Salon.com piece by volunteer on Kerry campaign.

[crispini]

This is not an election fraud piece per se, so I'm not entirely sure it belongs here, but since this is "Election Results and Discussion" ... anyway I thought this piece was interesting and worth thinking about.

It's the incompetence, stupid
Forget MoveOn and ACT -- the real downfall of the Democrats was the Kerry campaign itself. A volunteer speaks out.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By James Verini

Dec. 16, 2004 | In his Dec. 15 Salon article, "The Revolution Failed -- for Now," Farhad Manjoo spotlights the "lack of coordination" between the Kerry campaign and the celebrated liberal third-party groups, MoveOn.org and America Coming Together. Lack of coordination? Let me tell you about the disorder and complacency inside the Kerry-Edwards campaign itself. Look no further for why Democrats lost the election.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/12/16/volunteer/index.html

I suspect this will probably generate a lot of heat and noise here, but I also think it's worth tossing out there. I'd be interested in hearing from others who also volunteered with the K-E campaign, as I did.

[kostya]

1. Aaahhhh, that 20-20 hindsight thingee.

[bunny planet]

2. Farhad Manjoo is the same reporter from Salon that trashed the idea of

the election being stolen the first week. I haven't read Salon since. His slant is that Kerry lost, only one problem, he didn't. It was stolen as we know.

[crispini]

5. The article's not by Manjoo. n/t

[NewYorkerfromMass]

3. Coordination between Kerry and the 527's was forbidden

or did I miss something?

[crispini]

4. Yep, you didn't read the article.

It was by a volunteer on the Kerry campaign itself.

[glitch]

6. The key meme they are promoting here is "Look no further". nt

nt in this case means 'nice try'.

[blm]

9. Exactly. And why would anyone complain that K-E didn't coordinate with 527

groups when it is illegal? Pretty dumb, if you ask me.

The only mistake Kerry made was not holding a open-ended press conference specifically on the Swift vets' lies and taking every question there was until there was nothing left to ask.

[crispini]

10. Yet another person who didn't read the whole article.

It's not about coordination between 527's and KE. It's by a volunteer on KE campaign itself.

[blm]

11. But the part you chose to highlight WAS the complaint

that there was no coordination between those groups and the Kerry campaign. My reply was to the excerpt you chose to post.

[crispini]

12. I just posted the first paragraph, that's all.

I went back and bolded what I thought was the relevant part of it.

[merh]

7. 300 hours working a campaign - doubt it

This is a load of crap. Which event was it that the comeback kid didn't make it on time and the crowd was tired and restless, give details, a location because I can guarantee you that the crowds that were there will give you a very different perspective.

This is a hack job, trying to discredit the campaign and the party. NO credibility at all. Most folks don't volunteer for a campaign if they don't know a thing about their candidate and telephone calls and canvassing organization includes talking points and scripts.

You aren't being flamed, but the dweebbbb that wrote this sure should be. He is a lying sack of shit!

just my honest opinion.

[crispini]

8. Did you volunteer for the campaign? I'm curious, I'd like to hear

from some more volunteers, if they are on here.

[lizzieforkerry]

22. I volunteered my ass off, ask me anything!

[crispini]

23. Didja work on the official campaign, and did

you have experiences similar to the ones in the article?

[lizzieforkerry]

29. Yes, I worked for the official campaign

but you are going to have to tell me what the article says because I have tried to get the day pass but it is impossible, it keeps kicking me out. I had this same problem last time and I spent about a half an hour on it then so I am not going to try it tonight.

[crispini]

38. Basically it's by a volunteer,

who says, in his experience from a volunteer's-eye-position, the campaign was pretty disorganized.

