To the elitist defeatists: Get you GONE!

[David Van Os]

On Saturday, August 26, at the Radisson Hotel in Austin, members of the State Democratic Executive Committee (SDEC) attended a private luncheon to which Democratic candidates were not invited. At this luncheon, the members of the SDEC learned that a small group of moneyed lawyers and their consultants are now providing the funding for the Texas Democratic Party’s operations and will do so for the next four years.

At the meeting, the lawyers and their consultants told the SDEC members that 2006 is a “rebuilding” year and that the only races they believe Democrats have a chance to win are a few legislative districts around the state and these few races are what will be emphasized.

I have a response to these ivory-tower elitist lawyers and their over-priced consultants: lead, follow, or get out of the way. Their attitude reflects exactly the kind of Beltway-oriented losers’ thinking that has betrayed over and over again the millions of people who look up to the Democratic Party to stand and fight for them.

I am a Democrat because I believe in the magnificent historical legacy and value system of my party as the Party of the People in American life. I am immensely proud to be a Democrat. But I am not proud of these ivory-tower elitists and their continual selling out of the heritage of my party.

The people of Texas are under attack today from a reign of greed, corruption, and arrogance at the hands of the corporate monopoly robber barons and the crooked politicians who are their water boys. The rich lawyers and ivory tower consultants who are telling Democrats not to try to carry Texas this year are giving the robber barons and their incumbent Republican stooges exactly what they want. In effect, those lawyers and their consultants are doing nothing less than protecting the silk-stocking Republican social clique that runs Texas government today as if it were a private club.

I am proud of and believe in the great heritage of the party of Jefferson, Jackson, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy and Johnson, the people’s party. I am and shall always remain proud of the Texas Democratic heritage of the likes of Jim Hogg, Sam Rayburn, Jim Allred, Lyndon Johnson and Ralph Yarborough. I am proud to be a Democratic nominee this year with real fighters of heart and conviction like Chris Bell, Barbara Radnofsky, Maria Louisa Alvarado, Fred Head, VaLinda Hathcox, Hank Gilbert, Dale Henry, Judge Bill Moody, and J.R. Molina. But to the fancy-pants wimps and mice that are afraid to stand and fight the robber barons on behalf of the people, get you GONE!

Go find yourselves some little hideaways and snivel away in fear and defeatism on your own time. Go lounge away your time in your lifelong cocktail hours with the smug and haughty journalists who think it’s a big joke that millions of Texans are struggling every day to figure out how to make their paychecks or Social Security checks or farm income stretch to cover $3-a-gallon gasoline, exorbitant prescription drugs, skyrocketing utility bills, outrageous insurance premiums, and all the other attack weapons of the corporate monopoly robber barons.

As for me, I’m going to fight and fight and fight those robber barons and their silk-stocking politician stooges. You pundits and consultants won’t understand this, but we Texans are fighters. If I have to fight you too in order to get at the robber barons and the power-grabbers, I’ll do so. Whomever I have to fight in order to win justice for my fellow Texans I will, and I swear I’ll fight you till hell freezes over, and then fight you on the ice.

David Van Os

[Melissa G]

1. K&R!! The Hell they say!!! When we kick the behinds of all those

repubs they 'think' are safe..I wonder what they are gonna say?


Way to fight, David!!! I hope those fools are taking notes!!!

:kick:

[natureman]

2. David give 'em hell

I live in Goliad County in the proposed path of the I-69 TTC Corridor. I am going door to door to all of my neighbors and educating them about this corridor. It is amazing how ignorant people are about this corridor. The Democratic Party should be taking advantage of this. Last Sunday morning I dispensed homemade flyers at a Church in the proposed pathway explaining this Perry land grab to all of the members. I'm doing what I can. Thanks for what you are doing !! The TexDOT maps show where the democrats should be sending literature. I have a 100% (I'm not voting for Perry) response from everyone I have explained this to. I know most of these people have voted Republican or not voted at all. I can only do so much. We need to target these people with mail. Very effective strategy.

[johncoby2]

10. HOW IN THE HELL DO YOU EXPECT TO DO THIS?

yes. All great ideas. Send money.

Unfortunately doing this either needs a boat load of people who have nothing else to do with their life, like work, take care of kids, soccer, football, making money to pay for gas, school, yard work, etc etc or else you need some money.

Everyone wants the Texas Democratic Party to do this, and do that, and to send volunteers, and buy literature, and radio ads, and TV spots, etc etc etc etc.

Can any of you figure out how to do this WITHOUT money? If you do, come down to my area and help my candidates!

[PDittie]

12. Fred Baron is in for about a million dollars, John

and that money's going somewhere (not to any of the statewide candidates as far as I can see). It's going to databases and consultants and TDP staff and ...

It's the Texas version of the DCCC, the DSCC and the way they do business. Polls, "targeting", focusing on a few selected races "where we have a chance" the same way the Kerry campaign focused on "winning just one more state than Al Gore"...

It is a minimalist, marginalist, defeatist strategy and it has been since 1994. Why do we keep paying the same people over and over and over to do the same thing over and over when all they've done is lose?

