1
   

Dean to seek chairmanship of Democrats

 
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Nov, 2006 09:51 am
Sozobe
sozobe wrote:
I'm deaf, so my authority on this is limited, but I really don't think this is a man-describing-women kind of thing. She strikes me as shrill, too. Just in terms of her speechifying style -- not enough modulation, especially when speaking loudly.

I definitely, definitely object to that whole angle -- if you're against Hillary running you're somehow anti-feminist. I think it's more feminist to regard a woman candidate positively at the outset but then accept actual weaknesses rather than just plowing by them in the name of solidarity or something. I'd love it if Hillary didn't have those significant weaknesses. She does.


Sozobe, My preference for Hillary Clinton is that she be the Majority Leader on the Senate rather than run for president. She would be effective in that job. I also think she is qualified to be president, but I don't think she can win the national election.

In addition, I have never supported or voted for a woman just because she is a woman. I don't care about the sex of the person who has their foot on my head.

BBB
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Nov, 2006 09:53 am
Re: Sozobe
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
but I don't think she can win the national election.


I agree.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Nov, 2006 10:28 am
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
So how is Hillary Clinton "shrill"?

Kind of like this, from your description:

"Shrillness denotes [a] harsh, strident quality"

Her speaking style to me comes across as harsh and strident.

And I dont think it's just "males" who say that, either.

At the same time, the social rapport she has with her audience seems awkward and uncomfortable. Kinda like John Kerry's is. So it's sorta the worst of both worlds.

I am aware that as long as society is not used to powerful women, women who express themselves assertively are more at risk of quickly being perceived as "shrill", often for the same things that would have been taken for granted from a man.

But again, to put it in this odd way - just because you're being persecuted, doesnt mean you're innocent. The above may be true and Hillary may yet also actually really be shrill. I mean, I dont perceive Angela Merkel or Segolene Royal, both powerful women as well (and whose styles are practically each other's opposite), as shrill. So it must be something particular to Hillary as well.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Nov, 2006 03:12 pm
nimh and soz

No real intention there of trying to change your personal notions on the lady but rather just a reminder of how these campaigns can slip under our skin when we don't remind ourselves of them.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Nov, 2006 03:16 pm
nimh wrote:
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
So how is Hillary Clinton "shrill"?

Kind of like this, from your description:

"Shrillness denotes [a] harsh, strident quality"

Her speaking style to me comes across as harsh and strident.


Her speaking style is akin to fingernails on a chalkboard.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Nov, 2006 09:27 am
Labour drafts in US election architect for 'our midterms'
Labour drafts in US election architect for 'our midterms'
Howard Dean to advise party on campaigning strategy ahead of key May vote
Tania Branigan and Julian Borger
Saturday November 11, 2006
The Guardian

Labour has enlisted one of the engineers of this week's Democratic victory in the US midterm elections in an attempt to boost its flagging fortunes before the local elections in May.

Howard Dean, the former presidential candidate and one of the men credited with masterminding the trouncing of the Republicans, will visit the UK next month to brief party officials about his pioneering campaigning techniques.

"The Welsh, Scottish and local elections next year are our midterms," said Hazel Blears, Labour's chair. "It has to be done differently for us to carry on being successful ... We're looking at how [the Democrats] have upped their game."
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Nov, 2006 05:06 pm
Hear, hear..

Quote:
Howard Dean, vindicated

Only weeks after the Democratic National Committee chose Howard Dean as its chairman last year, the nasty whispers began to circulate around Washington and among longtime party donors and activists in cities from New York to Los Angeles. "He's going to be a disaster," they muttered. "He can't raise any money. He doesn't know what he's doing. And what does he mean by this crazy 50-state strategy?"

Those early days must have been painful for the former Vermont governor -- still smarting back then from his presidential primary defeat and that endlessly looped "scream" video -- and he endured a barrage of snarks and snipes from the Democratic congressional leadership as well. Unfortunately for Dean, he doesn't play the Washington press corps nearly as well as do rivals like Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., who ran the House Democrats' campaign committee, or Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who performed the same role in the Senate.