[lizzieforkerry]

51. I think ours was very organized. We had a great field organizer

though. She lived an hour away and they had to be in the office by like 5:30 and they had to stay until 11:00-12:00 and then she drove an hour home, she did this from Aug until Nov. This was her first campaign but I think she did a great job organizing us. I was in charge of phone banking at one of our remote sites and a few times I had to cancel at the last minute because my kid was sick, I locked my keys in the car, and my husband had a late meeting and couldn't get home to watch the kids and I couldn't find a sitter. What people need to understand is that it was everyday people that were organizing these things, people that up until the campaign had very busy lives. K/E was very organized but they can't control me locking my keys in the car and canceling the phone banking. Also I saw where someone was compalaining about getting called for volunteering when they were already volunteering. People would walk into the HQ and ask what they could do from home, so we
asked them to call and see if they could come to such and such or help with such and such. Because we couldn't be in contact with everyone every minute we would hand out similar lists- figuring 3 calls were better than 0 calls. So it wasn't that we didn't know you were already being called, its that we wanted to make sure our volunteers reached everybody and that we had a job for everyone that walked therough our door wanting to do something. We hardly ever turned someone away without a job. These people got up came in, we certainly weren't going to turn them away. As far as training for canvassing, again we are just people like everyone else. I learned everything I could from JK.com and then trained my canvassers on how to answer certain questions. THe thing I learned about canvassing is that very few people actually wanted to hear what we had to say. Most had already made up their mind or wanted to learn about it from an impartial source.

[lizzieforkerry]

54. We calculated that our field organizer was getting paid

about $1.58 an hour, not including her two hour commute. These people worked so hard, for next to nothing, and it kinda bothers me to hear people compalain about them. It certainly wasn't a job that I could have or would have done, I don't know about the other people in this thread.

[Dolphyn]

68. The easiest way to get a Salon day pass ...

At the bottom of the page it has a link that says something like "trouble viewing? click here." I always click on those. It's much faster and more painless than watching the $#@* videos.

Day pass gateway:
http://www.salon.com/src/pass/gateway/index.html?http://www.salon.com/premium/daypass

[sandnsea]

14. Totally disagree

Lots of people volunteered for this campaign because they hated Bush. They brought their own perceptions to the plate, put their own intepretations on Kerry's plans. I can't tell you how many people said his health care plan was free health care for everybody, which was totally untrue. Not because Bush said so, but because that was their own view and they thought it was the way to win voters. Then there were the people who repeated spin and even after you gave them the facts, they still didn't stop. The war primarily, but some people even said questioning his war record was legitimate. And the people who repeated the Teresa garbage. All volunteering for the campaign. Scripts don't do any good when people don't follow them and unity isn't unity when there's an undercurrent of resentment of the candidate.

[merh]

17. Maybe where you worked, but not in my neck of the woods

and I am in a red state that knew we would never see K/E.

So tell me, where on the campaign trail did Kerry show up late and everyone was angry or disgruntled or bored? That load of crap alone tells me this writer is a bushbot hack. Even when he was late, which is expected during campaigns, the crowds were involved and excited.
All that crap written by this twirp is not true, that you can relate to some of it is said, but that doesn't make the article true and give credence to the bashing found in same.

[crispini]

20. Where in the article does it say that about Kerry showing up late?

I'm afraid I've missed that part.

[merh]

21. Who is the comeback kid?

:shrug:

[crispini]

24. Oh, that sentence?

"At a Bill Clinton rally just days before the election, we had been waiting nearly two hours and the Comeback Kid still hadn't shown up."

I assumed it was referring to Clinton? I don't really know either. :shrug:

[merh]

27. I think it is Kerry, remember, he was losing the primary, he was

down and out and then he came back to win the primary. I can't think of anything that has happened that would entitle Clinton to the nickname "comeback kid".

=======================
Probably the best characterization of the Democrats' bungling came from the only truly dedicated precinct captain I worked with. (He spent his downtime in the phone banks or going door-to-door.) At a Bill Clinton rally just days before the election, we had been waiting nearly two hours and the Comeback Kid still hadn't shown up. There were interminable pauses during which no one came to the podium. Soft jazz crackled out of the speakers. The crowd was tired and antsy.