Performing the same action repeatedly and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity, folks.

Listen: it's Fred's money, and I certainly believe he's entitled to do what he wants with it. But this sort of thing is causing the Texas Democratic Party to divide along class lines. THAT ain't good.

[johncoby2]

13. $500,000!!!!!!!

Wow! That is cool!

Well, first it is not the party's job to raise money for candidates. Candidates do that and can get help from the party IF they show promise, or can get the message out, or can help the entire ticket. But I don't think it is the party's responsibility to fund candidates.

Second, there are somethings the TDP is doing that is great! VAN is super if you use it early and correctly, AND have money to take that information collected from block walking and phone banking to effectively use the information. It would be BETTER if it was effectively used by the entire party.

I am all for infrastructure. We definitely need this in the future.

[PDittie]

17. Dude.

You don't think it's the Party's job to help raise money for the candidates or contribute to their campaigns?

WTF is their job, then?

Let's first establish that there is no purpose for a Party apparatus if they cannot get people elected. And I think we can all agree that the Texas Democratic Party has been a complete, utter, abject failure at gettng people elected for the past decade.

The current iteration of leadership is doing precisely the same thing that all of the previous losers have done: paying "experts" to tell them how they can win. A 'few, select, targeted races'.

That is batshit fucking nuts.

And if the TDP's job was to recruit candidates to run for statewide office, well, guess what? They choked. After their asses got handed to them in 2002, they gave up. They quit.

They have failed us, the people too many times in the past. And they apparently intend to do the same goddamn thing again.

We have a slate of candidates running for office who aren't members of the Democratic elite, who weren't selected by the moneyed interests, who aren't part of the "machine", and each and every one of them have chosen to stand for office not for the money or the power or the prestige but because they felt compelled to change our government. To return to something that serves the people instead of ripping them off; a government that maintains state parks and public schools and doesn't give payoffs to their corporate pals to build toll roads or pass insurance rate increases, and on and on. This you get, I know.

WTF exactly should the Texas Democratic Party be doing with their money if it is not actively helping their statewide candidates get elected? Does it make sense that any statewide executive office you can name is more important than any five State House races you can name?

For Chrissakes, just one-fifth of Fred Baron's money -- $100,000 -- could get split 5 ways right now, among Chris B and Maria Luisa and David and Hank and Fred Head -- the candidates who need it the most -- just to get some gas in their tanks, or push cards or yard signs or maybe some direct mail or radio spots or a phone bank.

Do you know how many databases have been created just in the last year to "target" Democratic voters?

Don't you realize that targeting Democratic voters hasn't won us anything? That the message has got to spread to disaffected Republicans, independents, and unregistered voters (like oh, maybe the 150,000 people who now live in Texas as a result of Hurricane Katrina)? This year, of all years? How is the TDP getting that message out, right now? At this moment?

The headlines have been good, all right: "Richie files lawsuit against DeLay", etc. Good on him for that.

But I don't think we need any more databases or staff to program them or people to tell us how to use the programs or how to read the reams of reports or any of that hockey. If the Texas Democratic Party can't trust the statewide candidates with any money, then I damn sure can't trust the TDP with any of mine.

And beyond that, I have deep reservations about their ability to make decisions uncorrupted by the money Fred Baron is giving them.

[David Van Os]

18. Rejoinder to mi compadre Coby

Hey John, it is real hard for candidates to raise money when the party operatives are telling potential donors not to support the candidate. That is precisely what is taking place, John, right now, to candidates whom you support and want to see win.

The consultants and pundits have brainwashed lots of Democrats into thinking that the size of a campaign bank account and the percentages reflected in a poll are the most important measurements of the worthiness of a political candidate. But those are the very least important criteria. The most important thing is what is in the candidate's heart, character, convictions, and value system.

You know why the majority of voters don't trust the political parties or most of the candidates? Because the voters are smarter than the consultants give them credit for. The voters know that political candidates are being selected on the basis of money and spin, rather than on the basis of heart, character, and convictions.

The majority of voters not trusting the political parties hurts us a lot worse then it hurts Republicans, because the majority of voters are Democrats who are disillusioned because they keep seeing the "party of the people" let them down and keep waiting for it to come back. They're very patient, but they're also not going to give their votes until they see it coming back.

When you say that you want to support only "good" candidates, who decides that, John? Only the voters if you really believe in democracy. But today in our party, we are letting elitist pompous smart alecks decide that. However, if a candidate has been nominated by the Democratic Party, it is then the Democratic Party's duty to present that nominee to the voters so the voters have a fair chance to make that decision. That is not happening today. It is no mystery. At the luncheon on Saturday, the presenters flat out announced that the party is handicapping among its own nominees. And don't think the party doesn't fund its targeted favorites. The money may not come directly from the Party's bank accounts, but the party's representatives and courtiers get on the phones and tell donors which candidates they would like them to give money to. This happens in a big way.

Down with the politics of money and statistics. That kind of politics doesn't motivate the majority of voters; they know they're just data points on computer printouts and they don't like it. Restore the politics of the heart and of conviction.

My .02 for today.

