2005 to lay back instead of lean forward, Democrats in Texas were not in position to take advantage of a suddenly  beneficial national mood.

And that's why you fight everywhere with whatever weapons you have at hand.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:04:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

lame convention wisdom (3.67 / 3)

and why did the voters and media perceive our candidates as a joke?  why couldn't they raise money?

gee, that couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that our state institutions largely created that perceptions, could it?

Fudd's first law of opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

---

by: annatopia @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:38:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Definately, perception is a problem (0.00 / 0)

but let's be real for a moment. We did have a few lamo candidates out there on whom limited resources would certainly have been a waste.
I can think of a couple easily, I agree we should make an effort to have and support strong candidates in every race, but believeing that every candidate is viable, hell even decent, is delusional.
At some point cost benefit strategy has to be implemented, I'm not arguing that it was necessarily implemented to the greatest advantage, only that it is necessary to make those decisions where resources are limited, and you tell me when and where they aren't.

Prisoner of hope.

---

by: comeon @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:16:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Where exactly have you seen that contention? (3.00 / 1)

I do consider that if someone's won the primary you owe them a certain basic foundation of respect.

However, I haven't seen anyone contending that all candidates are equal-nor that all of these candidates would have won with more money.

But the fact is several of these candidates enlarged the Democratic Party's standing in places it's been largely absent just by showing up and engaging the  voting public.

Some of those counties probably came into play in Ciro's win.

And, I'll tell you right now if someone at TDP isn't looking for the places where there was no Dem and  a Libertarian candidate pulled in double digits to start party building they are squandering an opportunity.

We have to show up in all 254 counties. Not all equally, and not always in the same way.

But we have to show up.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:28:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Could not agree more (0.00 / 0)

with regards to recruitment in areas with high lib votes and have said so in sevearl posts, in fact i created a map outlining these counties.
However, my post was in response to the posts that argue that targeting resouces to winnable races is inferior to the "run everywhere" strategy.
We simply can not afford to spend a great deal of resources on candidates that are jokes. Remember, some of these people "won" their primary by default, so no great shakes there.
I don't want to be mean spirited by calling out names, sufice it to say, we had some candidates running out there that really had no buisness running for office in terms of their qualifications either to win or legislate, which is fine. That's part of what's great about our system, anyone can throw their hat into the ring, but let's not argue that a willing toss of the hat entitles one to an equal cut, or maybe any cut, of our limited resources as a party.

Prisoner of hope.

---

by: comeon @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:36:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

There's a Big Difference (0.00 / 0)

Between the "Run Everywhere" strategy and saying that all candidates should get equal resources.
I'm beating my head against the wall so I'll let Tracy Russo of the DNC address that a little bit.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:39:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This is irrelevant to my argument (0.00 / 0)

If you look up you will see that I was responding to the debate about whether or not we had candidates who were legitimate jokes, rather than only perceived as such, and I added that including incompetent candidates as beneficiaries of limited resources in order to fulfill an idealized "run everywhere" strategy would be a mistake.
I was not arguing against the "run everywhere" strategy per se'. In fact I have in many posts argued in favor of it when run everywhere means primarily recruiting solid candidates, not waiting around and trying to ballast ships that are sinking as a consequence of poor design

Prisoner of hope.

---

by: comeon @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:54:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm not sure where we differ then (0.00 / 0)

I've never advocated putting more money into sinking campaigns.
I am disgusted by what happened in 2005 when the big money players decided there was no point in anyone running statewide and shit all over anyone who tried to. End result -- the biggest Democratic wave in national politics since....since....since...1964? passes Texas by.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 18:35:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oooooh, a map? (0.00 / 0)

Could I get a copy of that map?

Because I'm serious as can be about that.

There were races on my ballot where Republicans were running unopposed, and I voted Libertarian on every single one of them.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:55:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

If you are serious (0.00 / 0)

Do I detect a note of sarcasm?

I can get it to you in the next couple of days, I am at work and I do not carry those things with me as a rule.

Prisoner of hope.

---

by: comeon @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:59:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I am utterly serious. (0.00 / 0)

That was not sarcasm, but genuine excitement.

I clearly need to get out more, but nonetheless, I'd love a copy of the map.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 15:00:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Here is a map (4.00 / 4)

that shows the counties where no Democratic candidate ran for State Rep and Rick Perry recieved less than 40% of the vote.

it's not exactly what you are looking for, but interesting none the less.

i will get that one with the Libertarian votes to you asa i can.

MAPS

Prisoner of hope.

---

by: comeon @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 15:12:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thank you kindly. (0.00 / 0)

I appreciate it.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 15:26:35 PM CST

[ Parent ]

it is inferior (3.00 / 1)

actually, i would much prefer to see a statewide structure that can support the candidates we recruit. that means having party offices in every county. it means recruiting in every county and supporting the candidates locally. it means building a farm team so that we can field credible statewide candidates. 

Fudd's first law of opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

---

by: annatopia @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:52:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

oh and i was responding (0.00 / 0)

to annatopias comment regarding some candidates being percieved as jokes. My contention being that some of them actually are.

Prisoner of hope.

---

by: comeon @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:37:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

of course some of them are (0.00 / 0)

but most are not.  most showed incredible fortitude and courage this season.

but the fact is that ALL of them were perceived by the general public as jokes.  and whether or not some of them were is a moot point.

those who weren't suffered because our institutions and power players - you know, jackasses like kelly fero who get quoted as saying the party is best when it's irrelevant - did nothing to combat this perception.  it was picked up on by the media and eventually trickled down to voters.

i don't think it's disputable that this seriously damaged the chances of many good candidates statewide. 

Fudd's first law of opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

---

by: annatopia @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 17:07:30 PM CST

[ Parent ]

And in order to innoculate itself from those few (0.00 / 0)

The TDP cut the entire slate pretty much loose.

That was an expensive innoculation in more ways than one.

What part of that do you posit helps future recruitment in any way whatsoever?

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 17:49:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

i never said that (0.00 / 0)

and we don't disagree.  but we had plenty of fine candidates all over the state who were largely ignored because our institutions gave up.  that can't be allowed to happen again.