"I don't think you'd see the Republicans doing this," I said. The precinct leader shook his head in disgust and laughed the laugh of the damned. "Evil or incompetence -- those are your choices," he said.
=======================

Too much excitement at Kerry rallies for this to be believable. Too many people woke up early or stayed up late just to see the K/E carivan pass by. Also, what did you call your campaign leaders or leader?

[theboss]

30. Clinton is notoriously late

I have no problem believing that story.

[merh]

32. Clinton is not the comeback kid!

:freak:

[theboss]

33. Yes, yes he is

Or did Tsongas adopt that nickname in New Hampshire in 1992?

[theboss]

35. Clinton thanks New Hampshire for making him the 'Comeback Kid'

For your edification:

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/11/clinton.nh/

"I came here one last time to New Hampshire to thank you for making me the 'Comeback Kid,' and to thank you for making America the comeback country," an emotional Clinton said Thursday after a minutes-long standing ovation.

[merh]

39. Thank you for that, I stand corrected.

So why is this writer bashing Kerry and the party for the loss of the 2004 election by associating an experience from the Clinton rally? Makes no sense to me and doesn't change my opinion that this is just a bash piece. Nothing constructive or informative about this article (an experience from 12 years ago associated with today's election, what the f*ck is that. And btw didn't Clinton win?) :shrug:

[crispini]

41. The author doesn't say it was twelve years ago.

The article's not entirely clear, but Bill Clinton did several rallies right before the 2004 election. :shrug:

[merh]

45. Well that is even worse

Blame the K/E because the former president of the US was late for a rally.

Farhad Manjoo spotlights the "lack of coordination" between the Kerry campaign and the celebrated liberal third-party groups, MoveOn.org and America Coming Together. Lack of coordination? Let me tell you about the disorder and complacency inside the Kerry-Edwards campaign itself. Look no further for why Democrats lost the election.

Not a bashing article :shrug: :wtf:

I also doubt the crowd waiting on Clinton was bored or disappointed that he was late. Hell, folks wait in lines for hours just to get him to sign a book, he is a friggin rock star to many and they wouldn't have come to the rally if they didn't want to see him and weren't fans.

[crispini]

47. Well, IMO there's a difference

between "bashing" i.e. "Kerry sucks!" and "criticism" i.e. "A volunteer on the campaign points out some flaws in the way it was run."

But that's just my two cents. :shrug:

[merh]

49. Well, in my opinion, blaming the campaign for the loss is just

chicken shit.

It would be much better if this writer wrote an article asking "what can we do to improve things" than an article to that clearly states "It's the incompetence, stupid Forget MoveOn and ACT -- the real downfall of the Democrats was the Kerry campaign itself. A volunteer speaks out" or "Lack of coordination? Let me tell you about the disorder and complacency inside the Kerry-Edwards campaign itself."

For those who worked their asses off and knew the issues and believed in Kerry and what they were doing, this is a kick in the teeth. How many will volunteer again when they find they are being blamed for the election results.

For the millionth time -- not you, or anyone on DU, not the K/E campaign, the campaign workers, John Kerry, Teresa Heinz, John Edwards, Elizabeth Edwards, the Edwards/Heinz families, big dawg, have anything to be sorry about or to apologize for. K/E won 57 million votes (that we know of). That is more votes than any presidential candidate and any president before him (including St. Raygun). The dems did get the grassroots effort energized and it was effective. Kerry won the votes despite the fact that the media coverage was biased. The weed go more free coverage for longer period of times than Kerry received. Hell, the weed was allowed to hold his pep rallies on military bases, Kerry couldn't do that. The press coverage was not only slanted, it was so one-sided that many on DU questioned where Edwards was during the campaign, they just didn't give Edwards or Kerry much coverage.

If folks want to look at 2004 to try to determine how we can improve our efforts, that is fine. But blame placing, pointing the fingers and being negative is not only unfair, it is wrong. K/E campaign ran one hell of campaign. If that is accepted and applauded and if you build upon your success, it is much easier to improve for the next round of elections.