DVO

[rusty_parts2001]

33. Absolutely correct!!

[muse]

30. I don't know that they are doing the same thing over and over again

I have a good friend that is a SDEC member and the plans from here to 2010 sound solid to me.

They (SDEC members) seemed to have left the meeting with the feeling that they had made wise choices for our future.

[johncoby2]

34. Ditto here.

I still don't know what you guys want the party to do besides the pie in the sky stuff.

When the party is able to attract donors for infrastructure, that is OK with me.

Just having a database to use is a HUGE improvement from 2 years ago.

Lets quit griping and go block walk in the hot sun. Maybe that would take some of the steam out of the discussion.

[PDittie]

35. I can't help you try to get this any more.

If you don't get it after my two previous posts...

And I'm not going to let it cost us our friendship either, John. See you Monday evening down at your place. We don't have to hash out this difference of opinion.

[Czolgosz]

3. K & R - Let those monied interests fund their candidates while we work our

own races.

Money is not immoral, but money is amoral. Money will always gravitate to the favorite and the sure bet, but passion is the currency of the just cause.

Let's hope that the best of the easy-money candidates are successful in their legislative races, but -- while we wish them well -- let's make damn sure we win the races we run. May all the good legislative candidates do well in their races, but we must stand by those who best reflect our values.

[snot]

4. Who exactly are the "moneyed lawyers and their consultants"?

Naming names could be helpful.

[PDittie]

8. Bob Schrum, Al From ...

...you need the Texans' names? (Would you know who they were if I named them?)

Just asking because, you know, this is where we're fighting this battle.

David has spent some time talking about the Consultantocracy before. (Google that word and you'll see.) It's the same thing David Sirota preaches. These people aren't interested in winning; they ARE ONLY IN IT TO GET PAID.

That makes them mercenaries at best, and whores at worst, in my book.

These are the people who have convinced the Walter Umphreys and John Eddie Williamses to give to Grandmaw, and NOTHING to any of the populists who stood up to fight this battle commencing in 60 days (yes, that's when early voting starts). And there's a whole new generation of these little prostitutes being raised on the teachings of those who have failed repeatedly, through multiple election cycles, to get Democrats elected.

Need another clue? You can read what some of them write here and here.

Names? You don't need no steenking names. You ought to know exactly who they are.

[TexasLinda]

54. Be still my heart...

"...And there's a whole new generation of these little prostitutes being raised on the teachings of those who have failed repeatedly, through multiple election cycles, to get Democrats elected..."

PDittie, you are my hero! And I know exactly who you are talking about as I have dealt with the little turds on more than one occasion.

[babylonsister]

5. Can we clone you, Mr. Van Os? Superb, and thank you! nt

[dweller]

6. if Texas don't want you sir

get yourself to NC, or any of the other upper 49 states and fight like hell there.

on ice :beer: for you!
dp

:kick: Rec!

[rusty_parts2001]

19. We want and need him in Texas and...

he's going to be our next Attorney General who will clean up the lobbyists' control of Austin.

[bvar22]

7. K&R

The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[TXsharon]

9. My first post here

It is all well and good to agree with David but we also have to give everything we have to give in time and money to make sure that his message gets out to the people.

[PDittie]

11. Welcome to DU, sharon!

:hi:

[johncoby2]

14. Help me out here. What is it that David and everyone else wants?

OK. They have some money and are trying to build infrastructure instead of pouring into races that cant be won.

(and we all have a candidate we know that cannot, will not, will never win a race)

(go ahead and admit it. I personally know of two, no three, that are running and shouldn't be running. Didnt ask anyone if they should run, didnt ask anyone if they would support their run, didnt have any money, didnt have any idea of how to get money, or a campaign, or a plan to run, or a strategy, and then wants the party to endorse and support them, and the clubs to walk in the hot sun and take their time from the other candidates who have a plan to work their experiment.)

I personally DO NOT want the party to support these people. They didnt do their homework before jumping in. We dont have the luxury of saving everyone who decided to wear a lead vest into the pool.

So.........what do you guys want the party to do? I am curious to know what you want, and how you would pay for it.

p.s. I believe in DVO, but not sure where you guys are coming from. Edumacate me.

[Czolgosz]

16. I can only tell you what I want.

We have a number of great and courageous statewide candidates (David Van Os, Chris Bell, Barbara Ann Radnofsky, Hank Gilbert, Bill Moody, J.R. Molina, and others) who are fighting campaigns of Democratic values versus entrenched Republican plutocracy, greed, and pay-to-play incumbency.

I understand the instinct to focus funding on easier-to-win regional races rather than more complicated and more costly statewide races, but I wish a larger portion of funding was allocated based on the candidates' values rather than some paid consultants' assessments of the candidates' marginally better or marginally worse odds of success at the ballot box. I'd like to see more financial support for our candidates who are fighting the good fight with pure motives and great heart because of the fact, and not despite the fact, that our bravest candidates have chosen to contest the best-funded opponents in the most difficult races.