But this week, he is enjoying vindication far earlier than he ever expected.

Despite all the complaints and demands directed at him over the past 18 months, Dean stuck to his principles. He and his supporters in the netroots movement believed that their party needed to rebuild from the ground up in every state, including many where the party existed in name only. These Democrats prefer to think of their party as one of inclusion and unity. They openly disdain the divisive strategies of the Republicans who have so often used racial, regional and cultural differences to polarize voters.

And they believe that relying on opportunistic attempts to grab a few selected states or districts as usual -- rather than establishing a real presence across the country -- conceded a permanent structural advantage to the Republicans that would only grow more durable with each election cycle.

Breaking that advantage would be costly and difficult, as Dean well realized, but it had to be done someday, or the Democrats would fulfill Karl Rove's dream of becoming a permanent minority party -- or fading away altogether. Against the counsel of party professionals, whose long losing streak has done little to diminish their influence, the new chairman began the process of re-creating the Democratic Party in 2005. And contrary to the gossip and subsequent press reports, he succeeded in raising $51 million last year, about 20 percent more than in 2003 and a party record for an off year.

Much of that money was spent in ways that obviously paid off on Tuesday, including the 2005 election of Democratic Gov. Tim Kaine in Virginia -- where Jim Webb's upset victory over incumbent Sen. George Allen overturned Republican control of the Senate. Several million dollars was spent on rebuilding the party's national voter files, yet another essential sector in which the Republicans have enormous technological superiority.

Less obvious but equally significant was the spending on hundreds of organizers and communications specialists -- and their training -- in every state. In some places this meant taking the chains off locked, dusty offices that had seen no real activity in years; in others, it meant bailing the state party out of literal bankruptcy and convening meetings in counties where party activists had given up.

In Indiana, among the reddest states north of the Mason-Dixon line, the Democratic National Committee placed two field organizers and a new party communications director on the ground a year before the midterm elections. While that doesn't sound like a very impressive assault on a Republican stronghold, those few organizers created a party presence and started preparing for battle in vulnerable congressional districts. Suddenly the Republicans had to deal with ground opposition where traditionally they had faced no field operation at all -- not only in Indiana but in deep-red Idaho, Wyoming, Kentucky and Nebraska, too.

The Democrats didn't win in all those districts, of course, although they did enjoy several unexpected victories. What Dean and his organizers created, however, was an environment that allowed insurgents and outliers as well as the party's chosen challengers to ride the national wave of revulsion against conservative rule. That enterprise, in turn, surprised and overwhelmed the Republican capacity to respond. Faced with many more viable challenges than anticipated, the Republicans made mistakes in allocating resources -- and were forced to defend candidates in districts that are usually safe.

For now, Dean has reached a peaceful accommodation with his internal critics and enemies, many of whom were motivated by his outspoken opposition to the war in Iraq and his support from the unruly netroots. Debate will continue over the wisest national strategy for 2008. Should Democrats continue to pursue the 50-state strategy, even in the difficult terrain of the deep South? Or should they seek to consolidate and expand the gains made this year in the mountain states and the Midwest?

Ultimately, the party's presidential nominee will make that decision. In the meantime, the party chairman has won the argument he started last year. Rebuilding the Democratic Party in every state is as much a matter of pragmatism as principle. There would have been much less for the Democrats to celebrate on Election Night if Howard Dean hadn't been so "crazy" -- and so persistent.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Nov, 2006 11:40 am
Howard Dean's 50-State Strategy Pays Off
Howard Dean's 50-State Strategy Pays Off
By Scott Galindez
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 13 November 2006

The chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), Rahm Emanuel, stormed out of Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman Howard Dean's office in May after an expletive-filled tirade against the DNC's spending too much money, too early, in "non-battleground states." Emanuel was concerned the DNC would be broke and not on the playing field in November. The opposite was true, and the playing field was larger due to the early investment.

