Tell the Democrats.

I totally agree with you Rosie (0.00 / 0)

Lots of those folks practically invaded North Jersey during the last few elections, and completely bungled things by ignoring the Democrats already here who knew their constituents and neighborhoods.  It was a clumsy ham-fisted attempt that LOST us lots of votes.  

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

---

by: carolh @ Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 21:45:52 PM UTC

Well said. (0.00 / 0)

Even though I'm not a Democrat, I filled out the survey anyway. I think as long as OFA continues serving as Obama's Personality Cult, they're going to be a pretty worthless organization. At least groups like Democracy for America are about actual political issues, rather than just cheering sections for one politician.

---

by: Dennis Hyer @ Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 22:33:22 PM UTC

DFA (0.00 / 0)

Yes, I feel very good about that aspect of DFA.

(Full disclosure, as I've said here before, I help lead DFA in NJ, but I'd say that even if I didn't).

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Tue Nov 23, 2010 at 23:15:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

First things first (0.00 / 0)

President Obama needs to grow a spine.  He needs to spend his presidency preaching to the choir (something which he is not very good at) instead of trying to compromise away his base with a party that wants nothing but to stop him no matter what the consequences (START treaty for example).  He needs to show leadership and not leave everything up to Congress (which will get much more difficult to work with very soon).

Second of all OFA needs to not waste resources in states that the president is not popular at all.  Having just worked in such a state on a campaign, we were sent boxes and boxes of OFA materials which were kept hidden because we could not associate ourselves with Obama (which our opponent did in every single stump speech he gave).   We all wound up taking a few home for souveniers but ultimately most of it was thrown away.   Those resources could have been used to print lit, provide us with campaign materials, or even another field staffer on the ground.  

I'm a member of OFA myself.  I support the president but do disagree with him on a few issues (offshore drilling being the biggest).  I'd vote for him again in 2012 but the organization needs some fresh blood in order to be a force again.

As for the DNC--- I think they need new leadership.  If the president does not want to bring back Howard Dean, then I nominate Russ Feingold for the job (I am very upset that he lost).   If he REALLY wants to please his base then nominate Alan Grayson.

http://outspokenliberal.blogsp...

---

by: tabbycat31 @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 01:00:27 AM UTC

A Different Point of View (3.00 / 1)

Rosie, you made some good points. But you're over the top on the name calling -"fake grass roots"? No need to eat your young, a bad trait that I notice in too many progressives. If it's not grass roots in your image, oh well. It's a hybrid, and...an an interesting and effective one that's still evolving. There is a lot of input from the bottom up. We don't just wait for surveys to say what's on our minds. Our role as we see it is not protecting the president's position (that would be kiss ass), but to help in the governing process and the electoral process. That means giving our input and then compromising or taking a stand as needed. We're part of the DNC, that's true, but that's because we're Democrats. I know that's stating the obvious, but hey, that's our politics. I think you're absolutely wrong about OFA being the replacement of the 50 state strategy. It is in fact part of the 50 state strategy. It's present and will be present in 2012 in every state and will work with anyone moving in the same direction as us.  

---

by: ESK @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 01:29:59 AM UTC

Welcome to Blue Jersey, ESK (0.00 / 0)

I see you just signed up and this is your first comment. Welcome!

"Fake grassroots" isn't name calling; it's descriptive. I'm not the first person to make these criticisms of OFA. And I think I disagree with the charge of "eating your young". Blue Jersey isn't, and hasn't ever been, a place for merely amplifying whatever message and direction the Democratic Party generates. You're new here, but you will see that everyone here will throw up a red flag fast if they think the Democratic Party, or any of its players, is headed wrong.

Where I think your point is fair is that OFA is - or should be - a hybrid. I'm not sure it is that, but it might be interesting to see it become that. As I said, the fault doesn't lie with the good people OFA draws in - and you may not figure that you're kissing the president's ass - but as I pointed out, you're not in charge there.

From OFA's website:
First Line:
"Organizing for America, the successor organization to Obama for America"

First "way to get involved"
"Joining grassroots OFA campaigns to support the President's agenda ..."

How to Join the Organization
"We'll let you know about local events, and send you all the information you'll need to organize around President Obama's agenda in your neighborhood."

I really have zero desire to fight with you about an organization you care deeply about. I get it, and wish you luck with it. But DNC represents my money, and my hopes and dreams too. I think it can do better.