I think we build the party by supporting those candidates who support our values because we educate the public about what we stand for as a party by those candidates we field. For example (and what a perfect example he is), I think a great campaigner like David Van Os does the party immeasurable good by showing Texans in communities large and small all across the state what a real Democrat sounds like. I think that quest deserves support even if it costs some funding from another candidate who the consultants have concluded stands an easier chance of winning election.

Politics should be more than a game of handicapping the most likely winners; it should entail the identification, encouragement, and promotion of those who best represent our most deeply held convictions.

[johncoby2]

20. Once again, I have now problem with this, but

Let's get real. Pick your candidate that you know will not win. I now know about 6. I do not want the party to promote these candidates. Not from the start. Not now. Not ever.

We dont have the time or the money to do so. PERIOD. God bless those who decided it upon themselves to decide to run, but if you are going to do this WITHOUT prior support, consultation, and a plan, then you are on your own. PERIOD.

On the other hand, we have some really good people running. Some true diamonds such as Hank and Valinda. They have the talent, experience, etc. Since I don't know how to run a state wide race, I cant offer any help on their campaigns or advice (which they probably wont want)

So what do you guys want? And how do you think you can get it done? Im at a lose.

[Czolgosz]

21. I want the party to have a candidate in every contestable race. Some of

those races are just about unwinnable, but I think there is nevertheless value to offering an alternative who promotes our values in every race no matter how difficult the race.

If we only support those candidates in the easier to win races, we concede part of the map, and I think that's not good for building a statewide party.

Not long ago, we had a hard time identifying and encouraging candidates in Dallas, but now Dallas has a growing roster of Democrats serving in elected offices. If we hadn't identified and encouraged those candidates who were the first wave to break through in Dallas, and had just conceded Dallas instead, we wouldn't be enjoying that North Texas resurgence.

A party must run candidates to win elections. We should encourage those who take on those tougher fights.

[johncoby2]

22. We should encourage those who take on those tougher fights. WHY?

Why if they did NOT do their homework? There is a HUGE difference between running and running intelligently.

Gene Kelley is running. Should we support him?

[Vincardog]

24. Do you equate a race like DVO (a HARD RACE) With Gene Kelley who

is a vanity run who only is playing with his name recognition?

There is no comparison. Why do you offer this false choice?

[Czolgosz]

25. I said we should support “campaigns of Democratic values versus entrenched

Republican plutocracy, greed, and pay-to-play incumbency” and gave as examples David Van Os, Chris Bell, Barbara Ann Radnofsky, Hank Gilbert, Bill Moody, and J.R. Molina. Did I mention Gene Kelly? Do you think Gene Kelly is fighting a campaign of Democratic values?

I said “I'd like to see more financial support for our candidates who are fighting the good fight with pure motives and great heart.” Does this describe Gene Kelly in your mind?

I spoke about the value to the party of having a candidate campaigning in “communities large and small all across the state.” Is Gene Kelly doing that?

I said that I favor “the identification, encouragement, and promotion of those who best represent our most deeply held convictions.” Is there any part of this statement that seems to encompass Gene Kelly?

In case there was any ambiguity in my statement that “We should encourage those who take on those tougher fights,” I did not mean that we should support do-nothing candidates whose entire campaign strategy begins and ends with voter confusion and name misidentification.

We should support candidates who actually campaign and who actually espouse the values we share and who are well qualified for the offices they seek. We ought not limit our support only to those candidates who have an easier path to getting elected according to some paid consultant.

Let me ask you: Henry Cuellar stands a pretty fair chance of being re-elected on the Democratic ticket. Is Cuellar's prospect for a relative decent chance at getting re-elected enough for us to throw our support and money behind his campaign or should we also question whether he supports our values?

Also, let me remind you that Nick Lampson got into the race against Tom DeLay at a time when many saw that election as "unwinnable" for a Democrat. Now Lampson is favored to win. If we don't run candidates for office, we cannot win back Texas.

[David Van Os]

27. Who decides?

John, who decides what Democratic nominee is and is not worthy of support? You? I like you, John, but no way do you have that right. It's not democratic, it's elitist. Do I have that right? No way. Does Matt Angle of the Lone Star Project have that right? He thinks he does, but no way, absolutely NO. Does Fred Baron's money buy him that right? NO!

As far as Gene Kelley is concerned, has it struck you that maybe the reason he keeps toying with the process is the way the same kind of bigwig lawyer elitists treated him in the early 90s when he first surfaced? Does the way I phrase the question suggest the answer? Fifteen years ago he was not such an obvious buffoon, but the royal dons of the TTLA viciously diss'd him because he was a military JAG officer rather than part of their elite personal-injury lawyer club. Hey I've been there and done that one, and I know how they diss' an honorable union-side labor lawyer & people's civil rights lawyer because he didn't have million-dollar verdicts on a trophy belt, never mind his track record with injunctions and issue decisions for civil rights advancement and labor organizing. If they'll do that to a labor&civil rights lawyer who is a Democratic Party activist, I can easily see how they would do it to a lowly JAG Corps lawyer. And, they did.

