Democrats starting to ignore corporate lobbyists

[Berzerker]

the foxes are fleeing the coop? Never happen

[DanS]

I like some of what Dean is doing. For instance, getting rid of all of the overpaid consultants is a solid idea.

However, I think his organization ideas are pretty daft. He's creating too large of a footprint for the national party at the local level. Those foot soldiers require a lot of funding to keep in the field and I'm trying to imagine what good they would do.

[KrazyHorse]

Read the title as: "Democritus starting to ignore corporate lobbyists"

Thought: "Good for him. After 2500 years in the ground he deserves a break"

[Sikander]

I'm glad to see that the Democrat party is trying to match the Republican party's long time lead in percentage of individual contributions vs corporate / union contributions. It's about time really, as the Dems have been the minority party for a number of years now.

[Ted Striker]

.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Democrats starting to ignore corporate lobbyists

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Chairman Dean is indeed leading the Democrats into a better place, and that place is one where corporate fatcats can be ignored in the place of small, individual contributions:


A recent hit piece by the WaPo on Dean, heavily sourcing DLC insiders, tried to claim Dean was disappointing in his fundraising because the Republicans currently have a 2-1 advantage in cash raised over the Democrats. This ignored the fact that at this point in 2001, the Democrats under McAwful--er, McAulliffe were at a 3-1 disadvantage. Dean is outperforming his predecessor by a significant margin, and his 50-state strategy is already paying dividends (particularly in the West).

When chastised by a lobbyist as to why he wasn't spending more time in Washington schmoozing, Dean responded, "Can't spend time in Washington--no voters there."

I think the Dems waking up and beginning to ignore the corporate lobbyists is an excellent trend that I sincerely hope continues. They are positioning themselves excellently to be the party of real, meaningful reform.

Dean's doing not much more than benefiting from a Republican implosion that's currently gaining momentum. If there's a way to **** it up and give things back to the Repubs quickly after the drubbing they'll receive in '06 and '08, Dean will find it, and the Repubs will unfortunately be far more adept and agile at repackaging themselves.

[:) Smiley]

Originally posted by Timexwatch
Grease is grease. There is nothing that substantially differentiates Unions and other organizations from corporate contributions.

If you've ever worked on machinery you'd know that all grease is not made equal.

Besides, the need for grease is rooted in bad design and construction of the machine itself.

[Boris Godunov]

Re: Re: Democrats starting to ignore corporate lobbyists

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Dean's doing not much more than benefiting from a Republican implosion that's currently gaining momentum. If there's a way to **** it up and give things back to the Repubs quickly after the drubbing they'll receive in '06 and '08, Dean will find it, and the Repubs will unfortunately be far more adept and agile at repackaging themselves.

Spoken like a true DLC corporate tool.

So the fact that Dean is outperforming his predecessors and bringing some substantial change to how the Dems operate isn't doing much? Yeah right.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Sikander
I'm glad to see that the Democrat party is trying to match the Republican party's long time lead in percentage of individual contributions vs corporate / union contributions. It's about time really, as the Dems have been the minority party for a number of years now.

[MrFun]

Re: Re: Democrats starting to ignore corporate lobbyists

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Dean's doing not much more than benefiting from a Republican implosion that's currently gaining momentum. If there's a way to **** it up and give things back to the Repubs quickly after the drubbing they'll receive in '06 and '08, Dean will find it, and the Repubs will unfortunately be far more adept and agile at repackaging themselves.

Yeah -- wouldn't you just love for this to be the case?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Re: Democrats starting to ignore corporate lobbyists

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Spoken like a true DLC corporate tool.

So the fact that Dean is outperforming his predecessors and bringing some substantial change to how the Dems operate isn't doing much? Yeah right.

Who cares how the Dems operate, if that doesn't translate into a sustained majority at both the Federal and state levels across a major portion of the country?

It ain't about the Party Oberkommando - it's about the results Wednesday morning, and repeating those results. Raising more money from the little people of the party base doesn't mean squat - it's ALL about election results, nothing more.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Re: Democrats starting to ignore corporate lobbyists

Originally posted by MrFun



Yeah -- wouldn't you just love for this to be the case?

Yeah, I'm coming out of the closet as a Bush supporter.

[MrFun]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Democrats starting to ignore corporate lobbyists

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Who cares how the Dems operate, if that doesn't translate into a sustained majority at both the Federal and state levels across a major portion of the country?

It ain't about the Party Oberkommando - it's about the results Wednesday morning, and repeating those results. Raising more money from the little people of the party base doesn't mean squat - it's ALL about election results, nothing more.

So you're saying that money contributions have nothing to do with political campaigns?

[DanS]

To speak for MtG, I think he's saying that if you don't have a majority according to the issues/inclinations, it doesn't matter how much money you raise or how well you organize. In the end, you're just playing to a minority crowd.

The DLC has always thought this and I agree that their analysis is solid.

[Boris Godunov]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Democrats starting to ignore corporate lobbyists

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Who cares how the Dems operate, if that doesn't translate into a sustained majority at both the Federal and state levels across a major portion of the country?

Winning those majorities is indeed based on how the Dems operate.

It ain't about the Party Oberkommando - it's about the results Wednesday morning, and repeating those results. Raising more money from the little people of the party base doesn't mean squat - it's ALL about election results, nothing more.

Right, because the Dem Chair has nothing to do with getting such results...

Dean is building a 50-state party, and that's part and parcel of winning back the majority. He understands fully that politics is local, and that's where Dems need to win first and foremost to start taking things back. You can't have a sustained national majority while local offices are dominated by Republicans--this is something the GOP learned many years ago.

Since there hasn't been a congressional election yet under his watch, and you seem to want to measure his progress by such an election, I don't see how you can claim he hasn't done anything as of yet.

I'd say that this year's election successes, coupled with his record fundraising without relying on huge corporate donors is at least an indication that he's being successful in his efforts.