It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 04:44:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

first comment (0.00 / 0)

doesn't mean someone is "new" it simply means this was the first time they were moved to sign up to comment.

it kinda feels like you're pointing out the commenter's relative newness as a way to undermine a point you don't agree with.

Not a very welcoming posture, IMHO.

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 11:17:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think that your feeling is reaching (0.00 / 0)

I see you just signed up and this is your first comment. Welcome!

As much as we can, I think that we should do our best to take words at their face value since there is no tone of voice that could infer otherwise.  If we do this with Rosi's first sentence as well as her track record here, I think that we can be safe in assuming that her welcome was sincere.

Just because Rosi has some brutally honest and right on the money things to say about OFA as well as some direct disagreements with what ESK wrote, doesn't mean that she can't be sincere in welcoming ESK to Blue Jersey.  They are not mutually exclusive nor should they be.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 23:28:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think that your feeling is reaching (0.00 / 0)

As much as we can, I think that we should do our best to take words at their face value since there is no tone of voice that could infer otherwise.

Think about what you're saying here for a moment. Are you saying that words, written or otherwise, when strung together as a thought or expression, are just words. That they don't express a tone or any affect? If you are, I'm not only going to disagree with you, but I'm going to tell you that you're just flat our wrong. They most certainly do incorporate those devices. Think of passages that you've read that make you sad and bring you to tears, or those that make you laugh. Those words, more often than not were written to produce those effects. They weren't just written to be taken at face value or just to be matter of fact.

I didn't feel unwelcome. I felt condescended to. When you use the word "fake" in a post being read by members of an organization that "good" people belong to and work for you express a thought, intentional or not, that implies that those people have made a bad choice, that what they do somehow is worth less because you disagree with the structure and methods that organization employs, an organization, that by the way has the same general goals that a lot of people have who post on this site. Saying that the people in that organization are good or awesome doesn't change that. It's disagreeable and it can cut off discussion. Happily I'm a bit thicker skinned than that.

Having said all that here's one thing I would propose. I think organizations like OFA and DFA should reach out, at both the top level and especially the grassroots level. The focus should be on finding common ground both in terms of issues and tactics. The benefits of this:
It provides a common sense means of communicating with others so that points of view are heard in an ongoing and meaningful way; provides opportunities to develop joint grassroots alliances and related projects; provides a greater potential shared resource pool.

---

by: ESK @ Thu Nov 25, 2010 at 19:56:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree and disagree with you. (0.00 / 0)

Think of passages that you've read that make you sad and bring you to tears, or those that make you laugh. Those words, more often than not were written to produce those effects. They weren't just written to be taken at face value or just to be matter of fact.

This is absolutely true and proves my point as much as it does yours.  If you scroll up, you will find that I quoted the following:

I see you just signed up and this is your first comment. Welcome!

I didn't think that there was anything unwelcoming or condescending about this.  Jay seemed to feel that there was and I expressed my disagreement and thought that we should look to the words being used since we cannot hear a spoken tone of voice.

Of course, you are absolutely right that words can have an affect or tone of their own, but if you spend more time here, you will find that most of the people who contribute to the conversation have very strong vocabularies are are usually quite clear about using words that establish the affect or tone that they want for the purpose of whatever they are writing.

You seem quite fixated on Rosi's use of the word "fake" and consistently choose to believe that its usage is intended to disparage OFA's members, when it is quite clear that it is specifically describing the grassroots quality (or lack thereof) inherent within the organization ever since it was folded into the DNC.

Obviously, this cannot be a disparagement of OFA's members as they had no say whatsoever in this decision, which is a perfect illustration of Rosi's "fake grassroots" description.  I imagine that it is very possible that the same thing would have happened to DFA when Howard Dean became DNC Chair if he hadn't been smart enough to separate himself from the organization that he created, install his brother, Jim Dean, as its face and voice, and allow it to evolve over time independent from the DNC.

If President Obama had a fraction of Dean's commitment to grassroots organizing and progressive principles, I believe that he would have allowed it to remain independent as well, placed Steve Hildebrand, who is a real grassroots organizer and a true progressive, in charge of it instead of David Plouffe, who is just a political hired gun who made his bones working for Bob Torricelli (not the kind of guy you want to be the face and the voice of the progressive grassroots), and charged it with the mission of becoming the missing link between the Democratic establishment and the progressive grassroots that is still desperately lacking from our political infrastructure today.

