A PROPOSAL TO SAVE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

[Caro]

I've tried to get the attribution for this message below, but was not able to find out who wrote it.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

A PROPOSAL TO SAVE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY:

Instead of spending $500 million dollars on TV commercials every 4 years, why doesn't the Democratic Party start using its money to open neighborhood offices that help people with day-to-day problems like getting their heat turned back on, or finding a lawyer, or getting something to eat? I'm not talking about political offices that open up a few months before an election and annoy people with a bunch of phone calls. I'm talking about permanent offices where people can get real help for real problems. Finding a doctor. Getting a tutor for their kids. A gym for kids to play ball in after school.

You know what you've got if you build something like this?

A recognizable brand, that's what you've got.

A trusted brand.

A political party that's known for rolling up its sleeves and getting its hands dirty and making a difference in people's lives. A political party that's not corrupt. A political party that's a palpable force - instead of simply another disposable consumer product being hawked on TV every few years.

True loyalty comes out of stuff like this, a loyalty that can't be swayed by glib 30 second entreaties. This is the politics of the real, not a reality show.

When you stop and think about the system we have now, it's completely stupid: a bunch of new hairdo's comes along every 4 years with a bunch of focus-grouped "issues" and the media puts on a reality show that results in... nothing! Nothing but revenue for TV stations! And, of course, another big thumbs up for one of the two wings of the ruling party. After it's all over, the losing hairdo skulks off in infamy to grow a beard or write his memoirs or lobby for some corporation - and the status quo tightens its grip.

I'm sick of it. We`re all sick of it.

Imagine a city street. Imagine an old storefront, refurbished and redecorated. Imagine a neon sign that says "Democratic Party Headquarters." Inside is a wireless internet cafe, bulletin boards, volunteers manning help desks. Maybe there's a cafeteria in there, maybe a health clinic, a child care center. Whatever it is, it's real people, together, helping each other, creating a community. Using the money they raise to make a real difference in the neighborhoods where they live. And giving people the tools for Democracy. Imagine hundreds of these places, all over the country, where people can meet and talk and plan and organize.

Hey, maybe it's my Chicago roots coming back.

Ask Soros to help. Michael Moore. Barbra Streisand. Clooney. All the usual Hollywood honchos. Steve Jobs.

How about "Newman's Own Democracy Cafes," with good organic food and nutritious political information.

"Ben and Kerry's."

Whatever.

Make the Democratic Party a grassroots movement. And make sure you open offices in rural areas. Bush policies hurt rural economies even more than they hurt cities.

Thousands of people donated millions of dollars to get Kerry elected, and what did we get for our money? TV commercials. Air! Poof, it's gone!

Why not ask people to donate to something lasting, that does real good, and has political clout as a result? I know I'd rather give money for this kind of real political action than the Theatre of the Absurd we have now. Sure, this smacks of old-fashioned machine politics. So what? What have we got now? Nothing but an advertising campaign with no product, just promises, promises, promises. It works for the corporations and the giant media conglomerates. But it's worthless for everybody else The creation of neighborhood Democratic Party Headquarters could be the tactic that finally evens the playing field with the Republican's use of churches.

Say what you will about right wing churches - but if one of their flock needs something to eat, they can at least usually get a hot meal. That's more than you can say for the great progressive party of the New Deal and the Great Society. When's the last time the Democratic Party ever fed anybody - let alone found them a job?

Sure, the wingnuts will call it demogoguery. They'll call it a return to machine politics. They'll say Democrats are buying votes. Good!

Let `em say it all they want! The point is, when you help people, they don't forget it. And with what is coming our way now, people are gonna be needing all the help they can get.

What do you think?

[Nickster]

1. Essentially, this is the model that the unions followed during the

Depression era. It built a lot of the "brand loyalty" that the article mentions. In a perfect world, I'd say this is great, but this is also a lot of what's wrong with how the Dem Party operates. If we did start funding something like this, that's one more draw on incredibly low resources that we have compared to the right wing. They continue to dominate and squash more and more of our funding, we are then less and less able to fund something like this. Our movement would have to get much stronger in order to sustain something like this.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

2. I could

get behind this kind of politics.

[cornermouse]

3. I could volunteer some time for this.

[Coexist]

4. Me too.

[tocqueville]

5. that's more how European parties work...

specially parties to the left. They are not electoral machines only. But I think two things are mixed up.

1) a local party organisation is needed to intervene in local affairs, elections, statements etc.. Party members try to be elected at all key points in society where there is a political representation. They meet regurlarly in small assemblies to try to influence local politics by different means from leaflets to rallies through all media statements.

2) the party "sponsors" independent organisations (and they don't neeed to demand a membership except for unions) to make life better for people in need : summer camps for children that don't go on vacations, help for women in need, counseling, culture, youth organisations, anti-drug organisations etc... Specially in the US I think a lot of welfare could be overtaken by gathering money and thus not leaving the market to solely religious organisations. But the above quoted activities are of course a good idea.

It's very important to show "on the field" what kind of society you want, what solutions you propose.


waiting for a magic bullet every 4 years is doomed to fail and will never give solutions in the long run.