Fudd's first law of opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

---

by: annatopia @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:50:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

the party (0.00 / 0)

can help them raise money.

its not rocket science

---

by: David Mauro @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:40:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I no longer work in Texas (0.00 / 0)

Just another DC hack at this point so I'm indulging in the freedom to speak my mind. I did some work for the party in 2004 and it was a deeply frustrating experience. Wouldn't work for the TDP again no matter what.
Just speaking as a citizen and a Democrat who wants to see us win again.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 11:49:57 AM CST

[ Parent ]

slight revision (0.00 / 0)

One other job would be recruiting candidates. Of course, if the TDP gives up on that stage, well, then what can you say from there.

And those 2 Congressional races? Beyond the lawsuits, and because of them, they are both special cases. Lampson didn't have an actually ballot line Republican and will have a hell of a time in 2008. And as we know, Ciro came out thanks to the DCCC.

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 11:51:37 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I couldn't agree with you more... (0.00 / 0)

Unfortunately, the current party leadership wasn't in place until well AFTER the primary.  I think candidate recruitment starts now for 2008 AND 2010.  It's the most important thing we can do.  My thoughts are simple: we need to recruit heavily for state Rep races and look for a rock star Gov candidate for 2010.  I'll say it again, we absolutely NEED to find someone who is a) outside the current political structure b) rich enough to self finance c) well known statewide.  Sanchez was outside the political structure and rich, but he wasn't remotely well known.  Bell was none of the above.  I'm not locked into one candidate yet, but I have a few in mind that meet each of the qualifications.

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:19:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Self finance is not the answer (3.00 / 2)

Many less well funded candidates won in 2006 -- Jim Webb, Deval Patrick, etc etc.
Texas remains bigger and more expensive than most states but the diminishing power of broadcast TV makes money less a central factor.
We need a candidate who can bring in small dollar donations on a huge scale. MoveOn.org has almost 200,000 members in Texas. If they each gave $50 to a senate candidate -- you've got your budget right there.
Please see this post about developments since 2003. It's amazing to me how many smart Texas Democrats have paid no attention to the massive changes in political communications this decade. It's like the internet and TIVO never happened

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:35:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

WHAT!?!? (0.00 / 0)

Broadcast TV's power is diminishing???  I'll make you a deal.  You run a candidate in the primary for statewide office without broadcast TV where you opponent has broadcast TV up.  We'll see who wins.  Your average voter is over the age of 55 and doesn't use the internet nor has Tivo.  Period.  The internet is good for building a volunteer base and raising money, it is completely ineffective at delivering any sort of message to the masses.  Hell, I'd argue it can't even deliver a message to the "base" (Democratic primary voters).

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:03:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You haven't bothered to read the linked article (0.00 / 0)

have you?

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:04:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Actually... (0.00 / 0)

a) Your link was just to the blog post that we're all responding to... b) Yes I did read the California article, if that's what you're referring to c) I think I know a few more things about political messaging than most people do...

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:09:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

And I'm sure your high opinion of yourself is justified (0.00 / 0)

But you're not the only smart person involved in this conversation.

And I think you're conflating Smarty and me, because I didn't link to anything in reference to broadcast media.

Not to mention you missed that I was making a physical rehab metaphor to follow up your life support metaphor, so perhaps you have some room for improvement yourself.

Just a thought...

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:15:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Ask Donna Howard (0.00 / 0)

about Cable TV and how it kicks the shit out of broadcast.
I didn't say that broadcast TV wasn't still powerful -- it very well may still be the single most powerful weapon in the political arsenal.
But if you think that broadcast is anywhere near as powerful as it was back when I learned the game at Mark McKinnon's feet you're being willfully blind.
In the 1980's or early 90's the better funded candidate won nearly every race they entered. That changed with the debacle of Bob Kerrey's "merry millionaires" in 1996.
You need to update your thinking dude.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:09:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

ROFLMAO!!!! (0.00 / 0)

You know what, I'd be happy to discuss this off the boards, but I feel, for many reasons, it would be better not to address your post on here.  The fact that you learned at PSI probably explains a lot, though.

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:12:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

How can I reach you? (0.00 / 0)

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:17:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Keep in mind (0.00 / 0)

That David makes his paycheck because people by broadcast TV. Not wholly independent there. =)

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:21:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Nothing a little (0.00 / 0)

"Crashing the Gate" can't fix. I've found it's amazing what happens when you put that book in the hands of candidates and donors.
Kills broadcast consultants dead.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:31:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Hey... (0.00 / 0)

I actually LIKED that book.  At least parts of it.  There are many many thieves out there who don't do good work.  Lots in DC and some here in Texas.  Noone would ever or has ever accused us of being one of them.  I can certainly think of several off the top of my head, though...

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:36:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

we can only hope EOM (0.00 / 0)

Fudd's first law of opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

---

by: annatopia @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:41:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

:) (0.00 / 0)

a) We earn the same commission on cable as we do on broadcast... so in monetary terms it couldn't matter to me less which medium people use.
b) There's a far greater markup on direct mail than on TV. 
c) Honestly, *I* personally don't see a dime more from people buying more.  I don't work on commission at ALL.  And, if it WERE about the money, I have offers to double my salary on the table right now. 

With that in mind, yes, I'll own up to the fact that I do have a certain perspective.  However, I do what I do because I believe it's the most effective way to win and also enjoy it.  It's not about the money.

BTW: Smartypants, check your yahoo email! :)

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:34:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'd take that bet.... (3.00 / 1)

For the over 55 set I would drop TV and focus strictly on radio - specifically I would target stations that run Paul Harvey.  I would target my messages by county. 

That's where your small town markets get their news and develop their opinions.

---

by: jimmyjack @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 17:32:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

small town markets (0.00 / 0)

don't get their news from radio. at least not towns with enough voters to target.

i do however agree with going with radio over t.v. on a campaign with a small budget.
Radio is frequently on in offices, in buisnesses open to the public, i believe most people still listen to the radio on their morning and afternoon commutes to work and you can buy a longer spot and say  more in a radio ad. Plus, i think it helps to get the local morning talk show folks talking about you and the race in general.

