Washblog

if people are excited about Barack cuz ...

cuz ...

fine.

I sent an email to over 100 people BEFORE he finished his speach in Boston in 2004 saying he'd be the first black president and,

he has just been another clinton-esque disappointment.

I've got no problem with him being imperfect on my smorgasborg of policies -

I've got a real problem with him cuz I think once he goes to enough meetings with his social class

- Harvard Law !!

he'll be selling us peons out.

He hasn't been a leader who interests me in the last 2 years, as I am NOT interested in yet another re-labelled bottle of DLC swill.

rmm.

http://www.liemail.com/BambooGrassroots.html

by rmdSeaBos on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 06:34:43 AM PST

---

Funny, I just read This: "Edwards Lures Dean Voters" from Howie in Seattle.

As a former Dean supporter, I think we should all band together and start a "Former Dean Supporter Bargaining Unit" and hold out for the highest bidder. I'm holding out for executive experience (like a former Vice-President or Governor), someone who opposed the invasion and occupation of Iraq, someone who has strong environmental credentials....I'm sure there are more things I could bargain for.

I am willing to negotiate on some things but I'm not quite ready to jump on the "any new pretty face will do" band wagon just yet.

Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue

by The Left Shue on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 09:52:05 AM PST

---

In 1984 the core of the Hart campaign won this state in the face of strong party support for Walter Mondale. The core formed an org that even had a newsletter over the following few years and with rare exception these 20 or so leaders were backing Hart's 88 candidacy until he took a boat trip ending his campaign. Following this even the core players met with Al Gore, Sen Simon, and others interested in wooing a skilled team who had succeeded here before. These meetings were interesting to say the least but in the end, the core split between Jessie Jackson, Dukakis, Gore and Harkin (I think).
Looking back, two things stick in my memory. First, that Gore who had a huge presence had no idea how to mount a national campaign (you may recall his 10 southern state stratagy) and secondly, while Paul Simon was impressing us with his great intellect in the lobby of the Olympic hotel we were found by Karen Marchiero and Jeff Smith who sat 20 feet away and starred at us. Paul it turned out had fit us in during his "down time" and had not shared our meeting with the state chair who was escorting him around the state.
Oh, and I was a Jackson delegate.

by Particle Man on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 10:38:50 AM PST

---

What Chad said reminded me of something I think must be kept in mind this political season.

We've been trained to think that campaigns are about accruing individuals, because these are the benchmarks of the old politics - volunteers, doors knocked, calls made, contacts, "Ones", "Twos", "Fives" and, ultimately, votes.

Yes, it's still all counted in votes, but, like economies, cities, societies, and campaigns are things that are much, much more than the sum of the individuals. They are things which are created - human infrastructures.

And campaigns must grow to live. And so in any discussion of 2008, it must be understood at the outset that to talk in terms of stasis is to talk of death.

We're already seeing how the failure to build aggressively on the 2006 victory has allowed George Bush to introduce talk of escalating and broadening the war (no accident about the timing of the raids against Iranian offices in Iraq) and rather than mocking it for the insanity that it is, the mainstream press is dealing with it as though it was a serious idea and not delusional.

I guess being so very far out of the political mainstream myself, I don't really see why people would hesitate supporting a candidate now whom they might not support later. I just don't have that much personally invested in Democratic candidates.

But that's me. What inpires me is the people. To me, the candidate is something to organize around - usually a source of annoyance, sometimes uplifting. But the people are what counts.

dlaw

by dlaw on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 08:55:53 PM PST

---

--the good parts and the bad parts.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2546081,00.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=30 98174

If I may read between the lines, I could say that Obama is afraid to scare off potential corporate backers. In one of the few fascinating sections of this book, he describes the struggle to get elected and how a candidate needs to succumb to the will of big-business or face being miserably out-spent. Money does matter. I can sympathize with Obama on this issue; yet I feel that my vote ought to go to a politician who will put the people first. This Republic can be ours if we're willing to take it back. Electability plays a key role in the voter's mind due to media concerns, but candidates are electable only if we the people have the courage to elect them. Democracy is ours for the taking.

Obama appears to align himself with the Clinton-Rubin brand of economic policy which is a softer, milder form of Bush's economic policy. Far from a people's agenda. He even consults Robert Rubin on free trade. I'm sorry but Mr. Rubin is not exactly who I want to be determining whether my yet-to-be-born children will have a chance at life in our America. We can do better.

by eridani on Sun Jan 14, 2007 at 12:13:24 PM PST

---