Although, it is possible we could lose the lead with independents if we go to the base.  Not suggesting we don't, just saying it's something to think about.

is, yes, as you said, to reinvigorate the party's base, but more importantly, the party's infrastructure.

Sure, independents may be on our side, but its a whole other matter to actually turn them out to vote. Keep in mind independents have the worst turnout rating when compared with Republicans and Democrats.

With a solid infrastructure (precinct captains in every precinct, etc...) we can reinvigorate our base and then using the base to turn out independents.

In chess, this would be called converting your positional advantage into a material advantage.(Note: you have to give up your positional advantage to do this!)  Simply being way up among independents is probably not enough to win the election--you have to give some of that lead away (which you couldn't do if you weren't way up.)  Democrats are in a position that they can take up-firing positions for GOTV, lose 10% of independents, and still win handily.  

Positional advantages are generally best converted before the endgame begins...

The problem is that the power broker Democrats are Clinton, Lieberman, Biden and other warmongering appeasers.  You have to push them out of the top leadership or you have a bottleneck.

When I first started reading this post, I was already thinking about a flaming piece about who gives a shit about where the independents fall and how vast the gap has become among the independent's and GOP approval/disapproval.

But then you summed up with exactly what I was thinking.  

These polls don't mean shit if we don't figure out an effective way to get our constituents to the polls AND pull the democratic lever.  It'll be the diehards of the party that will knock on the doors, make the calls, mail reminders to order absentee ballots and all the nuts and bolts that will grab the dis-enchanted independents and republicans, get them to the polls and pull the democrat lever.  
WE CAN'T LET THE GOP IMPLOSION DO IT FOR US.  In 1994, half of our party's failure and the GOPs success was SUPPRESSION of the democratic vote.  I guarantee that one of the GOPs strategy will be to do everything in their power to make voting democratic RADIOACTIVE, we will have to meet this head on and GET OUR VOTERS TO THE POLLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chris,

I've read all your conditional statements in the closing paragraph, and they almost all seem to require action by those outside of our netroots/grassroots movement.

What, if anything, can we do or should we do to promote these outcomes?  

Just an observation, but it becomes problematic to "motivate the base" to do grunt-level work like walking precincts and phoning people on behalf of candidates who are perceived as overly cautious at best and outright turncoats at worst. People realize pretty quickly that they are being used and discarded when it's time to make policy decisions.

I sense the beginnings at the local level of a new and as yet infant movement for progressives to be more aggressive.

It's an age-old debate in the party, and one snippet of it (as I'm sure many others in blog-land have pointed out) is that many veteran party activists internalized the "lessons of 1972" that in many ways account for continued Democratic timidity.

So somehow we have to get past the idea that standing up for things like an end to the war and civil liberties are dangerous strategies, because in 2006 they are not dangerous strategies for Democrats, they are winning strategies. IMHO.

Conventional party wisdom is not only alive and well, it continues to be in charge through large segments of the party, as everyone at this site knows. It's not going to be easy to dislodge the consultants and other poo-bahs all the way down to recalcitrant candidates and county level party activists, but I do believe there are more people rooting for reform in the party than we might realize. And of course there are plenty of poo-bahs and others who are already for reform. The question is at what point critical mass is achieved.

If I'm correct, which is always debatable, then sooner or later the national media focuses on the reform efforts. Which could go either way, message-wise. Either we're demanding a more open process and reform (our message) or there is a risky election-year internal battle that can't be tolerated (Joe Libermann's message.)

It's absolutely right that these poll numbers don't mean a bean unless the organization is there to ensure that they're converted into ballots actually cast.

What I dispute is that there is anything particularly progressive (whatever that means) in the manpower that needs to be mobilised to achieve this.

I'm with gatordemocrat:

With a solid infrastructure (precinct captains in every precinct, etc...) we can reinvigorate our base and then using the base to turn out independents.

What matters here is not specific to the progressives - it's that the Dems do the old things, the things that Dems were doing in FDR's days, for Dems on every block, by their actions, to associate in the minds of their neighbours the Democratic Party with helping the generality of US citizens.

That's not a goal to be realized in six or seven months. But striving towards it is the only way that Dem success - which is likely in November - can be sustained beyond the fatuity of controlling a single Congress.

Let's see:  for the first time in recent memory, we have a strong edge right now among Independent voters and we should therefore turn away from them between now and election day.  Right.  A concept of strategic genius.

One might suspect that some would rather have a Progressive-centered loss than have to owe anything to Independents in a victory.

I suggest going for the largest victory possible and and reserving intramural squabbling until afterwards.