[theboss]

43. That was a Clinton rally FOR Kerry

It was a rally where Clinton was the speaker. And Clinton showed up two hours late. I actually heard that a lot about Kerry events - that they never went off on time. Say what you will, but Republican events are timed down to the second.

[crispini]

37. I dunno, I don't think the author is referring to a Kerry rally there.

He says pretty clearly a "Bill Clinton rally." But I've never heard Clinton referred to as the "Comeback Kid" either. :shrug:

There was only one paid employee in the campaign office where I volunteered, and I don't remember what her title was, possibly "Volunteer Coordinator?"

[lizzieforkerry]

55. We didn't call them precinct captains

We called them field organizers

[sandnsea]

31. Iowa, for one

I watched an event on CSpan from Iowa, all four were there, I think it was after the convention. Anyway, the stage was empty for a long time before they arrived. I thought it was ridiculous, how hard is it to plan extra speakers to keep the crowd interested. I'm not a Kerry basher, but it really doesn't help to pretend there were no problems in this campaign and that there was no disconnect between varying groups who were supposedly unified. Maybe because I'm in a blue state I noticed it more, because we just have more factions. Not sure.

[merh]

36. There are problems in every campaign. This article is an over

exaggeration and a bash article and it is not the first time this writer has written such dribble.

Guess what, the clown-n-chief's campaign was full of problems too.

That is the thing about dems, we think for ourselves and we aren't afraid to disagree. You have to decide if you want to walk in lockestep (sp?) or if you want independent thinkers in your party and working for your campaign. Kerry is not responsible for all of the dissent or disorganization in all of the county and/or state campaigns.

It is my opinion that this article is just party/Kerry bashing and serves no purpose.

[crispini]

40. The article's not by Farhad Manjoo.

I googled James Verini and couldn't find anything else negative by him. I don't think the article is Kerry bashing. I don't see anywhere in there where it bashes Kerry, specifically.

Did you volunteer on the KE campaign? I'd be interested to hear about your experience, compare n' contrast kind of thing.

[merh]

42. So whatcha want to compare & contrast?

:shrug:

[crispini]

44. Well, your experience as a volunteer

on the KE campaign compared with the author of that article's experience, basically. How did things go right in your area that went wrong in his area? What was different?

[merh]

46. See post 17

maybe we red staters take it more serious than blues. :shrug:

[crispini]

48. That's interesting, because I'm also in a red state,

and we didn't have an official KE campaign presence here, all of my work directly with KE came when I went to a swing state. So they had a presence in your state?

And I read your post #17 -- you didn't give me a lot there-- I mean, did you have a better experience than the author did with phonebanks, with blockwalking etc? Did you organize your own blockwalks or did the campaign organize them for you? Did you get training on how to canvass, etc.?

I'm just trying to get a sense here of how different volunteers have experienced the campaign. Were your organizers with the state party or what?

[merh]

50. No, that is what I am saying, despite the fact we had no "official"

presence, despite the fact that we knew K/E would not step foot in our state, we were able to canvass, make phone calls, and be involved in trying to get the vote out and the vote for Kerry.

We were self informed Kerry supporters, we didn't expect to have our hands held, we contacted the K/E campaign, they sent us info, we campaigned for Kerry. Now why is that so hard to understand? It is called true grass roots and it was carried out by many who were willing to learn and who wanted to try to make a difference.

[crispini]

58. That's what I'm getting at.

Your experience wasn't with the official KE -- you did it yourselves. We did the same thing in our red state. The thing is that when the grassroots is doing it by themselves, 100% no budget, all-volunteer, that's one thing. When the official PAID campaign is involved that's a different thing.

And to reference your post (above or below, I'm not sure) -- I am by no means bashing the volunteers, the canvassers, etc. I'm interested in the diff between the grassroots experience that different volunteers had, in different places, and how it was in some places vs. others. In otherwords, how did the mid-level managers of the campaign itself do? It's not bashing to make the observation that it quite possibly wasn't all that organized, and maybe this is something that should be observed and learned from.