Prisoner of hope.

---

by: comeon @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 19:17:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Any town that is not large enough... (0.00 / 0)

to have it's own TV station absolutely gets its news from the radio.  They are getting high school football scores, farm and ranch reports, local weather, classified ads, etc. 

This is where people get news about their communities. 

---

by: jimmyjack @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 15:23:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

That, and the county paper (0.00 / 0)

I was really interested to see how many writeups the Van Os campaign got just by showing up to talk to folks.

I didn't realize how many small rural communities supported a press of some kind.

But yes, small town radio is not to be overlooked.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 15:31:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

the major media market (0.00 / 0)

where they receive their TV always carries any major news for the area. maybe a little bit of very local news, of which the majority of people don't care anyway, generally amounts to gossip will only be carried locally.
I happen to be from a very rural small town area and I know of which I speak. Any news of any significance is carried by the news from the closest town with a television media outlet.

Prisoner of hope.

---

by: comeon @ Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:51:00 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I have no vendetta against the party (0.00 / 0)

My original motivation was in response to the Texas Kaos effort to "take over the party" -- I'm trying to clarify what the party does and does not do. I think if we can't get at least a few big donors on board with the "run everywhere" and party building philosophy, we're tilting at windmills.
Please see this post I put on Texas Kaos: < a href="http://soapblox.net/texaskos/showDiary.do?diaryId=2099">"Taking Over the Party is Just a Small Part".

And to clarify another point -- I've done lots of volunteer work with DFT and Maxey but he's certainly never hired me for anything. And I don't even know that I'd support him if he runs again.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 11:56:39 AM CST

[ Parent ]

And your contributions have been appreciated (0.00 / 0)

We have to be candid about what needs fixing or we have no chance of uniting to make the Democrats of Texas the governing power they must become.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:01:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Ah some folks haven't appreciated it so much (0.00 / 0)

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:30:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

That's why I took the time to say it. (0.00 / 0)

I keep my saltshaker handy, and don't necessarily agree with all you say.

But you're giving us all some important views to think about.  The resistance is part of the process of moving things forward.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:35:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yup (0.00 / 0)

Like Will Rogers, I'm not a member of an organized party, I'm a Democrat.
I believe the open debate we have is a strength not a weakness.
But everyone from David Van Os to Chris Bell to Matt Angle is pissed that I have had to effrontery to open my mouth.
Sorry, not trying to offend, trying to make a difference.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:37:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

and thanks (0.00 / 0)

Your support is appreciated. I'm waiting for the personal attacks to start. It won't be long.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:40:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Just an opinion from an outside observer (4.00 / 2)

But of course they're pissed.

These are all proud people who've been fighting like hell under constant attacks from an increasingly partisan RPT, complicit media, and infighting as various TDP factions turn their energy to battling each other instead of united against the REAL threat to Texas, the Republican Party.

Hopefully, once we work through all that pain and frustration, we can take a clear dispassionate look at what the critical path to an governing Democratic majority.

Interesting to me that your vantage from inside and mine as definitely outside-I only started identifying as a Dem again in the 2004 national elections-have many common elements.

Personally, I find the clinging to the phantom of Texas "bipartisanship" in the face of a marauding Republican party is the most damaging handicap the Old Guard has.

RPT has proven that you will get bipartisanship when and only when they feel your foot on their neck, and not one second before that time.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:50:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

good points (0.00 / 0)

I wasn't that much of an insider, was more of an employee back in the day but never liked the way the game was being played.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:56:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Agreed... (0.00 / 0)

In a state like Texas, without MASSIVE money, you're running an absolutely futile campaign.

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:20:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Massive money is not the answer (0.00 / 0)

We tried that in 2002 and spent upwards of $65million to get 40% of the vote.
I think the 2002 effort hurt the cause even more than the 2006 effort.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:29:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I have two words in support of that. (0.00 / 0)

Dream Team.

Good candidates.  Hollow messaging.

Blown opportunity.

Guess that was a few more than two words.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:37:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Actually... (0.00 / 0)

Not so good candidates.  In all honesty, pretty piss poor candidates.  NO messaging and some pretty GLARING problems (connections to Enron, drug money, etc).  That's why I said in addition to self funding, they have to also be able to be outside the political process (thus, hopefully, insulating them from attacks on bad votes/all this baggage)and well known state wide (thus they've already been reasonably vetted by the media).  The so-called dream team was an unmitigated disaster, and really did more to destroy the party than 1998 did.

---

by: David O. @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:06:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

agree with you there (0.00 / 0)

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:11:24 PM CST

[ Parent ]

As I said at the time I was an independent (0.00 / 0)

So my perspective was simply as an interested voter.

I admit by the time we got to the election, I wanted to slap every one of the statewide Dems in their smug faces, but I thought that was just me.

Apparently not. Good to know.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:25:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

hey look (0.00 / 0)

i found something to agree with you about. =)

Fudd's first law of opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

---

by: annatopia @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:55:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Soechting started the ball rolling (0.00 / 0)

Yes, Cody, because of Soechting's focus on legislative races in 2004, Democrats increased their numbers in the Texas House for the first time in a generation (since 1972, to be exact).  Soechting's wins included knocking off the powerful chairman of Appropriations (Talmadge Heflin) and two of Craddick's closest allies (Jack Stick and Ken Mercer).

---

by: Cafe Tortoli @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 10:53:53 AM CST

kinda (3.00 / 1)

Charles Soechting did not knock off Jack Stick. Mark Strama knocked off Jack Stick. And Hubert Vo knocked off Heflin.  A lot of people with a lot more blood sweat and tears won those races including the 2004 Travis County Coordinated Campaign which was more amazing than the 2006 one.

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:05:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

i was so going to say that! (0.00 / 0)

thanks KT.