[suffragette]

31. Great points

When I was a young child living in the projects, a group of women living there organized pre and after school programs and educational outreach progams for youth who had dropped out of school.
They organized a few protests by banding together to get a bus to go to the state capitol, even got my mother engaged, someone who cared but felt powerless, though she made some great personal rants about the "man" from time to time.
These women had no money and seemingly no power, but their actions effected positive change.

[Poppyseedman]

6. Barbra Streisand ???

Good luck. One of the worlds biggest hypocrites. Overall, very good idea

One of the rethugs biggest advantages over the democratic party is they are tapped into the local churches though grass roots organizations.

Since the democratic party insist on making the very large religious segment of the population personally "non gratas" by being radically pro choice and pro homosexual and poo pooing the idea of culturally values are important to people.

We are at a serious disadvantage with about 40 % of the population.

[mazzarro]

8. What?

Please do explain the assertion that 'Since the democratic party insist on making the very large religious segment of the population personally "non gratas" by being radically pro choice and pro homosexual and poo pooing the idea of culturally values are important to people.' You must have missed out on the fact that pro choice and pro civil right are neither radical nor anti values. When you start spouting the right-wing fundamentalist jargon and MSM misinformation, decent people are bound to be riled about the crap you may have chosen to believe. Yes the rethuglican party may have some advantage in using fundamentalist churches as grassroots organizing outlets, the gist of this thread is a suggestion about revitalizing the traditional role of the democratic party that used to be an underlying party of the unions. Maybe the party can do this in conjunction with the unions and build both party and unions at same time.
And Barbara Streisand - what do have against her? and what hypocrisy have you to accuse her of?

[Poppyseedman]

14. You did notice I said "radically pro choice"

You must have missed out on the fact that pro choice and pro civil right are neither radical nor anti values.

You must have missed on the fact that a large segment of our population think radically pro choice positions, like partial birth abortions and pro homosexual positions are uncomfortable to many people of good conscience. Ever consider that's the reason we are almost powerless in all federal and many state governments ?

Many polls show people don't want to outlaw abortions but find the extreme positions of abortion on demand very disconcerting. I'm not sure what part of right-wing fundamentalist jargon you are referring to. That is a simply fact of the make up of this country. It's what we are dealing with. The democratic party does a terrible job in reaching out to these people.

As for couching the homosexual agenda into a civil rights position, though I agree it should, a large part of the country don't see it as a civil rights position, they see it as a morals issue. Again what part of "right-wing fundamentalist jargon" are you referring to. Is that not reality? Does not the a large portion of the country see it as that?

I'm not agreeing they should, but if as a party we are ever to regain power, these people need to be out reached to, not necessarily to convert them to a progressive agenda, but at least to give them the idea that their positions are worth listening to. Most people understand not everybody will agree on policy and ideology, but we should at least give them an opportunity to let them be heard without demeaning them.

As for Barbra, she lives in a multi million dollar home thats sucks up more energy than I'd use in my lifetime and has the gall to preach to me about conservation. Yeah right.

[TahitiNut]

24. Oppressing others isn't about 'conscience'

NOBODY is attempting to force an abortion on that anti-choice mom. Nobody!! It is the very core of being 'pro-choice' that insists the state has no legitimate delegated authority to impose its will on a woman's womb - either to impose an abortion or prohibit it.

I really don't know what's so fucking difficult to comprehend about this.

Insofar as obsessing about what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedrooms or kitchen table, there's not one FUCKING thing that's about 'conscience'! It's not as though GLBT people are attempting to criminalize heterosexual relations. Absolutely nobody is interested in coercing straights into GLBT relationships. Straights have no skin in this game! None!

Calling what these people are doing a "act of conscience" is like calling rape an "act of love"!! It's bullshit! Total, irredeemable bullshit!

[marions ghost]

26. The Democratic party has to stand for PERSONAL FREEDOM

Freedom for Women.
Freedom for Gays.
Freedom for the dying.

Freedom from gov't surveillance.
Freedom from gov't censorship.
Freedom from gov't mind control.

For those who don't agree, the Republican party welcomes you. There is no reason for the Democrats to compromise on these essential issues of personal individual freedom. The Alito vote has bad enough implications for this. The Democratic party cannot afford to compromise its principles any further. Any benefits gained by reaching out to people who are rigid in these matters will be a zero-sum game, IMO.

[Tesha]

28. Yeah, it really sucks to support human rights for everyone, doesn't it? NT

[Perky]

7. I like the notion...but

There is limited political value in the urban areas. They are Dem stongholds already so unless it is deigned to increase voter paticipation (not an easy task) it would have limited value.

Now putting this type of function is the Suburbs makes a great bit more sense. The construct is a little different there becuase the ombudsman function would have to be able to influence political leadership and if it is Republican leadership...I am not sure how effective the function could be.

Still I like the notion of an advocacy in every suburban Republican District. Sort or a permant shadow government???

[Lydia Leftcoast]

20. Yes, at least help perplexed citizens navigate the bureaucracy

Say a group of citizens is trying to get a traffic light installed at a dangerous intersection and the Republican city council keeps saying "no money, no money."