However, if you think that "fake grassroots" implies everything that you have written above, there is nothing that Rosi or I can write to change your mind except that it should be possible to disagree with an organization's methods and structure while respecting the people who are part of that organization, which is exactly what Rosi wrote and what you would see if you weren't looking for an affect or tone, saying something else, that simply doesn't exist.

There is a lot that DFA, OFA, and the Democratic establishment could do going forward that would benefit all of us tremendously.  I don't expect that it will be done, because the key component of this equation, the Democratic establishment, is far too invested in the status quo to allow the progressive grassroots to be anything other than free labor for its elections.  The only alternative is for the progressive grassroots to replace the Democratic establishment, which probably won't happen either, because we are not nearly committed or organized enough to be the change that we want to see in our government, political party, and organizations with which we associate.

So the status quo will remain the status quo and we will continue to quibble over the choice of words and their affect or tone and Sarah Palin will most likely be elected President in 2012.  The only upside of all of this is that the world is supposed to come to end in December 2012, so she most likely won't be able to take office anyway.

Wisconsin's and Pennsylvania's losses should be America's gains.  Draft Russ Feingold for President and Joe Sestak for Vice President in 2012!!!!!

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Thu Nov 25, 2010 at 21:26:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If, If if - We Need to Work with What Is (0.00 / 0)

You did say that words need to be taken at face value right. I got the welcome part. I said I didn't feel unwelcome, just condescended to. I'm not fixated on any word. I was just trying to make a point. I didn't write the post to have my mind changed, although I'm open to that. From your rhetoric, you appear not to be. I said that people on the ground in both organizations ought to talk to each other, not at each other, which is what you're doing to me. If i wanted cutesy comments I could have gone to Huffpo and read their posts. One more thing - Uncle.

---

by: ESK @ Thu Nov 25, 2010 at 21:42:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, we don't. (0.00 / 0)

Based on what I have read and heard from the President since Election Day, I am ready to write him off as another weak Democratic President like Carter and Clinton and while I hope that he is able to win a second term, I would prefer to see someone like Russ Feingold take him on in the primary elections and force him to either stand up for his centrist positions or change course and become more progressive, which is highly unlikely considering the makeup of the new House and Senate.

OFA, meanwhile, is only going to serve the President's agenda, which is fine, but also a further illustration of the fact that it is not a real grassroots organization.  But none of this really matters anyway since the truly pressing issues at this time for the progressive grassroots here in NJ are at the state, county, and local level and I seriously doubt that there is anybody at OFA paying attention to what is happening here on these levels.

If it did, it would realize that most of the minor benefits of the President's watered-down healthcare reform legislation are not being experienced here, because the Governor is not willing to commit the small amount of state funding required to qualify for the federal funding, and it would have worked with the progressive grassroots and Democratic legislators to make sure that pressure was brought to bear on both the Democratic leadership and the Republican Governor to ensure that every New Jerseyan was able to receive 100% of what little benefits they are entitled to under HCR.

If it did, it would have been more engaged on the ARC Tunnel issue, providing the state's Democratic Congressmen and Senators with additional grassroots muscle on top of the efforts that were already being undertaken to ensure that this vital infrastructure project did not die an untimely death.

Does OFA even have county or regional groups that meet regularly to discuss how OFA members can educate themselves about key municipal, county, and state issues and engage their local elected officials and party leaders to effect change or is it just a more centrist version of MoveOn.org that sends e-mails occasionally to its members, asking them to do certain things and give money to them and others?

I would love to talk to other members of OFA, but how can I find them if there isn't really a grassroots infrastructure to engage.  I seriously doubt that David Plouffe is going to send out an e-mail on my behalf or anybody else's here to all of the OFA members in NJ, asking them to visit Blue Jersey and join the conversation here so that the fake grassroots and the progressive grassroots can get together virtually and chat.

I am always open to having my mind changed about individuals and organizations, but it only happens through actions, not words.  I have been involved in politics long enough to know that words mean less than nothing, especially when it comes from someone like President Obama and/or anyone associated with him.

Wisconsin's and Pennsylvania's losses should be America's gains.  Draft Russ Feingold for President and Joe Sestak for Vice President in 2012.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Fri Nov 26, 2010 at 03:23:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sigh. (0.00 / 0)

You felt condescended to. Well, I didn't anticipate that, ESK, or intend it. I'm certainly sorry you felt that way and sorry what I said made you feel that way.

But let me make some distinctions here. I thought I was pretty clear distinguishing between the people who walk in the door when OFA calls, and the leadership of OFA. I'm not the first person to notice that OFA is a top-down operation. Or that its prime directive concerns the President. It's all over OFA's materials. Surely there has to a place and a way to say that here; it's said so often elsewhere.