---

by: cv172 @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 13:21:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Beg to differ (0.00 / 0)

Soechting and his team helped recruit and elect Vo and Strama, which both of those fine candidates readily acknowledged.  So have David Leibowitz in San Antonio and Donna Howard in Austin.  The continuing refusal of the Dem establishment to admit that 2004 was a watershed that showed the path toward a new way to win just shows how out of touch they are and how captive they are to the old consultant elite.

---

by: Cafe Tortoli @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 12:09:45 PM CST

Recruited? (4.00 / 6)

Revisionist history going on here.

Mark Strama decided to run for political office on his own.  He sought out advice about District 50 AFTER he decided to run for the House. 

I was part of those discussions. 

And I highly doubt that anyone in Austin "recruited" Hubert Vo.  I met Vo during the Dean campaign early in 2003 and he said he was running against Heflin.  And most Austin party leaders were rolling their eyes at him as if he was nuts. 

These guys were their own "recruiters"

So let's be honest about "recruitment" vs. being there during/after filing day.

---

by: Glen Maxey @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:19:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

If youve ever talked to (0.00 / 0)

Mark Strama you know he doesnt need any advice from the likes of Charles Soechting.

---

by: David Mauro @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:28:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

exactly right (0.00 / 0)

---

by: David Mauro @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:29:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Team effort in CD23 offers direction for 2008, and TDP was part of it (4.00 / 2)

Yes, KT, the DCCC came into CD23 big time with an independent expenditure campagn for Ciro, but they also worked hand in hand with TDP and the DNC on key elements of the campaign. TDP's Deputy Communications Director even worked full time with Ciro (as an in-kind donation) and they thought enough of Hector's work that they want to keep him around for a while.

As you may know, all State Parties are strictly limited by the McCain-Feingold reforms in terms of how much they can contribute to federal candidates and what they can do for them, but TDP worked with the DCCC and DNC and labor to help raise $100,000 in federally qualfied funds that were used to put an effective GOTV voter contact program in place in South SA and the heavily Hispanic Winter Garden area south of US 90, a program that involved several TDP field staff.

Together, they conducted a smart and solid program in the areas that provided Ciro's winning margin - probably even a little more important (if not as cool) to the win than those "true blue" Canadians calling into South Texas - "como esta, eh?"

Seriously, all these efforts help, from the DCCC, TDP, DNC, Ciro's volunteers, True Blue Action - you name it. And they work best when we work together. Obviously, this is the kind of effort we'll need to take out John Cornyn and more legislators in 2008, and I think TDP will work to build that kind of effort. But that's neither easy nor free, and it will take a lot more cooperation from all us D's - meaning a lot more organizing and fundraising instead of self-righteous intraparty sniping and fratricide. Couple that with the recruitment of capable candidates who have the ability and the discipline to run serious, well-planned campaigns, and we could have a damn good year in 2008.

If that's our goal, we should offer and welcome constructive criticism on how to get better, but we must also keep the destructive ranting (which is typically accompanied by no tangible ideas about how to do things better) and personal agendas in check. After all, we have the 2007 "off year" that we can spend getting it together and building on the taste of success our party has just experienced, or we can spend it tearing each other down to the R's' benefit. If we really want to beat Cornyn, we're going to need the DSCC in here in '08 just like we needed the DCCC in here for Ciro. And we will be in no position to have that happen unless we start working like members of the same party now!

For example, I would think that means tempering some of these tirades against fellow D's (you know, the people who vote the same way we do) and directing more of them against Republicans. Granted, that may seem boring, but just think about Cornyn's "I am God" hair and I bet we can redirect some venom his way in the blink of an eye.

Final note on another "argument" in this thread - in 2004, it was nice to pick up a House seat and TDP did play a role as a partner in that effort, but it was nothing compared to 2006 effort.

---

by: getreal @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:07:10 PM CST

Visibility, accountability, and effectiveness (3.00 / 1)

You make some good points, however, I'm going to point out that dialog goes both directions, and telling people to shut up and toe the line is not going to be productive.

Visibility, accountability, and effectiveness are what's required, and that means getting past the knee-jerk defensiveness phase to listen to each other and work together.

On both sides.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:20:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

yup (0.00 / 0)

Did you read the post even? The 2nd paragraph? I don't remember saying anything much different than you about the TDP other than their online efforts which have always been lame which is just par for the course.

Seriously, now you're just making up destructive ranting where there is none. Maybe you're just used to it, I dunno. That and missing the point of the post.

That and Matt Angle did apologize to McBlogger for the nature of the email on Tuesday.

And tirading against fellow Ds? Oh that's right, I only spent the last 2 weeks building coverage of everything Ciro possible, dealing with some less than enthusiastic national bloggers who came to realize what was really going on after the fact, promoting the race via a statewide email from DFT and my own BOR list, all while taking finals and writing my last papers for UT. On top of that, I've already made plans to Travel to HD-29 to work and blog from the race out there.

Give me a break.

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:24:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

and by post (0.00 / 0)

I was referring to the one actually about TX-23 which I thought this was attached to.

And I'm hoping you recognize that I didn't *write* this post. I promoted it the front page to spark discussion as it's a slow news day. Nothing irritates me more than people in this party who refuse to be willing to talk about anything, ever.

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:27:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Here's my list (0.00 / 0)

of immediate concrete suggestions.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:29:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

questions (0.00 / 0)

can you expand on a few things for me, because i'm genuinely trying to understand this.

what do mean when you say: "TDP worked with the DCCC and DNC and labor to help raise $100,000 in federally qualfied funds".  how exactly? what actions did tdp take in this case?

also this, re: 2004: "TDP did play a role as a partner in that effort".  can you tell us what role the played, and how?

i'm genuinely curious.

Fudd's first law of opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

---

by: annatopia @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:59:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, fewer tirades, please (0.00 / 0)

Lots of uncalled for tirades here against good Democrats like Kelly Fero, Glen Maxey, Chas. Soechting, Matt Angle, Boyd Richie, etc.  These folks have devoted themselves to electing Democrats and making a difference.  They deserve our thanks and respect, not petty attacks.