The local Democratic party office can sponsor strategy and p.r. sessions to organize the concerned citizens. The next election cycle, they run one of the most helpful people for a spot on the city council...

Another possibility, even in the suburbs, would be to set up free medical clinics for the uninsured, because not all uninsured or under-insured people are poor.

[Caro]

33. So, we shouldn't help people...

... because we don't HAVE TO?

Hmmm....

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

[Stevepol]

9. To Save the Dem Party: make elections fair! n/t

[PlasticinePorter]

10. Like it need saving!

The party is OK!

[Boredtodeath]

11. This is EXACTLY how Cynthia McKinney took back her seat

During the 2004 election Cynthia did not run a SINGLE commercial on television. She got out in her district and met with the people. She held town hall meetings and constituent days.

In fact, she STILL holds constituent days in her district every week.

[marions ghost]

16. YES!

This is what Democrats need to do. Face Time. Get Real.

People are starved for real representation in this country.

[BlueIris]

12. Well, at least she's paying attention.

"Ben and Kerry's." I love it.

[mtnsnake]

13. In a perfect world maybe, but what we need to do is hammer them with

some hardcore commercials of our own. Blast them like they've blasted us. Of this 500,000 million dollars of commercials you speak of, I've only seen one effective one yet, and that was the recent one that Americans United for Change came out with last week that you can check out right here:
http://www.americansunitedforchange.org/#

[Lydia Leftcoast]

19. It shouldn't be either/or

But in the end, politicians build loyalty by demonstrating that they care about their constituents.

The American people have been "commercialed" to death. One of the problems with the Democrats is that they've been relying on Washington-based "image consultants" instead of getting in there and mixing with the common folk.

By mixing with the ordinary people of their area, they can learn exactly what problems the people are facing and come up with workable solutions. That's the kind of stuff that builds loyalty, not just another TV ad.

[Caro]

29. Commercials, huh?

My problem with commercials is that running them puts more money into the pockets of the very media moguls who are paying their employees to belittle and demonize Democrats at every opportunity.

We're paying them to kill us. Doesn't sound like the best strategy to me.

Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com

[LA lady]

15. My Left Wing

I saw it on My Left Wing suposedly writen by "Cheese More"
http://www.myleftwing.com/userDiary.do?personId=1905

[Joe Fields]

17. This strategy has worked for Hamas

[jeannicot]

18. Whaa?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

21. No, really

All through the Middle East, the Islamic militant groups have won public support by doing things that the governments there have neglected. For example, there's no social safety net in most of those countries, so the militant Islamic groups distribute food to the poor and provide free medical clinics. They act as informal courts for settling disputes. To use the expression used by one poster above, they act as a "shadow government."

[jeannicot]

22. I can see the headline now

"Democrats emulate Hamas, build shadow government."

We need to think this through.

[cornermouse]

25. I see....

Just because we think someone who we don't like may be doing what we want to do, this means we shouldn't?

Correction: I don't think this is aimed at becoming a "shadow government". Its aimed at helping people.

[marions ghost]

23. I agree with your vision

but I don't know whether the Democratic party as it is today can accomplish this anytime soon. With only a few exceptions the Dem party is in the business of exploiting (not supporting) its own grassroots. Dean is trying to change this. Remains to be seen whether he can really make the difference.

Why wait? Why don't we get together with people in our communities and start our own Town Hall meetings. It's not that hard to get speakers. Draw from local resources as well as national. Make it casual and fun. I wouldn't wait for the Democratic party (or obscenely rich Democrats) to come into the picture (at least not at first). They are far too locked into the status quo. We are going to have to move on this ourselves. It's up to the people to take the initiative.

[ewagner]

27. I have often "opined" for the Chicago Model

Yes, I know, Daley's machine was corrupt.

But the ward captains made sure to meet the needs of "their people".

I know for a fact (I have family in Chicago) that when the breadwinner of a family was sick or hurt and couldn't work, baskets of food were brought over.

In one case, the family was poor and their young daughter was being confirmed and mysteriously, a beautiful, white confirmation dress
mysteriously appeared on the doorstep.

The ward captains either did these things themselves or caused them to be done by others. There was great loyalty to them .and the party

[JNelson6563]

30. Just one thing

it's the locals who should be doing this. I am so tired of whiney Dems wringing their hands and crying "Waaaaaahhhhh!! The DNC/State party doesn't do it all for us!"

Pathetic. I say until enough Dems get off our asses, get busy, build local parties and raise some local funds, there is no reason for anyone else to invest. If there isn't enough interest or drive in an area to get started, there won't be enough to keep an operation handed over on a silver platter going either.

I know. I'm in a red county whre Rethugs have had a strangle hold on things for years. We got active, kicked ass, raised a ton of money (all locally) and showed we can do it. Now there is interest in partnering on various efforts from places like the State party.

Get busy Dems or get used to losing. Don't count on a Daddy WArbucks coming in and doing it for you. Ain't gonna happen.

Julie

[marions ghost]

32. exactly

start small and local and don't look for saviors