I understand feeling protective of an organization you're contributing your labor and passion to. But you might consider that this is not an organization either funded or led like other organizations. This is the Democratic Party, its expenditures, its strategies, and the protection and re-election of its president. Criticizing OFA is like criticizing the Democratic Party, like criticizing the White House and the President.

And as a stakeholder in the Party, I have an opinion on that, and the Party was soliciting that opinion by sending that survey as I'm sure it was sent to many, many others.  

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Fri Nov 26, 2010 at 01:52:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not A Monolith (0.00 / 0)

Let me assure you that my comments were not meant as the opening gambit of a "fight". And not to belabor it, while using the phrase "fake" may not be name calling, it is a pejorative and was pretty off-putting.

I don't think OFA is as homogeneous or monolithic as you may think. Those of us working inside of OFA recognize where it needs to improve, and while you're accurate about an out of balance top down approach being present, that doesn't mean we don't have a say (we do have skin in the game - our time); there's currently a discussion underway at various levels to address that. The survey was a piece of that.

I think that this type of ongoing citizen involvement inside of a major political party is a departure from business as usual and has the potential to be a conduit for change. I think that the problem that you have may not be as much with OFA as it is with the policies and tactics of the Democrats and the president. I don't agree with them all the time either. But I, and others like me, have chosen to work more inside the organizational process. Sometimes that can be limiting, but I believe that's not just a function of the OFA, but of the governing process itself; something that we've accepted in order to get things done. I'll grant you that it can at times be frustrating.  What I'd like to see are more discussions between OFA and other organizing groups, at the grassroots level, (separate from discussions between the leaders of the groups), about policy and how to move the agenda (whatever that ends up meaning) forward. That kind of coordination of effort I think can be productive.  

---

by: ESK @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 13:54:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Beyond the cult (0.00 / 0)

I'm the first to admit that I was an early supporter of Obama during the primary season.  And I think that his campaign in 2008 was well run.

The problem that I have is that we've squandered the opportunity to turn that energy into sustained progressive action.  OFA had perhaps one of the best developed databases of engaged voters.  And we didn't do anything with it in 2009.

So when OFA wants to engage again with voters in 2010, it's too late.  None of those new voters stayed connected to local politics.  And that's a failure from the top, not of folks working in the trenches.  We never had access to the data.

In Hunterdon County, we are lucky to have a dedicated core of volunteers on the ground -- folks like Rosi who have been engaged with DFA since 2004.  But imagine what we could have done if given access to the resources from OFA/DNC to engage all the new voters back in 2009.  We wouldn't have been re-inventing the wheel this year in trying to ID voters and get the vote out.  We would have had an organization for Ed Potosnak to tap into.  (The fact that Ed got as many votes in 2010 as Stender got in 2008 with a fraction of the resources is telling)

But it appears to me (and I know to others) that the 'O' in  OFA is all about 'Obama', and less about 'Organizing'.  It's too late to change that, but I feel that's the core of the problem.

Jeffrey Doshna

---

by: Jeff Doshna @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 01:31:16 AM UTC

OFA did use the Obama database (0.00 / 0)

at least in Kentucky they did.  Our volunteer recruitment list to call off of was the Obama email list.  Problem is that a good portion of those "names" on the list were fakes or people doing "opposition research" the way that I stalked Anna Little's new media pages.  (I did not join her email list).  We had names like Obamaisa Muslim and Notta Socialist come up on our call lists.  

Granted 2009 was not an election year in most places, but in New Jersey it was.  Starting in 2010 right at the beginning I was getting my inbox flooded by phone banking from home opportunities for Martha Coakley in MA (talk about a blown opportunity).  Where were the flooding of emails for phone banking from home for Corzine (or that guy in VA)?  

http://outspokenliberal.blogsp...

---

by: tabbycat31 @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 01:51:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I got four e-mails from them (0.00 / 0)

All in October/November 2009, which seems late, but barackobama.com did ask their e-mail list to call for Corzine, volunteer, vote early, etc.


Frank LoBiondo Record and Jon Runyan Watch

---

by: Hopeful @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 03:37:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Right, in October (0.00 / 0)

My point is not that Obama didn't campaign for Corzine / Weinberg in October.  It was that we needed them in February.