Not excusing Gene Kelley, but the thing about democracy is you take the bitter with the sweet, you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. One ridiculous Gene Kelley is not worth institutionalizing the elitist selective targeting that Martin Frost (and his strategic advisors such as Fred Baron and Matt Angle) institutionalized when he headed up the DCCC in the 90s and especially embedded into the Democratic Party's politics in his own state.

Hey, when you tell 70% of the voters that you don't expect to get their votes and aren't going to fight for their votes, what the hell do you think they're going to do? Not vote for you, that's for sure. But even worse, they will assume that you never want their votes so they will make it a permanent insitution in their lives not to vote for you. And that is exactly what they have done as a result of Frostie's haughty targeting strategies. If we had been in there running candidates, at least we could have told the voters, we care about you, we are fighting for your votes, and then they wouldn't have written us off permanently. The thing about writing voters off, is that they tend to reciprocate and write you off. What the hell else do you expect them to do?

A winner never quits and a quitter never wins.

[Vincardog]

23. John a race is only a race as long as it has at least 2 people in it.

Nader ran several times to INFLUENCE THE PUBLIC DISCOURSE. Why do you have a problem with TDP helping Democratic candidates? Have you bought into the fantasy that you are buying the candidate? By supporting Democratic candidates we force the republiCANTS to answer to the people and bring responsibility to the process.

The added benefit is that it stretches the oppositions budget to make them spend time and money everywhere instead of concentrating on those damn "targeted races". By refusing to support all the races TDP is aiding the opposition by allowing them to save their money.


GET IT?

[PDittie]

26. Reacquaint yourself with Howard Dean's 50-state strategy.

Even Greg Wythe gets it, for Pete's sake. (Google "run everywhere" and his name together.)

It's more than a little bit insulting to post what you have about people who chose to stand for office (and no, I'm not talking about Gene Kelley. He's a twit.) Someday when we're the majority party, we'll have the luxury of not challenging certain offices, although that would be similarly stupid to not doing so now.

(Turn on your empathy gene and try to understand what it feels like when Democrats say things like this when YOU run for office someday in the not-too-distant future, John. It just ain't cool. People take time away from their families, their businesses, spend a lot of their own money, all because they feel the need to try to change the direction things are headed. Seems like the least we can do is save the mockery for the Republican'ts, idn't it?)

[muse]

31. I must not be getting something basic here

I am going to assume, and hope, that everyone here donates money to candidates. I sure the hell do! My God, I give up my Banana Republic habit around election time every year (which is a SERIOUS committment), to give money, money, money to candidates.

I don't have money to give to races that I think are unwinnable. Someone, somehow has to convince me that a race is winnable for me to toss my $100 checks at it. Maybe other people donate differently. But, I want to fund races that have potential, not just as a charity effort.

Which is EXACTLY what some of this sounds like - throw money at candidates as a charity effort because they are fighting in the tough races.

NOT ME. A candidate has to prove himself/herself for me to donate. I read commentary about the candidate (and make up my own mind). I look at data.

There are some REALLY terrific candidates that I like, but I will NOT give them money, because it would feel like throwing money away. I have limited resources. The TDP has limited resources. I am not opposed to them applying strategy to their funding efforts.

[johncoby2]

32. Time AND money!

The TDP has to do with what they have.

Im still not sure what you guys want except giving pie in the sky answers to tough questions.

Assume the TDP didn't get any of the infrastructure money. What do you want them to do? Exactly. Give money to your candidate? Raise money for your candidate? And if so, how?

I am with Muse here. We have limited time and money as a party. We do not have the luxury of putting money into a race that is not winnable. HEY FOLKS WE ONLY HAVE 70 DAYS LEFT!

if a candidate hasnt proven him/herself yet, it is a bit late in the game to do so.


I think alot of you guys want to change the world on a change the county budget. That needs to wait till next cycle.

[David Van Os]

36. John, your comments are a dagger to the heart

John, the people who made the presentation at the SDEC luncheon say that I'm not a viable candidate worth putting any resources into. They think the same thing about every one of the statewide candidates you're publicizing about having at your Labor Day rally in Sugarland next Sunday. They also think the same thing about Sherrie Matulla and most of your other candidates too. Do you understand this?? Do you agree with their dismissal of your candidates? Let me know right away, please, because I don't need to spend the money on gasoline to indulge an organizer who doesn't think my candidacy is worth supporting.

Your responses here are a dagger to the heart of lots of people who are working their tails off fighting for the things you claim to believe in. Whose apple are you trying to polish?

[Sailing]

42. No John,

You can't change the world until you first change your small corner of it. Perhaps thats the one lesson we should take away from the repiglicans, that they succeeded in.

I donated to John Kerry's campaign at a time when I was unemployed, because I understood the criticality of it, only to find out later that he held back, what was it?, 5 million or so? I was not at all happy with that. He was supposed to spend every dime of it to win 2004. I am through with the way the game has been played for the last 25 years, to the advantage only of republicans. It's definitely time to change the game.

"Wait till next cycle" is not something we can continue hear over and over every cycle. It has to start now.

