I’ve avoided writing opinion diaries for a bit because I’m still going through the mountains of data an election generates. Since election night, however, I’ve been pelted with thoughts, commentary, and opinions by many about the direction of the party and the role of the DNC.
There are some assessments being made which are fair, others which aren’t so fair, and some which are just, well, wrong. The greatest problem I’ve run into is that for as eager as people are to get involved, there aren’t enough who seemingly really understand the problem or realities that a national party faces or how to repair them.
I want to say up front that this is subjectively my opinion, and therefore you can take it as you will, but I think it is time for us to snap out of it and talk about what needs to be done. Below, I’m going to detail that.
Recently, Markos put up his thoughts on the direction of the DNC. I'd strongly recommend you read it; agree or disagree, it is a clear vision for the role of the national party. I think we need to clarify a few points about how to improve our party.
Hyperbolic demands for mass firings isn’t helpful.
Let's get this out of the way. It is cathartic to demand that heads roll. It makes people feel good. Saying “these people should lose their job!” is certainly a winner in a lot of crowds following an election where you lose. There is some level of turnover that has to happen in order to signal a sea change; but more recently we’ve turned this into a matter of hyperbolic stunts rather than reasoned arguments. If we want the right change, we have to move beyond blanket statements that confuse a lot of readers.
A good example of this is Cenk Uygur, who recently argued that “everyone should be fired” in Common Dreams. By framing his argument as “EVERYONE should be fired” he offers no qualifiers to readers and that has left too many thinking about this in a way that isn’t at all helpful. The reality is, in any organization, you have a ton of people doing a ton of work; the continual assertion that everyone is tainted is not helpful if we want to build the party.
While Uygur would certainly contend he means only those at the top, it isn’t the message that is being effectively conveyed, in fact, he goes on in the article to say “Let me be clear—every single person at the DNC should be fired.” Nationally, numerous Democratic party members and officers did the work that was asked of them, and surprising even in a loss, some did it exceptionally well. We have to remember that in elections there are a lot of moving parts; firing people at the DNC who managed, say, campaign finance compliance, accounting, key relationship services, outside vendor contracts… to what end does that give us? Any at all?
The typical comeback is: “that isn’t what I meant and you know it”; my counter response is simple: realize too many Americans and Democratic party members do not understand how a large scale organization works, and therefore they do not instantly get that when we say “everyone should be fired”, we don’t REALLY mean everyone should be fired. Clarity and word choices do matter.
Be sensible when we talk about what is and isn’t possible. NOTE: I had originally put “heads on pikes” a colloquialism a lot of us use, which resulted in people being unhappy and disregarding the heart of the message I want to convey here; a great way to distract from the key point. So, text edited to “promoting mass firings”, which is as accurate as possible.
Gerrymandering can kill statewide candidates. We need to recognize that reality.
When Democratic party members talk about gerrymandering, we often say “well, this gets neutralized in a statewide where those boundaries don’t matter”. This is absolutely false. Completely false. What has occurred is that we end up with Democratic representatives in seats where they face little to no challenge. This is true on the state and federal level. What happens? If a Democratic candidate knows they are certainly assured of re-election or they are unopposed, it is much harder to get them to work on turning out voters in their district. What does it matter, they think, I’m guaranteed re-election!
We also end up with Democratic members stuck in overwhelmingly Republican districts who write off their election because “my vote here doesn’t matter” in overturning terrible state and local legislators. So, they quit going to the polls.
The fact is, it DOES matter because we need high Democratic voter turnout in districts we are guaranteed to win in order to carry states and congressional districts. One of the greatest problems we have is turning out our voters in solidly blue districts at a high enough number. We also need Democratic members in less friendly areas to feel as though there is a reason to participate.
Now, I’ve talked to others and pointed out I’m likely an Ellison vote, but I think those who assume that he has a lock on what grassroots look like need to realize that even Rep. Ellison needs to better look at voter turnout. Let’s check his district, Minnesota’s 5th.
en.wikipedia.org/…
Overwhelmingly Democratic, in 2016, Ellison’s voter turnout was down from 2012, despite the fact that per a query to the registrar there should be more eligible voters on hand than there were in 2012. What happened? Elected officials who face almost no real challenge to a reelection simply struggle to put together a turn out the vote campaign. Ellison, like many, faced only token opposition. Assured of victory it is hard to motivate workers and donors to support a real get out the vote effort. Ellison, however, did far better than most in his situation.
Ellison's drop off is nothing in comparison to others. Lacy Clay, Democratic representative in Missouri’s 1st District saw a nearly 30,000 vote count drop to his total this year; a drop so significant that it would have made a major difference in other races around the state.
If we want to understand how to make our party better, we have to head on confront the fact that we no can no longer just embrace gerrymandering when it benefits us; it has become a Republican tool to promote complacency, and it works far too often, far too well.
Democratic party members need to see a significant shift in expectations of the kind of turn out operation they need to operate in their own state.
Please note: while I’ve singled out two, I could single out a great number. People who work in house offices often refer to several as ‘house plants’. I mention Ellison, but realize, his turnout number is far better than several others. Too many get into districts they know they will win, with no contest, that we stop turning out votes and there is no intent to really force them to own the turnout model in their own district because.. again, they win, regardless of the turnout number.
This needs to change.
Party Chairs Are Not Messiahs
Over the last few weeks, I’ve had several democratic party leaders lobby for my vote regarding DNC Chair. Some good arguments, some poor arguments. Some have argued it this way: “Vote for my guy or I quit the party!”; others have argued as “If it isn’t X, then we are all screwed.” I want to point out something: party chair is not a messiah. They can address some issues, including big ones. But they alone cannot solve all ills that face the world. That isn’t their job. People in all camps, Bernie and Hillary supporters have chosen favorites and make strong arguments for their candidates.
No matter whether it is Keith Ellison, Howard Dean, Ilyse Hogue, or anyone else, the reality is that their tenure will be largely successful or not successful based on the candidates that run and the work done in the states needed to win. No matter who becomes chair, they do not get to determine everything on the board, especially who runs and what issues power their campaigns. Anyone who thinks they can falls into the exact trap that people blame the DNC for, rightly or wrongly, in 2016.
While a party chair who is represents our issues certainly matters, having a plan that involves all 435 congressional districts matters in a big way. No matter who runs or wins, it is an obligation on all of us to not just sit back and say “see, we got that sorted out”, we have an obligation to make sure we find good candidates who will continue to run in order to fill up slots in state legislatures, county commissions, and yes US Congress and Senate.
There are real opportunities. Take them.
If you’ve been sitting on the sideline and saying “I hate the DNC”; or “I hate Dems”; or “I just don't care anymore”; that is certainly your right. But if you want to help make change happen, you have to look at the landscape now and realize things have shifted in a big way.
Trump is not normal and future elections will definitely be impacted by his win. If we want this to work for us, in upcoming special elections and state level elections, the work began last week.
I haven’t been able to post as often because, frankly, we’re already talking to candidates in multiple states about their 2017 races and 2018 races. The interest in standing up to Trump is there. The question is, do we have the work ethic to earn the support of those who want to give it?