Was Emanuel Talking About States Like Indiana?

The Democrats picked up 3 seats in a state that was considered as red as the Hoosiers' basketball uniforms. Dean, in an interview with the Christian Science Monitor, said: "We put folks into Indiana a year and half before we knew the candidates."

Was Emanuel Talking About States Like New Hampshire?

Voters in New Hampshire, home of the nation's kickoff presidential primary, re-elected Democratic governor John Lynch in a landslide over state representative Jim Coburn (R). Democrats gained more than 80 seats to grab a majority in the 400-member House, where they had been in the minority since at least 1922. Democrats also picked up five seats - giving them 13 of 24 seats - to flip control of the New Hampshire Senate, where they have been in the minority since 1988.

Was Emanuel Considering Governors' Races?

Going into the midterm elections, Republicans had a 28-to-22 advantage in governors. That number has now flipped. States with Democratic governors now command 295 electoral votes, up from 126 before the election, a factor that could have a "huge impact for the presidential race in '08."

How About State Legislatures, Rahm?

Democrats nearly doubled the number of states where they control both the legislature and the governor's office. Fifteen state governments are now solidly blue politically, seven more than before the voting. Ten state capitals are fully in Republicans' hands, down from 12. The other 25 states have divided government.

Emanuel and Schumer Deserve Credit, Too

Much has been made about the battle between Dean and the Netroots v. Emanuel and Schumer. In the end, they all did their jobs, and the Democrats prevailed. The DCCC and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) pumped enough money into the key races in the last month of the campaign to guarantee victory. Now if they could just see that by pumping money and staff early into all 50 states, Howard Dean gave them more key races to work with.

Lesson Learned

The lesson learned should be that the DNC should continue to build the party from the ground up in all 50 states, expanding the playing field, while the DCCC and DSCC should continue to target the key races, giving the final push to victory.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Galindez is the Managing Editor of Truthout.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Jul, 2007 04:44 pm
Sometimes it's fun to end up back in time in a thread a bit..

You know, you do a search for something, come up in a wholly unrelated thread, and you're seeing these posts from, in this case, April and May 2005..

And read all of this kind of thing...

JustWonders wrote:
<< Predicts the Dems will soon have to fire [Dean] if he keeps preaching hate, hate, hate. One or two must have learned something from the last go 'round>> Smile


Lash wrote:
[Dean's] going around calling DeLay a criminal--when Hillary and Pelosi backed down from the DeLay Challenge, because their own ethics violations are worse than DeLay's?

Dean spouting off about it will only zero people back on to Hill and Pelosi.


timberlandko wrote:
I should be wholly unsurprised were Dean to find himself out of a job before -if ever - DeLay is found to have violated any Senate rule or civil law.


JustWonders wrote:
Dean's just another red-faced, angry Northeastern liberal who fools no one.

I bet Hillary is livid, though. The more he plays to the left's fears, the harder it will be on her attempts to expand their party towards the political middle.

Just keeps getting narrower and narrower Smile


Lash wrote:
<Hmmm...Dean...fired...for stupidity....maybe, folks>


JustWonders wrote:
You might want to look up some recent polling data on a certain Senator from W. Virginia....I know it's way, way early (and not even sure he's gonna run), but could be we'll be singing 'Bye, Bye, Byrdie" one of these days Smile


jpinMilwaukee wrote:
It's almost like watching a train wreck in slow motion.


Lash wrote:
It IS a slow mo train wreck.

But, what this will do is AGAIN cause Indies and sane Dems (there are two left) to look at that party---and feel like they want to be FAR away from it.

Dean really has been--and continues to be--a boon to the GOP.


Didnt quite work out the way they thought, eh?

Wonder if something was learned..
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Jul, 2007 04:47 pm
Don't you already know the answer to that?