[Joanne98]

15. We love you David! Give them Hell!

[PDittie]

28. This post from McBlogger nails it

And T. did so in a slightly more upbeat way than I managed:

Many people, especially the entrenched losers in the Democratic Party who refuse to understand that things change, are fond of talking about circular firing squads. Of course, just as they are wrong about campaign issues, messaging, press and everything else, they are wrong about the nature of the firing squad. It's not a circle, it's a line and the guns are all pointed in one direction... unfortunately for them, it's usually at their hearts.

Let's take the Texas Democratic Trust, the group of trial lawyers and their consultant hangers-on who have managed over the years, by listening to bad advice and making horrific strategic blunders(John Sharp's 2002 Urban Only Strategy, for example), to make the Democratic Party the minority in Texas. Their latest decision has a number of tongues wagging across Texas.

The Trust, ably represented by Fred Baron and Matt Angle, presented their plans at this past weekend's SDEC meeting. While they committed to funding TDP and SOME Lege races this year, they made it clear (as one source put it) that they could give less of a damn about the 2006 Statewide Ticket. Of course, many of them have already thrown their support behind OSB so it's no real suprise and at the end of the day, it's their money. Still, to hear so many within the TDP heirarchy talking about this as a good decision is, for me at least, irritating beyond belief.

This year we have a fantastic slate of statewide candidates all of whom stand a good chance of winning their races. However, even today there are those who don't want to see it because pessimism is so much easier. The Trust has been a valuable ally and the consultants tied to them are not uniformly bad. Still, there is a profound lack of wisdom in their decision making, as well as an attitude that the only thing Democrats can do is throw up their hands and wait for demographic changes that will begin to positively effect us in 2010. The only problem with that is that already those changes are being counterbalanced by R outreach to those communities. In short, the demographic change the Trust and their consultants predict will sweep Democrats into office in 2010 and beyond is unlikely have much of an effect.

The alternative? Be competitive in every race, every cycle and never again let a Republican candidate walk into office with unfunded Democratic opponents. However, yet again, this is what the Trust is doing.

It's futile to get mad at the Trust for deciding to use their money the way they see fit. Of course, it's also futile to whine about it and cast about with a 'woe is me' attitude. What we have to keep doing is working hard to elect Democrats and help out every single one, no matter how hopeless the race may look. Keep in mind that since 1994 the Trust has been very wrong on a lot of races and the best revenge is winning. As for those within the Party heirarchy... we've already stopped listening to those of you that haven't been replaced. That's why we started winning again and why we'll continue to do so in 2006.

[PDittie]

29. And the best news of the day is that Fred Baron is

starting to -- maybe, a little bit -- get it, too. Peggy Fikac of the SAEN, posting to the Chronic's "Texas Politics"...

Several of the state's high profile plaintiffs' lawyers, traditional sources of Democratic funding, have abandoned gubernatorial nominee Chris Bell this year in favor of Republican-turned-independent Carole Keeton Strayhorn. That's because they believe she has a better chance of unseating their old nemesis, Gov. Rick Perry. As the incumbent comptroller, Strayhorn is much better funded than Bell and in a better position to fight a TV war against Perry that could be crucial in the governor's race.

Bell this week, however, scored a $25,000 donation from Dallas trial lawyer Fred Baron, reported Bell's spokeswoman, Heather Guntert. She said Baron indicated he would round up similar contributions for Bell from some of his colleagues.

[TXDem24]

37. Everyone is entitled to their opinion (including me)

Mr. Coby does not want to fund candidates that can't possibly win. I don't plan to force him to do so. Evidently, he lives in a county that actually has choices on the ballot. I didn't. My ballot in 2004 was limited to the national races, a couple of state races, ballot propositions and no options on the rest of the ballot! Just how in the hell does this build an opposition political force in this country?

Democracy is about choice ... the type of country we can be is defined by our options on the ballot. Without choices, we are stuck maintaining the status quo. Without the ability to voice their discontent on the ballot with the incumbents in charge, just how does a voter have any power to guide policy or demonstrate dissent? If Mr. Coby wants to minimize his county, that's fine. Just don't tell us how to run ours.

In the eighties, Republicans couldn't get elected to dog-catcher if they owned all the leashes in Texas. But, they continually ran candidates and pushed grass-roots efforts and worked neighborhood after neighborhood ... and the persistence paid off. They won out over our complacence. We can do the same thing.

In my opinion, candidates are the best vehicle for promoting our core democratic values. Having candidates on the ballot helps to build the Democratic Party as it demonstrates "presence". More candidates will generate more presence, drawing more voters, motivating more candidates to run for office, generating more presence, etc ...
We should support candidates who affirm our values in public and build a farm system for candidates. Sure we will have to face the possibility of bad candidates and take care of them, but this is preferable to having candidates selected in closed sessions by anonymous power-brokers. This is the reality of a true democracy. Good candidates do not magically appear, they are built in the fires of election campaigns. The good candidates will progress and build support.

We should not be evaluating our candidates solely on their fundraising skills. This is a Republican standard. And I am sick and tired of playing the Republican's game on Republican turf with Republican rules refereed by Republican judges. It's time for a new sport that the rest of the people can participate in.

[johncoby2]

38. So......what is your plan?

Or are you in the bitch and moan category?