[merh]

59. My responses have been relative to the article that is referenced

in your post that began this thread. The article bashes the campaign as a whole, which includes the grass roots in the red states that had no "official" ties to the K/E campaign, that is wrong and one of the many reasons why the article is fatally flawed and nothing more than a bash K/E, bash dems article.

[crispini]

60. Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, then.

Because IMO the article's not talking about the "campaign as a whole." It's talking about the "official" KE campaign. This doesn't include the grassroots efforts, just as it doesn't include the 527s, because the official KE campaign, by and large, didn't coordinate with the grassroots, nor did they coordinate with the 527s.

:shrug:

[merh]

61. And that is what I cannot figure out about your position.

The grass roots efforts were a part of the campaign, they functioned in the way campaigns operated before the technical advancements that exist today. You can't say the "official" campaign failed without including the grass roots. They are part of the whole. How is it that the official campaign was less prepared than the grass roots? They were not, they had more coordination and organization than the grass root arms of the campaign. I cannot separate the two, I was part of the K/E campaign. I don't need directions from the "official" campaign before I can canvass, organize, communicate and put forth my candidate's position.

All campaigns have their problems. K/E's financial and time limitations prevented it from adequately reaching out to the red states, that was not good, but it was not fatal. That being said, K/E won the election (imho) and the campaign was not fatally flawed and the party is not in crisis. It is much more important to growth and success if we recognize our strengths and successes than it is to glare at our mistakes and flaws. See the good and focus on that, recognize the mistakes and try to not make them again.

[crispini]

64. I'm looking at it from a project management point of view.

Since I have been a project manager in the past.

On a frontline level, many decisions were made. What precints to canvass, where and when to phonebank and who to call, who to train, how to train them, and what to train them on. Developing walk lists, writing phone bank and walk scripts, etc. These are tactical, short-term decisions which were made every day. Ultimately, these decisions had impact on the overall quality of the effort.

You were involved in a grassroots effort in which these frontline decisions were made by (if I may make an educated guess here) volunteers, locals, and activists.

In other places (swing states), these decisions were made by hired employees of the KE campagin.

That's the distinction I'm making here, that's all, and that's why I'm distinguishing the "grassroots" efforts that you were involved in from the "official" KE campaign. We can only each speak to the effort that we were directly involved in, and that's what I'm curious about on this thread. :shrug:

[merh]

66. But the article you used to begin the discussion is nothing more

than a slam of the campaign, which, as I have discussed in earlier posts, incorporates all efforts.

[sandnsea]

13. True, but

Any time you tried to get Kerry's record out there, somebody was always running it down, as often from the left as the right. I gave up trying to talk to the Dems about Kerry in my own town, too much conflict. People were also more interested in the dirt being thrown. People insisted we bash Bush more. So while I agree with this guy because I was always disgusted individual people didn't know more about Kerry; the truth is they didn't want to know. They thought bashing Bush was enough and they were wrong. At least if you want to go down this road. There really isn't one simple answer to this election.

[Doremus]

15. Have to agree with some of his points

In many respects the campaign was chaotic and clueless. Not once, not twice, but three times when I went to put in my shift at the phone bank, the door was either locked (donated offices) or they had decided to cancel that day and didn't call me. This was only about 6 weeks before the election and that's when I started to worry that the campaign (at least on this side of Cleveland) didn't have itself together.

For canvassing we were told to arrive for training a few days before going out. When we arrived, the office was packed with people, but inexplicably no one knew anything about training and we were told to just come back on our assigned day. I only canvassed once, on 11/2, so it's possible early canvassers were given more instruction, but the crowd of us that day were handed a map and literature and that was the extent of the "training." Those in my small group were familiar with the issues, but I have no idea about the rest.