Though I will say that Conservative and Republican participation at A2K has absolutely plummeted.

I've said it many times before - Republicans are great on attack, sh*tty on defense.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Jul, 2007 04:49 pm
<maybe I should finally vote in my poll Very Happy >
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Jul, 2007 04:55 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Though I will say that Conservative and Republican participation at A2K has absolutely plummeted.

I've said it many times before - Republicans are great on attack, sh*tty on defense.

Yep, I noticed that. Exceptions excepted and all that.

I remember after the debacles of '02 and '04, how Democrats/liberals would gather here (or at Abuzz, still) to discuss all the various questions related to, what did we do wrong?, what should we change to better meet with the voters?, where to now?, what solutions would be right?

The strident conservative types, in the main, overall, just seem to go into hiding.. Until some victory will allow them to come out and snipe again, I s'pose.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Jul, 2007 05:25 pm
Actually, I believe most of them have found the constant deluge of insults, thread disruptions and lack of proper moderation enough to find greener pastures.

I am too lazy to find another forum, so I stick around.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Jul, 2007 05:30 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Actually, I believe most of them have found the constant deluge of insults, thread disruptions and lack of proper moderation enough to find greener pastures.

I am too lazy to find another forum, so I stick around.


Mmm hmm. There's no more of this going on now then there was back then, I guarantee. The only thing which has really changed is the political ascendancy of the Dem Party.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Jul, 2007 05:43 pm
McGentrix wrote:
and lack of proper moderation enough to find greener pastures.


once the next version of A2K gets going, it's going to get even better Cool

~~~

Seriously, I'm glad you're around. I'm not so interested in looking things up when I'm only reading one/one and a half sides. The freepers are useless these days. GOPUSA's interesting in its language shift but its writers are a bit ennnhhhh. It's good to get some other reference points to follow (and I don't always want them to be as dry as factcheck).
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Jul, 2007 08:48 am
McGentrix wrote:
Actually, I believe most of them have found the constant deluge of insults, thread disruptions and lack of proper moderation enough to find greener pastures.

I am too lazy to find another forum, so I stick around.


Demoralization, of the sort that attends an avalanche of events or an overwhelming change in consensus in directions which one finds disagreeable, seems rather more likely as fundamental cause. I consider Just Wonders a paradigm example...gone the day after the election. Who imagines this re-evaluation on her part had the election gone otherwise? Who thiinks foxfyre wouldn't still be here if Bush's approval rating was at 50% or if the movement she represents and believes in hadn't fallen into such broad disrepute?

I am entirely unsympathetic to either of them. I found them both to be ideologues almost completely incapable of rising above their sets of fixed ideas and party/movement membership. Authoritarian political arrangements whether right or left or godless or righteous are built with such people and require mindsets such as they demonstrated.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Jul, 2007 04:54 pm
Hey, Dean said some stupid shlt, nimh....
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Jul, 2007 05:02 pm
Doesn't seem to have hurt him, or the DNC.

In fact, they do seem to be raising record amounts of money.

Maybe what he said wasn't so stupid after all.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Jul, 2007 05:14 pm
I think we can all see they've muzzled him. After that necessary adjustment, he isn't the lightning rod he was when he was allowed to be himself.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2007 05:06 pm
Quote:
Changes are taking place with the party organization too. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, who railed against "fundamentalist preachers" during his presidential campaign, is reaching out to evangelicals and other religious groups. Over the past 3 years, the DNC built a faith operation from scratch including a Faith Advisory Council, a research wing, polling and targeted messaging. They're partnering with state parties to bring local clergy members into the tent.

Dean, himself, has increased his visibility at religious gatherings and conducted briefings with religious leaders across the ideological spectrum. He was the first DNC chairman to appear at the Hispanic prayer breakfast.

"Contrary to partisan rhetoric, the truth is that Democrats are people of strong faith and we are guided by our values," he said at the breakfast.



cnn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/06/2024 at 08:35:45