---

by: Cafe Tortoli @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 21:29:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You mean like calling out Glenn Maxey? (3.00 / 1)

Look to your own etiquette before you try to police mine, thank you very much.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 00:07:31 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Bottom line (1.00 / 2)

We all should have known.  Sooner or later, it all gets down to the bottom line: nothing happened unless Glen Maxey says it happened because, as usual, he was present at the creation

---

by: Cafe Tortoli @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:26:42 PM CST

grow up (0.00 / 0)

---

by: David Mauro @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:29:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Funny about how Maxey's not been mentioned (0.00 / 0)

in most of this discussion, but you still think this is some kind of pro-Glenn/Anti-Boyd discussion.

Get. Over. It.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:31:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

what does that even mean? (0.00 / 0)

I'm not really sure which way that comment was meant, or with sarcasm or not.

Either way, in the few short years I've known Maxey, I continue to be surprised about once a month in learning about something, often times because, yeah, we was present at their creation.

Aids Services of Austin
Texas Legislative Study Group
Mark Strama & Huburt Vo as mentioned above (new one to me, see)

I'm sure he could go on..........

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:31:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Have to agree with Glen on Strama (3.00 / 1)

Anyone who knows Mark Strama knows no one could ever "recruit" him to anything he wasn't going to do already. In 2004 I wrote him checks and discussed strategy with him, too, and he's my State Rep. now, but not because of me. And while we're on Austin area races, Donna Howard also had a lot of help from a lot of people, including the Travis Co. Party's direct mail and GOTV program (why not drop another player into the mix?.

As I said before, I know TDP, like many others, helped in the 2004 Vo race (mail for sure) as well as some others. This year, TDP also played a role in the Vo race with VBM, direct mail and phones, as did the HDCC, Rep. Garnet Coleman's support and Hubert's own campaign (heaven forbid anyone give the candidate's organization any credit)

In any case, the 2006 effort was much more comprehensive and more successful, and that's not meant to knock what the party could afford to do with very little cash in 2004, it's just a fact.

---

by: getreal @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 14:33:27 PM CST

You're right (1.00 / 4)

The world was invented this morning, none of these victories are part of an ongoing process, Glen Maxey is a genius, and anyone else born more than, say, nineteen or twenty years ago is clueless and in the way.

---

by: Cafe Tortoli @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 15:25:24 PM CST

Look Forward (3.00 / 1)

It's hard to drive the road ahead if you're only looking in the rear view mirror.

How about looking to the future instead of constantly dwelling on credit or blame or Glenn or Soechting or what-ever-the-f***?

After all, it's the ultimate sin: boring.

To aid the effort to move forward, here's a list of things I think we all can agree on:

1. Glen has done nothing and everything, and was present at the creation of everything since his own.

2. Charles Soechting was the best TDP Chair who served between Molly Beth Malcolm and Boyd Richie.

3. Mr. Pants is doing a fine job of promoting his new blog (or consulting firm?).

We had some success in 2004.  We had more in 2006.  Success begets success, and I have no doubt that '08 holds a lot of opportunity for us.

If you think we came up short in '06, fine.  Put forward some positive ideas.  Explain, for example, how "run everywhere" means something more than, well, run everywhere.

And please, remember that when you attempt to diminish somebody with personal attacks, you can also end up diminishing yourself.

---

by: El Jefe @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:03:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

That's why they call you The Boss... (0.00 / 0)

...or do they?

Ditto on points 2, 3.

The "run everywhere" question is a good one.  On it's face, I think it's a pretty straight forward, good idea: file Democrats for every office possible; don't let a single Republican walk in.  The question I'd like to know is this: does "run everywhere" mean "spend everywhere"?  Or is it more nuanced?  I'm honestly asking...

---

by: CMistress @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:38:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

it's nuanced (0.00 / 0)

but can be broken down fairly easily.

unfortunately, it takes a lot of structure and teamwork - something we're seriously lacking here sometimes - to execute it well.


Fudd's first law of opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

---

by: annatopia @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 17:04:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'll elaborate on run everywhere soon (3.00 / 1)

The basic idea is that some campaigns are more excercises in party building and will reward a small investment -- mostly infrastructure such as candidate training and online volunteer management tools but more importantly a few encouraging words from on high.
I can recall sitting in the TDP offices in 1998 as Molly Beth refused to meet with a city councilman from College Station who was thinking about running for State Rep. WTF?
If good, credible people want to run, even if it's in an uphill/impossible seat, arm them with an honest assesment of their chances, train them and let them help us build the state wide party.
In the 80's and 90's a losing campaign was a complete waste but today with the internet, every new candidate brings in more new donors and activists and a good % of them stay active via email and other online tools.
Look at groups like Moveon and Democracy for Texas, in the 80s such long-term activist organization were solely organized around single issues and really were more top down fundraising mailing lists than actual volunteer organizations.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 18:46:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not spend everywhere, right? (0.00 / 0)

I think it's imperative that we cover as many races as possible, so that description of "Run Everywhere" works for me.

I just don't think we ought to spread our resources everywhere.  We have to make hard, unpleasant choices.  We can't dump big money on candidates who have little chance of winning and not give that money to candidates who do have a chance.  You have to make the best use of your resources.

---

by: El Jefe @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 10:30:01 AM CST

[ Parent ]

blogging is a terrible way to promote (0.00 / 0)

a consulting business.
Which is why I sorta tried to be anonymous.
So far I've pissed off everyone from Chris Bell and David Van Os to Kelly Fero, Matt Angle, Rep. Doggett and Fred Baron. And wait until I go off on Maxey.
Not smart business.
Hense I'm glad I'm working in other states now.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 19:30:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You know (3.00 / 3)

You know Cafe, the age comment is one that amuses me. I consider myself to be young in the big picture (27) but if it weren't for Glen Maxey, I would have never gotten involved. And it's because he took an email from a young person interested in getting involved with politics and encouraged me to get involved. I've learned more in my time watching him than from anyone else. The craziest part? I'm literally one of hundreds, thousands?

So your comment is a little insulting, and ironically enough, childish.