In my district (Tom DeLay's) we had republicans running unopposed. Our club has worked for 7 years to have a candidate that is going to win in CD22. And we have a very well qualified candidate running for state rep who we RECRUITED (Sherrie Matula). And next election we will have a candidate lined up for state senator.

We have a systematic approach to winning, it isnt perfect, we know our shortfalls, but we have a chance to win and we are energized. WE DIDNT ASK FOR HELP FROM THE STATE. WE DID IT OURSELVES, but we greatly appreciated the training and the database the county and state has provided to us.

What we dont need 2 months before the election is people pissing on the fire.

So. what is the plan? Besides bitchin about stuff 2 months before the election?

[TXDem24]

39. The plan was obvious

recruit more candidates to contest every race and give voters a choice. If you want to characterize that as "bitch and moan", then it seems that "thou protesteth too much" (with apologies to Mr. Shakespeare).

In response to "pissing on the fire": you are the one that gone off on candidates that you feel are not "deserving" of support in the final two months of the election season. Regardless of your feelings on the matter, these people have taken on a responsibility to do what they felt was necessary. If you don't agree, fine. Just quit being an obstacle. It's a hard enough job without having to cater to your benevolent side.

There is obviously something under the surface here. But it's not worth my effort to explore it. And I could give a rat's ass because I'm trying to make things better where I live. Politics is local. And I'm going to "piss on the fire" in my back yard to keep it from my house.

[johncoby2]

40. what ever

[rusty_parts2001]

41. This has been a lively and interesting discussion.

We all have views and all want Democrats to win. There is merit to both approaches and maybe the landscape is different in different areas of Texas. I do believe we are on the threshold of some major upheavals and there will be plenty of credit to go around when Democrats regain important political offices.

[StellaBlue]

43. Thanks, Mr Van Os!

I just put your bumper sticker on my car this week!

Woo woo!

[muse]

44. Not drinking the kool-aid

You know, there is room for differences of opinion on DU. In my DU world, there is anyway.

It's humorous - and kind of sad to me - that David Van Os assumes my comments (and OK, I'll go ahead and speak for John, because we discussed this) - pertain to him. Never once did we say that David is not deserving of support from the TDP or donors. We were actually talking about other candidates. But, speaking for just me again, I have a difference of opinion with David and I do NOT appreciate being lectured to as if I am a little girl. I also do NOT understand why some people feel it is their one true mission to convert me, and others like me, and if we are not cooperating, then we are not listening and beyond hope.

FYI: during the last DU fund drive for David, I contributed a significant amount. Probably more than most. Just saying.

[theredstate]

45. As a newly minted SDEC member, I was at this luncheon....

At no point did I ever hear anyone in the room say that anyone candidate was not deserving of support. If fact, nothing was said that would get you even infer that.

What we heard was a plan on how to get the party back on track to be an effective organization. Unfortunately, money is a scarce commodity and needs to be used for focused short-term and long-term goals. Dumping the money that is used the staff the TDP with professionals into statewide races would help us in the long run how?

Let's be honest, I have spoken with a candidate from the central Texas area that said he was running but wasn't really trying because he knows he will lose. What kind of crap is that? I don't publicize the name because it is our job to protect our own even when they do something stupid and naming that person helps only the Republicans. Run everywhere but be smart. If you are trying to build a base to be ready for a future run then great. However, to advertise that you are going to get you ass handed to you doesn't make me want to give you a penny.

DVO: I find it troubling that you would insult Fred Baron, Matt Angle and the rest of the folks trying to rebuild this party. Fred started his career as a Nader Raider so I don't question his bona fides. In fact, he doesn't even have to be involved. He has earned his retirement but chooses to spend his own money to help our party when NO ONE ELSE WOULD. There is no elitism involved here. They are a tight knit group desperately trying to bring life into our party. I have been able to see a little of the inside workings of the Party and I can testify that they work their butts off rebuilding it. Just because you weren't "allowed" to go a luncheon meant for SDEC members doesn't mean that, there is some nefarious plan afoot to derail your campaign. The enemy is out there, not in here.

I am bias. I worked in the Lege when Tom Delay raped and pillaged our state. I want us to have control of the House by 2010 so we have a seat at the table for redistricting in 2012. That is what matters to me personally. If we don't at least do that, then Ardmor, OK, New Mexico, the headaches, the heartaches, the lawsuits and everything was for nothing. That is my short term finish line. I will not have ten more years of Republicans disrepecting Texas.

I propose we focus on the task at hand. When we our back in power, then we can bicker.

[acmejack]

53. People like me living on a disability check in Central Texas want to know

Why should I give my money to some one like that? In fact why should I give my money to the TDP when I hear this kind of crap? Rich folks, even people who can work-it's not like I am handsomely paid on a VA pension, don't mind giving money to people who aren't playing to win. I can't afford to.

I supported my home raised candidate to John she's in the lege now representing district 48. That didn't just happen either. I could walk then & walk I did! I give David money cause he knows how to fight, I give Courage money I think he is playing to win. Bell ditto since the beginning, Lampson, the same, Donna Howard, ditto. I support my County DP, the TDP, I am starting to worry about frankly. Don't really like us populists much, do they?