In the weeks leading up to the election, I must have received a dozen or more calls asking me to volunteer. I already was volunteering, but none of the records showed it, despite my telling each caller that I was at the phone bank and was doing GOTV canvassing on 11/2. About 2 days before the election, one woman called and said she had me listed for poll watcher. WTF?

There were definite organization problems from my experience.

[crispini]

18. I'm glad to know that I wasn't the only one.

I spent a week in a swing state, working directly on the campaign, and I was the only one who carried around the KE book so that I could answer questions about his programs and issues. I read the article and I was really surprised by how well it talled with my own experience.

[Leilani]

16. Why don't you post this in Poliotics Discussion

& highlight the real message of the article...the opening paragraph is misleading.

Good article, BTW

[Helga Scow Stern]

19. Interesting. Not sure what to make of it.

Seeing the incompetence of the DNC, etc. in rising to the challenge of confronting election fraud, it kind of rings true. Did they want Kerry to lose?

Also, it fits with reports I heard of local races where there was money sitting around, but none of it was used effectively to support the candidate challenging a Republican incumbent. That happened in California, I heard. Just this sense of ennui and incompetence from the party itself.

OTOH, this kind of complaining can come from many motivations--in reading it myself, I had to remind myself that the election was in fact stolen. Gee, it has you thinking if you're not careful that Bush really did win. There was no talk of what I heard, that Bush events were so staged that they may as well have hired a studio and completely faked it.

I find its greatest value as an indictment of the leadership of the Democratic party, which is really, really in big trouble in my book. They may deserve to go to jail with the rest.

[Quakerfriend]

25. Kerry won in a landslide

They stole the election. Period end.

And, frankly I think the Kerry people did one hell of a job!

[nashville_brook]

26. yeah, Salon's trying sooo hard to be the best loser on the block n/t

[Helga Scow Stern]

28. Election was stolen. Kerry did a hell of a job. But Dem leadership? n/t

[KoKo]

69. Dem Leadership in the non-swing states was lacking... I don't see how

Kerry Campaign can be held accountable for the State Dem Party which varies in efficiency from state to state. The complaint where I am was that the National Party didn't give us enough money and the State Party doesn't give enough money to the County Dem Party to update Voter Lists and have money for signs, printing, and campaign literature.

There was much lack in the way of support...but as I said it varies from state to state but I put the blame at our DNC/DCC door...not the candidate who was running. If any other candidate had run the lack of funding and the outdated voter registries and lack of coordination with grassroots would have been the same.

We've not addressed this on DU enough. I personal thought Salon's "Volunteer" article was misleading in many ways. Maybe it was "this volunteer's personal experience" but there were thousands of volunteers who could probably fill out this report and make it more meaningful. :shrug:

[F.Gordon]

34. You probably should have posted this in GD: Politics

Since this is the Election Was Stolen by Fraud forum. Still, I'm glad you posted it even though any significant discussion will probably be drowned out.

Was there disorder and complacency in the K/E campaign? Yes. I witnessed it myself. Is this the reason Kerry lost? No. MoveOn, ACT, and the dozen or so other activist groups also contributed greatly to the disorder. Is this the reason Kerry lost? No.

In 2000 the Democrats freaked the shit out of the repukes when they made it a close race by waging an excellent GOTV program. Yea, I know..... Gore won 2000. :eyes: The repukes aren't very good at coming up with new ideas but they sure are great at stealing good ideas from the Democrats and doing a better job at implementing them. This quote stands out from the article you posted....

The Bush campaign was far better choreographed. First in Ohio and then in other swing states, Karl Rove and Ken Mehlman raised a highly organized, direct-marketing-style ground army, much of it volunteer, with strict accountability and clearly defined tiers right down to the people getting coffee. Rather than bring in precinct captains, they endeavored to find natives with ties to the community. They did it in large part by studying Al Gore's 2000 campaign.

Their database was much more up-to-date. Not as much cross training was needed because they had clear defined "job descriptions". They ran their campaign like a business and they did make better use of the locals.