Imagine, for a moment, a world where the OFA list was sent to each of the state party organizations.  Imagine further that it was pushed down to the counties.  In my perfect world it would get all the way down to the precinct  level.

Imagine if on January 21st, 2009 every OFA voter got an email or phone call from their local Democratic committee member.  Thanking them for all their hard work, and inviting them personally to participate in the next local meeting / event /  rally / whatever.  

Would all of them respond?  Certainly not.  But we would have made a far better transition from a national presidential campaign to enhancing  party organizations on the ground.

Rather then being directed from the top ("Can we count on you to call 10 voters in NY-23") it would be, "Our local school board is looking to eliminate funding for the arts.  Can you come out to the meeting this Monday night and show your support."

Again, I'm not saying it would have guaranteed that we'd hold the House.  But it might have made a difference in some key places.

Jeffrey Doshna

---

by: Jeff Doshna @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 12:06:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Local Change Will Take Time (0.00 / 0)

I'd like to see the county Dem organizations use OFA's resources as well. One of the major problems, however, is that the county organizations have not wanted to involve OFA, in most cases, beyond giving them lip service. That doesn't mean OFA hasn't tried to work with them, because they have. But OFA can and should do a better job in promoting and reinforcing local political change.As you probably know the county orgs are typically tightly controlled power stuctures that are not terribly welcoming of any "outsiders" who may want to help. They're used to doing things in a certain way and will need to change their on the ground tactics, and OFA minded people can help. It's the way it is in NJ and it will take time to change. Maybe they got a wake up call in this last election. We'll see.

---

by: ESK @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 14:09:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

THat would be easier said than done (0.00 / 0)

Having just come off a campaign that was a part of OFA but due to the president's (lack of) popularity in the state, we had to hide it.

Our (local) headquarters was in the same building as the county Democratic HQ.  You think that we'd share resources and work together but no.  OFA (and other successful Democratic organizations) base their strength on numbers and voter contact, which is what we did.  The county party was only focused on yard signs (they had phone banks for yard signs) and lit drops.  We would compete for volunteers with them.    It was not until GOTV that they finally started working with us not against us.

http://outspokenliberal.blogsp...

---

by: tabbycat31 @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 14:33:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I hear ya (0.00 / 0)

Working your way inside a local Dem organization in NJ is tough. Changing their mindset about how they do business is even tougher. We need to keep working on changing that.

---

by: ESK @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 15:24:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not everywhere (0.00 / 0)

Perhaps it's my parochial experiences in Hunterdon County, but our County organization would welcome anyone coming to the table with resources and volunteers.  I can't speak to the rest of the state, but I suspect that in the historically redder sections of NJ, we'd be glad for the help.

Jeffrey Doshna

---

by: Jeff Doshna @ Thu Nov 25, 2010 at 13:28:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

hunterdon (0.00 / 0)

that's great that you guys are so keen to share resources in HuntCo, Jeff.  many of us up covet such an open and welcoming turf-less environment.

But you guys never win anything.  and the counties that do win are nothing like yours.

It's a frustrating paradox.

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Fri Nov 26, 2010 at 12:06:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wins/no wins in Hunterdon (0.00 / 0)

It's not true that we don't have any wins in Hunterdon; but they're municipal wins, GOP has a lock on the county seats.

But you're quite correct, organizing in blue and red counties is a very different experience.

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Fri Nov 26, 2010 at 12:42:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's all about....Leverage (3.00 / 1)

Jay, I think you're right about turf.  

It's just that a relatively small infusion of resources in Hunterdon, for example, has in the past proven to be far more significant.  No, we haven't won county-wide, but when we had just a little bit of staff on the ground, we did in fact do better in local elections.  

And I guess the larger point is that sustaining local victories is what will build momentum and develop candidates to run county-wide.  The math is certainly not there -- yet -- but the trend is in the right direction.  

There are right now about 17,000 registered Dems here (and yes, 32,000 Republicans) of the total of about 87K voters.  

[Ask Rosi what the numbers looked like just 10 or 15 years ago -- we've made some significant gains.]

But the election turn out this year was only about 40,000 voters.  Which means that good Democratic candidates -- with the right resources -- would be at least competitive.  

Jeffrey Doshna

---

by: Jeff Doshna @ Fri Nov 26, 2010 at 13:10:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What's frustrating is... (0.00 / 0)

...that progressives do not seem willing or able to adapt to the obstacles placed in front of them.

Clearly, progressives in red counties are going to have a very hard time winning general elections except at the municipal level and even that is very hard.  However, this doesn't mean that victory is completely impossible.

