I've been puzzled lately as I watch netroots activists support old school, DLC type Democrats.
I thought the point of the netroots movement was to elect progressives. To “crash the gate” with new candidates. To bring fresh ideas into the Democratic Party.
I can't count the races I've seen already where there is some state senator or state rep who is now going to run for Congress with the urging and blessing of the DCCC and DNC and state Party's. And it seems our netroots activists are flocking to them. Even though these candidates are much closer to DLC Dems than they are to being Progressive Dems.
Look how disappointed we have all been over FISA, Iraq, etc. We want to know why the Dems never stand up. Well it is because we keep putting the same people — or people just like them — back into office.
I'm not advocating we start a bunch of challenges against Dem incumbents ala Lamont/Lieberman.
But in those seats where there are incumbent Republicans, why aren't there more netroots, grassroots, progressive candidates? Why aren't we out recruiting them? Supporting them?
And when there are those candidates, why are netroots, progressive activists supporting the old school Democrats?
If we really want change, then we have to change who is in office.
I liked the votevet initiative last time. Those guys weren't old school Democrats who had worked their way up the party structure and were just running for Congress because it is the next step on their resume.
It was an effective initiative. It matched candidates with their districts.
The electorate is ready for change. If we keep running the same old school Democrats who sound exactly like Republicans (except for maybe stem cells and abortion) then what is the point?
Loading ...
I’m supporting a local candidate who was indeed a former State Senator, and is courted by the national party. But does that mean he is DLC? I won’t name names since I this discussion is bigger than wooing supporters to my candidate, but you’re welcome to flip through my previous posts.
He is a adamant supporter of campaign finance reform. He was called a “lone ranger in the fight against special interest”. He introduced the legislation that banned drilling for oil underneath the Great Lakes. At Yearly Kos he discussed reforming the earmark process. He “shrugs off” CAFE reform by suggesting we dump fleet standards and set standards based on vehicle type, but ultimately the end goal is to get away from foreign oil.
I’ve seen him speak at multiple local Democratic clubs in district, and get standing ovations each time with activists chanting for him to run.
I can promise he’s not going to run off to Congress and join the Blue Dogs. We’re talking about someone who was as upset as the rest of us about the Iraq capitulation, FISA vote, and our own state’s Senator voting to approve the Military Commission Act.
We definitely need to support progressives. But we need to be careful as we decide who WE support, and who we let the old school institutions support on their own. I happen to think the candidate I’m excited about will make an exceptional legislator because he shares our progressive values AND he has the experience of serving in the State Senate.
I do want to say I did not expect this guy to be so progressive when I first saw him, so I don’t blame anyone else who feels the same way. So I encourage the netroots to dig into the records of some of these candidates. I did, and I found a progressive “diamond in the rough”.
I’m interested in this discussion though. Does DCCC support always mean the candidate is DLC?
In retrospect it may well have been a good decision in Ohio. But I don’t think Hackett was ever a DCCC/DSCC selected son and so it is an example of a power play by the party insiders to get their candidate in place.
My frustration has been building for months as I watch our Democratic candidates capitulate to whatever Bush tells them to do. I think I am particularly urked by the smirk on Rove’s face as he leaves knowing he trounced the Democrats.
It is like dating. If you keep dating the same kind of person and it keeps ending up badly, you need to think why you keep choosing the same kind of person over and over again.
It’s the old definition of insanity — doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result.
Part of the problem with the DCCC/DSCC/DNC is that they are all of same beltway mentality. And that mentality is very entrenched and they don’t want to lose any of their power to any “pajama bloggers”.
These campaigns, particuarly for the House and Senate are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. The revolving door between the DCCC/DSCC/DNC and democratic “consultants” all want to control that money. They think only they understand the message that Dems should get out to the public. We’ve watched for 20 years while they were wrong.
We started promoting exciting new candidates who weren’t tied to the old school power structure — and we started to win.
So I’m frustrated when I see progressives — particularly those on the bigger sites, start to line up behind the traditional Dem candidates rather than even consider more progressive netroot candidates. Even if that means doing some groundwork to find a netroot candidate.
Again, I’m not advocating going after Dem incumbents, I’m thinking about challengers to incumbent Reps or open seats.
I think Markos statements last week on MTP about candidates being willing to differentiate themselves from Republicans rather than try to blend in.
Reading those editorials in WP from Harold Ford and Markos are very insightful and inspiring.
I just don’t want to see us all get inspired to get involved and then just flock to the candidates chosen by those who have had the power in the party for the past 50 years.
Given your questions and those of James L., I recognize that my post is strong on opinion and light on facts.
I’m going to give this more thought and post something in followup with more specifics.
I can’t count the races I’ve seen already where there is some state senator or state rep who is now going to run for Congress with the urging and blessing of the DCCC and DNC and state Party’s. And it seems our netroots activists are flocking to them. Even though these candidates are much closer to DLC Dems than they are to being Progressive Dems.
Name them. Name all of these DLC Dems that we (as in blogs) have been flocking to support in the 2008 Election cycle.