But even more important than that--yeah, Maxey has a lot of young people who would work their asses off for him--but shouldnt that say something anyway? The funny thing is, if you ever stopped by the coordinated campaign headquarters to help with a post-Maxey email request for help, yo'd notice a majority of people who respond aren't in their 20s and 30s, they are older, and I am guessing it is due in part to seeing his effects on campaigns firsthand over the years.

A huge majority of the young people I know just want to learn and to get active. Myself, I listen and try to learn, because of course there is a shitload of it to do. But its comments like yours that continue to perpetuate the gap, and ultimately push young people like myself to find new and innovative ways to try to do things, instead of just being told we are dumb and haplessly naive.

---

by: nickDFT @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 18:27:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Just for the record (0.00 / 0)

You are neither dumb nor naive.

IJS.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 19:01:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'd love to (0.00 / 0)

I'd love to stop by the coordinated campaign in Austin, but it's a tough commute from my my home in Raliegh, NC.  And my parents might not let me, anyway.

---

by: Cafe Tortoli @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 21:10:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

step up in NC then (0.00 / 0)

I sadly was a Republican most of my time spent living in NC, but was fairly inactive in either party, and I regret it back then. So my suggestion to you, is to get involved in the NC Democratic Party and Wake County and whatever other organizations there are. NC could use some more progressives running the donkey side of the fence.

www.stonewalldemocratsofdentoncounty.org

---

by: John McClelland @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 21:13:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I just want to see Michael McCaul go down... (0.00 / 0)

cant we all just get along and take him out?  :o

Beating cornyn will be hard.  If it is going to be done, it needs to begin right now.  The likelyhood of that happening is low. 

---

by: Morter Forker @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 15:57:24 PM CST

the chance of beating (0.00 / 0)

cornyn is higher than beating mccaul

---

by: David Mauro @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:35:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

If you want to see Michael McCaul go down... (1.00 / 1)

a good place to start might be at Bobby Van's in DC:

I saw Congressman Michael McCaul (R-TX, married with five children) drinking at Bobby Van’s on 12th St., NW the night of Pearl Harbor Day with a stunning blonde. The only other time I’ve seen the blonde is at Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff’s side, so I guess that’s who she works for… But Chertoff was nowhere to be found. The blonde did have three smoked packs of Marlboro Lights in front of her, though, so Chertoff may have been disguised as a cigarette.

---

by: jimmyjack @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 16:59:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Cornyn is the target (0.00 / 0)

David is right.  Cornyn is the target.  McCaul would be nice.  But with a daddy-in-law who has more money than God, it's gonna be tough.  We need to get Cornyn next.

---

by: Cafe Tortoli @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:46:07 PM CST

exactly (0.00 / 0)

clear channel will just out spend us into the ground.

not saying we shouldnt try -- i believe in run everywhere -- but cornyn should be #1.

---

by: David Mauro @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 17:40:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

On working together (3.00 / 1)

1. Working together does require dialogue, both ways, and my Mama taught me not to tell people to shut up. El Jefe said the rest better than I can.

2. Otherwise, my comment was prompted by  a typical kind of comment made in this thread and others that typically include a gratuitous "kick the cat" tone any time TDP is mentioned, minimizing or mocking whatever the Party does. In addition to comments about CD23, an example is this throwaway remark - "if the TDP gives up on that (recruiting candidates)...". Who ever said that would happen? The current TDP Chair wasn't even there during the 2006 recruitment season, and the E.D. had just come on board. Regarding 2008 recruitment, it's pretty common knowledge around Austin that the HDCC, TDP and many other alled groups plan to be on the recruiting trail ASAP after the first of the year.

And in my comment, I said nothing critical BOR, KT's efforts, or anyone else, other than the general observation that we hear too much destructive ranting, which contrasts sharply with the fact that we win when we work together. That said, even a constructive two way dialogue doesn't always resolve disagreements, but winners figure out how to fight the real enemy, and that shouldn't be us.

3. Smarty Pants, I saw your list. As I read it, was I mistaken or did I read, in short, that "we're electing the next Chair so work with us or else"? I wondered if that's really an invitation to constructive dialogue or an ultimatum, but let's give everyone the benefit of the doubt, because if we want to win, we have to get it together long before June, 2008.

3. On the redistricting lawsuit and proposed maps (more mentioned about that in another thread), it's doubtful we could have won without the fundraising and the legal team assembled first by the Democrats and maintained by the LSP. And when it came to the final Court fight over South Texas, all the plaintiffs - Democrats and Hispanic advocacy groups alike - were generally united against a horrid Greg Abbott map that in many ways was worse to minority voters than DeLay's plan. In the end, the Democrats insisted that a Court remedy must be better than the old (2002) CD23, which Bonilla may well have won without a runoff had that been what the Court ordered. And as odd as it may sound, looking back at the maps proposed in the Court case last summer, the SA to El Paso plan the Court ordered actually somewhat resembles a proposal submitted by Travis County and the City of Austin plaintiffs, which also included a district that returned more of Austin to Cong. Doggett. Again, a team effort.

---

by: getreal @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:46:33 PM CST

I'm not "we" (0.00 / 0)

as I replied to David O. on another thread:

It's the folks at Texas Kaos and what David Van Os calls the "Maxeycrats" who are looking to take over the party. See my post here.
I'm trying to make the point that we need both the Fred Barons and Matt Angles and a more vigorous netroots.
If I may quote myself again since you don't seem to like to click on links, here's my opening salvo in this debate:

After the election there was much discussion about the role of Rep. Rahm Emanuel, head of the DCCC, in the big wins that Democrats won nationally. Personally I think Rahm contributed in a big way, but was certainly not solely responsible for the win -- in fact, if it had been left up to Rahm we'd have only won 9 seats instead of 29. He targeted 21 seats and only 9 of them won. Thankfully Howard Dean and the netroots expanded the playing field and we were able to mount many serious challenges and win the majorities. Nevertheless, Emanuel made an important contribution and shouldn't be slagged.