If progressives in red counties registered as Republicans, organized other Democrats to do the same, and ran candidates in Republican primaries, they would have a much better chance of winning because turnout is so much lower in these elections.

The solution in blue counties can also be found in lower turnout primary elections.  Democrats in blue counties vote for machine candidates in primary elections, because they tend to run unopposed or against disorganized opposition that doesn't understand that they need to build a full line of candidates to create the image of strength.

However, if the Democratic establishment in these blue machine counties had a real progressive opposition with compelling candidates advocating important issues that the machine candidates only pay lip service to, there is no doubt in my mind that progressives could win primary elections at every level on the ballot.

With all due respect, Jay, you missed a golden opportunity to get something started in Camden County when you were on NJN this week.  If you had not accepted the premise of Michael Aron's question with regards to Democrats being outmanuevered by Christie and instead focused on the lack of Democratic opposition because the Senate President's boss and the Assembly Speaker's boss are in bed with Christie, you could have brought a lot of attention for the need for a progressive alternative in Camden County and other blue machine counties.

But by all means, Jay, keep doing things the way that you are doing them.  Even if it doesn't get marriage equality passed or DADT repealed, it should keep you on the talk show circuit.  Apologies in advance for the snark.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Fri Nov 26, 2010 at 16:41:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

what campaign (0.00 / 0)

are you referring to, Tabbycat?

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 18:18:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The one I just worked on (0.00 / 0)

It was a coordinated campaign in Kentucky that I just spent the last 3 months working on.  We lost the senate race but won the congressional (narrowly).

http://outspokenliberal.blogsp...

---

by: tabbycat31 @ Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 18:39:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

ESK - It would be nice if you reached out to DNC members (0.00 / 0)

in NJ! We'd all like to be on the same page and if the idea is to use the OFA to optimize the through-put of Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents and the DNC ... there is much more to do!

Have you met any NJ DNC members? Has there been connections with regular Democratic and progressive constituencies?

In my experience there was nothing done by the OFA until I met the new state field director in the late spring of 2010. She, at least, gave some hope and did appear at necessary events!

It did seem as if a whole year was lost ... and at that point OFA was playing catch-up. Perhaps I just missed something?

I did like the 50 state strategy, but I do know that each of the 50 state parties are organized differently and the tasks of organizing through each state party might appear daunting for a uniform  message, but we do realize that "all politics is local".

I do have confidence that "We Democrats" will figure it out!

"Discrimination caused by ignorance and fear is a tax on human progress" - Barbra Casbar Siperstein

---

by: Babs NJSD @ Sun Nov 28, 2010 at 19:59:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

First Person (0.00 / 0)

With regards Jeffrey Doshna's criticism of OFA above, you should know that Jeff Doshna (who was the Democratic candidate for mayor in Flemington this year) was the first person in Hunterdon County to have an Obama sign in his yard. Early, early. He was the President's tireless advocate. Far more than I. It's a big deal for me to read that he has some of the same criticism's of the Obama campaign's successor.  

It's not a particularly snappy signature, but here's what I think we need in the next NJ Democratic State Chair.  

---

by: Rosi Efthim @ Fri Nov 26, 2010 at 02:00:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dean, Feingold, Grayson and the Grassroots (0.00 / 0)

I think Obama won in '08 because of his ability to speak and thanks to a grassroots organization built by Howard Dean.  Asking Howard Dean, Russ Feingold or Alan Grayson to lead should be a no-brainer. But that's only half of it - the politics half. Obama needs to do policy, and, in my opinion,  needs to bring in economics people like or including Paul Krugman and Robin Wells who understand Keynesian economics, Robert Costanza, Herman Daly, and Josh Farley, who understand ecological economics, and energy and resource people like or including Bill McKibben, Van Jones, Amory Lovins ...

But that too is only half of it.

The Republican-Tea Party won this year - and we can expect them to overreach and help us keep Obama in the White House in 2012 - because of a fake grassroots organization funded by Charles and David Koch, of Koch Industries, with boatloads of free publicity from "Faux" News, and with more money courtesy of the Citizens United decision by the "Subprime" Court.

We need a Constitutional Amendment that states: "Corporations are not legal persons and do not have and may not claim the right to free speech or other rights as delineated in the Constitution or the Amendments thereof."  

Sustainability: Harnessing processes rather than consuming resources.

---

by: lfurman @ Fri Nov 26, 2010 at 19:34:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]