What I witnessed was mostly reactive campaigning. Changes made in mid stream, reacting to problems, etc. Given all that, I still think the Democrats did an outstanding job and the author of the Salon piece is just venting a little steam. As many hours as he put in you'd think he could have taken on more of a leadership role and corrected some of the "problems" he witnessed. But that's just me... I expect too much from people.

[robbedvoter]

52. Unlike the W perfect campaign?

The media told us there were only 3 perfect campaigns: Joementum, Edwards and of course, W.
I say, all are naturally flawed.
The volunteer is dead wrong on this: we won.
Dunno about the rest, it's pretty irrelevant at this point.

[merh]

53. Thank you, thank you, thank you for your post

of reason and truth! :toast:

Could you imagine trying to train the majority of the DUers in some new task. The first time they mess up they would be convinced that they were stupid and terrible people. Where is that article comparing dems to abused spouses/children. It was so on target.

Thanks again!! :thumbsup:

[KoKo]

56. The article is by a "Dem Activist...but it's an interesting read.." I, as

a "Dem Activist might have posted much the same after my and (our) experience here in NC ...on the ground..involved...knocking on doors activist.

However, I question that "Salon Mag" has done nothing to promote a "Re-Count" and question their "investors" who've kept them out of bankruptcy so often...

It's still a Great Read...and Important Read because it verifies what many of us went through dealing with our "Dem Party" on the ground as "canvassers" GOTV, Activitsts....

Just saying take some of this for what it is from "Salon" but don't ignore that "US ACTIVISTS" weren't pushing boulders "up the hill" here when we went out "knocking on doors." The TRUTH is somewhere..and MY EXPERIENCE is with "SouthEast USA" and not what the Original Poster says their experience is with "SouthWest, USA."

I learned from "on the ground experience with THIS campaign that Dem Capaign's differ so much over ALL the USA...that we need to get our "butts in gear!" But didn't we have FOUR YEARS, ALREADY to do this?

:shrug: How much more time do we need?

[Helga Scow Stern]

57. WHAT PISSES ME OFF ABOUT THIS

Is that it repeats that most pernicious of lies, the same one used by Rove to convince Rethug governors of the Mandate, that Dems did not get the minority vote.

They would have gotten it (did get it), had there been enough voting machines and had there not been major vote stealing from Latino populations in CA, FL, and TX, among other places.

And what really burns me up, is that the Dem leadership probably uses/believes this lie as an excuse not to stand up for disenfranchised minority voters right now. Bastards.

[latteromden]

62. self delete

[EFerrari]

67. Ojai Person, that's exactly what I think.. After reading (and being

educated as a result) the mechanics of suppressing the minority vote, I started to remember all the excuses/myths/received wisdom I've bought in the past.

The only difference really between this last theft and earlier ones is now all voters are potentially "minority voters". It's just that the lowest hanging fruit are minority voters and young voters.

[latteromden]

63. I was a volunteer for the K-E campaign - about 3 hrs/day

16 hrs/weekend for a little more than two months. Probably did well over 300 hours (not including work for 527s). Was an intern, if you want to get technical. Am, for some reason, omitting subjects from my sentences. Here in Minnesota, I'd say we had a very well run campaign. I never got a chance to "compare notes" with volunteers from any other state, but it would be sort of interesting to hear what others have to say about it.

Anyway, I can tell you that there was no "disorder and complacency" here, not from the 527s nor the Kerry campaign. Granted, the state offices were less organized than the state headquarters, but their main goal was to get state and local candidates elected (and they DID, we very nearly took control of the House!), not to get Kerry elected. We had some amazing field organizers and volunteers, and I can't think of one person that I met who was not entirely and completely dedicated to electing Kerry (and not even simply defeating Bush!).

This was my first campaign, and I'm glad it was, because it was very well executed, and nothing like the author said, at least not in MN.

I'm sorry this isn't much info, I'd be glad to provide more specific stuff, but I'm in a hurry right now, whatever would be of interest. :)

[lonestarnot]

65. No time for review of this type of thing.