In Texas we've got Fred Baron, who gave the Texas Democratic Party $1.5million and helped Texas Democrats win 5 State Rep seats (6 if you count Donna Howard's spring-time special election win). Baron's money allowed the TDP to invest in the Voter Action Network -- a state of the art voter file manager, among other things.

But....and here's the big but...

In Texas there was no Howard Dean to counter the conventional wisdom as embodied by Baron and his advisor, Matt Angle. They worked furiously to keep Glen Maxey from winning the state-wide party chair position. And they did nothing to discourage other donors who have traditionally given to Democrats from backing Carole Keeton Strayhorn's ill-considered and spectacularly unsuccessful independent bid for Governor.

I'm just saying that if Maxey came within 2% in 2006, with another 2 years to build his organization and the help of the folks at Texas Kaos (some of whom, like Bondad, have massive audiences on DailyKos) he's a lock to win.
I think Richie's done some good things but he needs to recognize the political realities and reach out to the netroots.
It's politics 101 -- do some outreach, build some relationships, co-opt some issues. Shit, they should just hire Maxey or use his tools.

I don't know that Maxey is the ideal Party Chair, but he does have a genuine political base and Richie and company would be smart to do some outreach.

You'd think Angle would have learned something when DailyKos crushed Frost's DNC Chair bid...but nope.

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 19:24:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Our support will need to be earned (0.00 / 0)

There is a lot of reform energy there, but it's not solely for the sake of reform, and it's not attached to any one person.

I realize it seems like a foreign concept, but it's just possible that we're talking about this because we actually believe it's necessary to reform the party to make it more effective and not to make any one person look either good or bad.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 20:07:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

and that's the beauty (0.00 / 0)

of democracy. politicians have to make adjustments to earn support. which is good and the whole dang point.
if Richie can't win a contested state convention how the heck is he going to lead the TDP to victory?

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 20:47:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

SP.. (5.00 / 1)

It should be worth nothing that the 2% Maxey lost by was made up of appropriated votes. Out of the people who were in attandance at the convention and voting, Maxey won. He lost in the appropriations, for instance, where one person shows up from Van Horn, Texas, is the only one from that area/county/SD/whatever that shows up, and grabs their 100 votes or whatever.

Just worth noting.

Also, in a conversation with David Van Os he told me that he just didnt see enogh fundamental differences between the two. I suggest taking a look at the overall philosophies of our current voter tools. Lets compare

-Texas VAN
Password access limited to your immediate precinct or area, limited functionality. Its one thing to have a lot of bells and whistles and another to have functionality.

or

-Maxeys TrueBlueAction.com (something that we have NEVER had before, by the way)
which is a free flow, open source, take-this-information-and-use-it kind of creation even with a link for developers to contribte ideas to the site. It is a living organism in my opinion and in combination with online phone banking can be used in a unlimited variety of situations and is quickly adaptable.

Kudos to both Mario Champion for all his hard work on it, and lets not forget all the phonebank for Ciro links on the front page of DailyKos. Way to go, K-T.

---

by: nickDFT @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 11:57:13 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Kudos to both... (0.00 / 0)

I will be the first to admit Glen has done AMAZING things for the party and I deeply respect him.  In no way and on no occasion will I ever disparage him.  He has been working with the current chair and has done a great service to the party.  We owe him a LOT for his service throughout the years; he was working before most of us were even born!

These tools cannot be compared.  They are two different creatures entirely.  One is a tool for grassroots organizing/activists.  It's an evolving tool to be used outside the camapaign structure.  The other is a tool to enable campaigns to more efficiently run field operations.  Having worked on a DSCC targetted race which used the VAN, I can speak to its value.  It is an amazing tool for well organized campaigns and it allows them to do FAR more than they could on their own.  When utilized with bar code scanners/palm pilots/etc it can make data entry SO much simpler and allow one to track voter contact and, for GOTV, target one's supporters FAR more efficiently.  Because of this, one would WANT to password protect it!  Do you realize what would happen if Republicans got their hands on that data!  It would allow them to send voter suppression mail/phone calls/etc. 

Just because you don't understand a system, don't knock it.  There's a reason so many DSCC, DCCC, and DGA races all use the VAN.  If our state ever is competitive in a real statewide election, having the VAN in place now will SIGNIFICANTLY help the staff put into place.  Ask the field workers who came onto Ciro's race and were able to plug in instantly because the VAN was in place (and, in that race, time was certainly of the essence and field WON the race).

---

by: David O. @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 14:16:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It is not "if" but when. (0.00 / 0)

That wording of yours really encapsulates the difference between us.

It is not a question of "if" we win again statewide, but when.

Do not reinforce the myth of Republican invincibility, oh great messaging expert.

As I said elsewhere, we can reinforce unfavorable perceptions, or we can fight them.

I say we fight them.  You never know when the last teaspoonful of undermining will cause their house of cards to crumble, but it will never happen if we don't start digging.

Regarding the databases, I'm of a similar mind to you. 

I deal with highly sensitive data all the time.  While I have never used VAN, I did use the TBA tools.

The dynamic between security and openness is a difficult one to manage.  Not enough security, and you're compromising sometimes very personal and critical information.

Too much paranoia, and the vast treasure trove of info you've gathered might as well be written in Sumerian on crumbling clay tablets, because it's not deployed in the service of your mission.

So, I think the VAN should be protected. But I also think that since it is available only to a limited group within the party structure, we need to make sure all the counties have someone in place who can legitimately access the info.

I know of one shoestring campaign that crossed counties. They were able to get help from the county chair in one county, but in another county the chair was either vacant or uncooperative.

That was stupid-even if you don't consider the candidate a likely victor, missing the opportunity to make voter contacts to build the party in your area is just plain stupid.  (Assuming, of course, that the goal is of building the party even if you end up short in the vote count.)

Data is only useful when it's deployed.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 14:50:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

VAN Access (0.00 / 0)

Can't County Chair's access the VAN? Otherwise, it's the campaigns and whoever else each campaign allows to have access.

---

by: El Jefe @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 16:23:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Campaigns have to pay (0.00 / 0)

And money was hard come by for most of these folks because there was a decision made in 2005 to lay back and take a pass in 2006 on most offices.