Come on, Chris.  I love reading your stuff on the party and even tho I am a die hard who will call and canvas and deliver my vote in november just like i have for almost 30 years I don't have to like it.   And I don't like what you are suggesting.

If you let them (inside the beltway) dictate a 'we must win at all cost' strategy when they get in leadership they won't look back.  Sure you might have access as an individual blogger.  But the party will not recognize progressive objectives overall, there will be little change in fact.  Murtha and Feinstein will still be on the sidelines.  More progressive candidates will have lost.  The problems of the working poor, the working middle class, equity in education, health care and labor will sit in a backseat somewhere.

we need leverage in order to have power in the party and in crafting policy solutions.  What you described does not bring power or leverage to progressives.

The GOP gave the far right power because they saw the inherent advantage.  The current democratic leaders just want our votes--no exchange for power.

Power is more important than winning.  And in fact shared power is the ONLY WAY TO WIN.

It is because of the war and because of corporate greed.  If you are support the war and the same lobbyest, people will figure this out and you will be on everyones shit list too.

Some things that activists (or progressive political believers who aren't tied into the party org) can do to help move the Independent base to the Democratic base.

1.  Talk with your independent and left-ish Republican friends.  But don't just Bush bash.  In fact, don't do that at all.  That horse is out to pasture.  America already believes he's a liar and failure.  Don't talk to them about Dems and GOPs as parties either.  Don't say, "this is why we must elect Dems" (at least at the outset).  Lead them to this conclusion.  Talk issues.  Talk issues in your own local understanding and vocabulary.  Practice first with your spouse, family, whatever if you have to so that you don't sound like you are lecturing.  Express your concerns about the country's progress in calm, rational ways.  Try to identify the types of solutions that might be out there and then, try to figure out who would be the people to implement the solutions (i.e. Not the current GOP)  Remember, we are trying to be persuasive here.

2.  Vote for people that share your VISION, not because they might seem to be electable.  Listen to the candidates and think about what they say.  Vote for your belief, and not what you think is electable.  Let the candidate you believe in have the chance to prove to the greater public that they are electable because of their ideas.  (As an example, initially, I really thought John Edwards was a terrible candidate for Pres in 2004 [too inexperienced, lawyer, etc.] but the more I listened to him, I realized he wasn't just talking about a regulation here and a bill there.  He was talking about ideas and a new vision for America.  Of course, he wasn't the only one.)  

3.  Pray (or whatever you do like that).  Why?  Because for this election to truly be about ideas and to have a long term impact on what the public thinks is right for America, we need to have the leadership speaking out at the national level that will articulate a vision.  The vision has to be a positive vision, one that convinces the public that they should get on board and sail with us.  Not a vision that says the GOP sucks, but one that shows why and how we will do better.  

This last point is where I'm afraid we lose the historic chance.  Who are our visionaries?  Edwards on social issues.  Gore on the environment and energy.  Feingold on campaigns, justice, and doing what's right.  Two out of office.  One gaining prestige, but not being followed.

It is about fear. It is all about fear. And it damn well should be about fear. But at some point, we might hope that even the limpest couch potato must rise from the rotten old comforter and actually take a look around. Is there really some guy in a turban waiting in the kitchen with a dagger? No, that's only what we have been watching on the TV.

The real problem with the kitchen is that there's no food in the cupboard. Fresh water is running out, so the faucet only lets out a tiny dribble. And the gas tank is empty. And the security freaks have cameras in every room to ensure that there are no guys in turbans hiding out in the den. And you know for sure that all of this will only get worse and worse.

But Johnny will come marching home again shortly. On one leg. So that Exxon can raise the gas prices a few dimes.

You see, you didn't realize it, but you have in fact been running a business -- you've been running a business upon which your life depends. But you made a slight error by not rising from that rotten old comforter when those two-bit hack lawyers mandated that you allow those church-going gangsters to run your business. And now you found out that they hardly ever went to church at all. And they have totally looted your kitchen.

All because you put your confidence in some salesman called "Rush," who makes $32 million dollars a year complaining about how the evil liberals were so much worse than the gangsters. And, if you voted at all, you punched your choice into some computer that happened to be infested with 359 Trojans. Or used a paper-punch gizmo that produced hanging chads. Or didn't stop to ask why the nice man on the TV somehow neglected to explain about those funny butterfly ballots.

Perhaps your best move, at this point, is just go to church and pray. But you can't do that, can you? 'Cause the damn clunker is out of gas.

Perhaps you should start running your government like it's your business. Because it is. And it is bankrupt. And you might do well to just chuck that TV and forget about guys in turbans with daggers in the kitchen, since you have a whole lot of bankruptcy papers to fill out now, and the gangsters have just made that job 100 times trickier.