[PDittie]

46. I'll speak for David

since he won't be speaking here any more.

I looked back over David's comments and I can't really see how you arrive at the conclusion he's speaking to you, Martha, much less speaking down to you.

David has addressed his differences of opinion with John off this board, and that will work itself out in its own fashion.

I believe David would feel as I do, that your personal contributions are your business and don't require justification to anyone here or anywhere else. The same as Fred Baron's, for example. And David is especially grateful not only for the money you have given his campaign but also your time and efforts on such things as organizing and conducting the bloggers' conference call.

If he -- and I -- have a disagreement with you over how the TDP spends its money, then that is an honest disagreement about philosophy and is not meant, nor should be taken, personally in any way.

[muse]

47. what you don't realize, PD

Is that I got an PM from David. Not good.

Not good, at all. I don't even want to address David privately in any way, not for one minute, so I wanted to make my point here, thinking David would read it.

And, now I am done. Totally done with this.

[WestHoustonDem]

48. Ok folks, I'm going to jump in here

Some of my favorite people are at each other's throats over this and it just shouldn't be. Let's remember what we're here for.

David is one of the few candidates I have met that takes stands on the issues based on principles rather than polls and consultants. We need him desperately. I don't blame him for being angry at the TDP because his race is winnable. They are just punishing him for not sucking up to their failed strategies.

I have been out there talking to not just active Democrats, but also Republicans and disaffected liberals and progressives. They don't give a shit about polls. They are simply asking for a candidate with principles who will stand up for what he/she believes is right, and take on the corporate interests that are bleeding us dry. David is that candidate. There has only been one person I couldn't get interested in David's campaign. Her daughter works for Greg Abbott.

John, muse - I know you both believe as I do in everything David's campaign stands for. I hope you'll continue to support him and every candidate you believe in.

Let's keep our eye on the prize - working together to take Texas back for the people!

[Lithos]

49. There are certain threads which tear at my very core

This is one of them. I know people care and are trying. It's not an issue of us being Demos or not, ideologically we're all closer than not, but it falls down to the strategy for implementing this vision.

I understand there are candidates who will not win, but I also know that politics and marketing are two very related beasts, especially when there is a concept of how you earn market share. Frankly, being Top of Mind costs money and it's easier and more efficient to sell the Democratic message wholesale, not piecepart. For each slot where we have a hole, it's that much harder to sell the message about other candidates. Thus Chris Bell is hurt when there's no Dem running along side him when he makes an appearance out in the hinterland. But if there is no money, there is no money and volunteer/grass roots efforts can only go so far in specific talents and energy. Knowing where to draw the line is difficult.

Tough decisions are hard and painful and mistakes will be made. We need to stop and ask questions, honest questions. We should also be honest and open and forgiving


Lithos

[bryanin22]

50. Stereotypes

I am an underpaid consultant for an elitist SDEC lawyer (who also happens to be my dad). I loosely call myself a consultant because I charge the candidates I work for just enough to justify to my girlfriend the time I spend working on political campaigns.

I work for five local candidates, all of whom have a HUGE chance of winning in Fort Bend. Yes, Fort Bend. And I'm not just saying that because I have to sound optimistic. I know the numbers. Democrats county wide just need to pick up 6 points from 2 years ago. That was before the approval rating for the president and congress sank to record lows, before DeLay abandoned his district and created apathy for the republicans here, before confusion caused by Shelly's write in campaign, before widespread Republican ticket splitting in the Governor's race, and before all the hard work we have been doing for over a year now. And not just hard work...smart work. We were one of the first counties to get access to the VAN, and we've been using the data to find the persuadables, contacting them by phone and walking, getting ID and getting the data back in the VAN via bar code scanner so we know who to get out to vote, who to send persuasion mail to, and who to not waste time or money on.

But yes, I am constantly frustrated by everyone only wanting to give only to Congressional candidates, and yes, state wide candidates over local candidates. The effect of electing 5 Democrats county wide in Fort Bend would be staggering.

I will admit I'm not a huge fan of the Party structure. Our local county party is ineffective and virtually non-existant. My dad reluctantly ran for SDEC only to try and get the State Party to give more official recognition to Democratic grassroots organizations.

I am definitely not a defeatist. When a voter walks into our headquarters and I given them David's push card, I tell them, "This is David Van Os, our next Attorney General." But in all campaigns the reality is that there is a finite amount of time, money, and people. Do I agree with the state party that they should focus on select congressional races? Of course not. In my opinion they should spend resources in ALL LOCAL county parties/grassroots organizations, regardless of whether it is blue, red, or purple. Get every county setup with a headquarters, material, signs, ect. That way, not only do local candidates benefit, but also David, Chris, Barbara, Fred, Maria, Hank, Valinda, and everyone else will have visibility all across the state.

That's just my $.02.

[merci_me]

51. Don & Susan raised some smart sons !!

Welcome to DU, Bryan!!

[bryanin22]

52. Thanks!

I keep meaning to become a regular poster, but I also keep meaning to regularly update my blog. That doesn't always happen!