My argument is that these campaigns are actually helping to build the party in their areas. Instead of blowing them off due to a cash shortfall, use them to build your voter contacts from.

I admittedly do not have all the details even in this situation. But just on this blog I've had plenty of folks dismiss the long shot campaigns out of hand.

Quite aside from the disrespect for the candidates and the sacrifices their families make during a campaign, such an attitude is stupid.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 16:41:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The reason campaigns have to pay... (0.00 / 0)

It's really quite simple.  a) This system costs money.  A LOT of money to put into place.  Not the software, but buying the lists that make it a valuable targetting tool.  b) McCain-Fiengold dictates parties cannot give campaigns a donation that exceeds certain limits.  Giving them access to the VAN without them buying in would exceed these limits. c) Even if that weren't the case, people appreciate something they have to pay for.  If it's free, they will take it for granted and just "assume" it should be there.  Whereas, if they buy in, they'll respect it/no its worth. 

---

by: David O. @ Sat Dec 16, 2006 at 17:46:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I understand it's complicated (0.00 / 0)

and bound by legal restrictions.

All the more reason to make sure that the county organizations are as robust as they can be, and are accountable for working with the campaigns.

Which, I know, they are in theory. But I've heard a fair number of stories that indicate there's some clean up that needs to happen, and I'm not all that directly plugged in.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Sat Dec 16, 2006 at 18:49:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

County chairs can. (0.00 / 0)

As I said, in this case the chair in that county was either vacant or uncooperative with the campaign.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 16:43:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Its not that I dont understand it... (0.00 / 0)

..precisely the opposite.

---

by: nickDFT @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 17:07:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

interesting to note (3.00 / 1)

I've actually made a new table of the delegate allocation by county based on Bell's results (did you know he actually got more votes than Sanchez in 6 counties, half of which border Travis, the most being Williamson)?

Anyways, since the delegates are based off of every 300 votes for governor, there were losses in 249 counties (though the ones that only had 1 vote last time can't get any less than that so). I reweighted all that by percentage and some other cool stuff.

End result? Travis gains over 2 full percentage points in strength, going from having 5.74% of all delegates to 7.88% of all delegates, the highest shift (in that measure) in the state.

At the other end, Cameron, El Paso, Hidalgo, and then worst of all Webb lost huge shares of their vote. Collectively they went from 9.8% of all delegates to only 5.9% of all delegates.

Lamb County actually was the worst in the state in the sense that it went from 6 delegates to 1, an 83% loss, the highest in the state in terms of it's percentage change of raw delegates.

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

---

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 14:37:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

and I can't count to four...adios now (0.00 / 0)

---

by: getreal @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 16:47:26 PM CST

The Future (5.00 / 6)

I'm sorry if my comment came off as a snark...  I just want to say that both the positive and negative things of the past are just that:  IN THE PAST.

We did a lot of great things in 2004 and in 2006 to start rebuilding this Party across Texas.  But we have much more to do.

I certainly haven't been around or a part of all of these things, but I've helped with my share.

I'm ready to saddle up, circle the wagons, get on the same team or any other slogan anyone wants to put on it to move forward.

We have exactly one year to put in place infrastructure, tools, leaders, candidates, plans and finances to do all of things folks in these posts are wanting to do.

Here's some of my to-do list for 2007 (in no particular order):

1) I'm ready to assist with the critical piece of recruiting candidates to run in races all over the state.  We all have been kicking ourselves for not having candidates running for local offices where we could have won in 2006.  I'm accepting a large amount of blame and kicking myself that we (I) didn't find a candidate to run for JP in Pct 2 in Travis.  It's obvious just a DEM on the ballot would have been enough to take back that seat from the Republicans. 

If we want statewide candidates to win, we have to have folks running for all these local countywide, Constable, JP, and judicial seats.  EVERY. DAMN. ONE.

2)  I think we should deregulate the Party's affairs from statute so we can make some of our conventions and other Party rules more productive and workable.  Takes a statutory change and we should do that.  Then the Party can make its delegate selection and convention processes more workable. (Ex.  It is asinine to have precinct conventions at 7:15 on election night.  If the statute didn't mandate it, the Party (SDEC) could adopt rules to perhaps have the first phase on our delegate selection on a Saturday.  (Current way that this happens now in about 200 counties is that the same people who are at precinct caucuses are the folks at the county convention.  We might think of letting these counties just have a county meeting and caucus by precinct as the first step at the county convention , for example. [Not proposing anything here, just giving an example]).

3) We're going to make the True Blue Action lists a organizing tool for the presidential candidates in Texas.  Mario Champion is working on the programming now, and we'll roll it out early in 2007.  One of the biggest challenges for presidential campaigns is how to organize in 8500 precincts in Texas for conventions.  Making this available to the volunteers and supporters of ANY and ALL candidates will give these campaigns an important tool to allow these campaigns to play in Texas.

5)  Lots of folks around Texas have expressed an interest in using online tools to clean up and prepare voter lists for 2008 in critical areas of the state.  We should create the tools for that to happen to update both True Blue Action site and the VAN database of TDP.  (True Blue Action PAC's policy from our inception has been to share data with TDP.)

There's lots to do, and a year to do it.  I think we ought to build a statewide "To Do" list and all roll up our sleeves and get to it.

John Cornyn has got to go.

---

by: Glen Maxey @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 17:44:43 PM CST

Rock on! (0.00 / 0)

Cool shizzle Glen!

Any comments I make are my own personal opinion and do not reflect the opinions of any client or consulting firm I may be associated with.

---

by: SmartyPants @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 19:31:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

awesome! (0.00 / 0)

a "to do" list would be great.  i can't wait to see these tools, glen.  thanks for all you do!

Fudd's first law of opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

---

by: annatopia @ Thu Dec 14, 2006 at 21:29:35 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The one thing the Lege won't "dereg" is the Party's affairs (0.00 / 0)

Fo' shizzle.

---

by: Hugh Brady @ Fri Dec 15, 2006 at 19:39:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]