How Chris Dodd Won My Support: By Leading On the Issues Now

I never expected to be supporting any of our fine candidates for President at this point, much less Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT). I was not shopping for candidates. Indeed, I insisted (insist?) that the Netroots has spent 2007 too focused on the 2008 horserace instead of being focused on the pressing issues of today, especially the Iraq issue.

But that actually explains how Chris Dodd won my support. Chris Dodd is leading on the issues of today as well as discussing his vision for the issues of tomorrow. Take Iraq for instance. While Dodd thoroughly explains his views on what he will do about Iraq as President, he has spent just as much time explaining and stressing the critical importance of Democrats doing all they can now to end the Iraq Debacle. This is not an issue that can wait 18 months. Thus Dodd argues that we must:

End the War in Iraq Decisively. Chris Dodd understands that ending the war in Iraq makes America safer. He strongly supports the Feingold-Reid proposal - the only responsible measure in Congress that sets a timetable to end the war in Iraq by March 31, 2008 - and he has urged all the candidates in the presidential race to join him. It is time to stand up to the President's misguided Iraq policy.

(Emphasis supplied.) More than anything else, this position won my support. Instead of introducing a "Dodd plan" for getting us out of Iraq, to buttress a stump speech, Chris Dodd put the issue first, he put the nation first, and he argued for what Democrats (and any Republicans with wisdom and courage) should be doing NOW, not in January 2009, to end the Iraq Debacle. With this one act, Chris Dodd demonstrated the type of leadership, political courage, selflessness and wisdom that we need from our future President.

Similarly, on the restoration of habeas corpus, Chris Dodd has not been making stump speeches, he has been leading:

February 13, 2007

Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) today introduced his bill making important changes to the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which in its current form, does not provide a credible process for bringing suspected terrorists to justice . . . The "Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007" restores Habeas Corpus rights, bars evidence gained through torture or coercion and reinstates U.S. adherence to the Geneva Conventions in order to protect the nation's military personnel abroad.

Chris Dodd is leading on the important issues now. He is not just promising to lead starting in January 2009.

Chris Dodd is also leading in understanding what a radically extreme and dangerous Administration is currently in office. For example, on the assault on the Constitution carried out by the Bush Administration, Dodd said in an interview with Glenn Greenwald:

GG: One of the things that I think could be invigorating about your campaign is that you are making these constitutional issues the centerpiece of your campaign. You said in the debate that one of the most critical issues we face is the assault on our constitution, which you indicated was unprecedented. Can you talk about why this assault on the constitution is so fundamentally different than anything that has come before it? . . .

CD: Well, it's so pervasive. I mean, its domestic. It's foreign. And it is has been so calculated on so many levels. . . . But here -- winning elections. And pursuing people or not pursuing people. That takes it to a whole new level. The power of the U.S. attorney is real power. Power. The power to prosecute people is enormous. It saddens me that it even has to be an issue -- the fact that "defending the Constitution" even has to be an issue in the presidential race. . . .

A campaign for president allows you to have a megaphone here on a national scale to talk about these things, at a time when this crowd, if it continues, can enable you to stop them, do even more than raise the issues. But secondly, if I don't win this thing, I want everyone else to be talking about these issues.

Chris Dodd is leading NOW on the issues that matter today. He understands that we must fight the Bush Administration and the radical and extreme Republican Party now, not starting in January 2009. On FISA, Dodd said:

GG: Can you describe what you think it is that motivated 16 of your colleagues in the Democratic caucus to vote in favor of this [FISA] bill?

CD: No, I really can't . . . We had caucuses during the day, so everyone knew what was there. You had a vote at 10:00 at night, people say I didn't know what was there, then normally I can understand, but we had a caucus during the day. There was a lot of conversation about it.

. . . In fact, even during the vote, Carl Levin was sitting there, and Carl said: "look, I want everyone to read this" . . . . Most people know about the Gonzales references and the 180 days -- there is also a section, as Carl pointed out, that basically says that if they can prove reasonably that you're out of the country -- not that you're not a citizen, just out of the country [then they can eavesdrop on you] . . . .

GG: There is this gap in FISA, which everyone, even Russ Feingold, says needs to be filled, which is that if there is a foreign-to-foreign conversation which happens to be routed through the U.S., it requires a warrant -- so why not just say "OK, we fixed this gap and here's our bill and if you veto it, and there's a terrorist attack, then it's your responsibility"?

CD: Hello? Sounds pretty reasonable to me. But part of what this comes down to is that too many people in public life are not secure enough in their own beliefs -- feel vulnerable to attacks by people who will attack you -- and feel unwilling or unable to respond to them with clarity and conviction. And if you lack that clarity and conviction, and if you haven't been through this in the past, then you're likely to be a little weaker in the legs.

Clarity and conviction. Leadership. Today. Not a promise of leadership starting in January 2009. That is how Chris Dodd won my support. Sure, Dodd has all the 16 point plans on health care and education and the like. You can go to his website if you wish to see them. But Chris Dodd has demonstrated leadership, clarity and conviction now on the issues that matter now.

And that wins me over every time over promises of leadership to come in January 2009.

Andgarden points to the ad now featured at the top of this post. That ad captures, I think, what I am talking about.



Display:


Leadership today (3.00 / 1)

on the issues that matter now is the best evidence of the leadership that a candidate will provide as President in 2009.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 07:56:17 AM EST

you make a strong case (3.00 / 1)

and I have no doubt that Dodd would be an outstanding president.

My reservations about Dodd are 1) we haven't had great luck nominating senators from the northeast, and 2) if he were elected president, we would immediately lose a Senate seat from CT.

This may be unfair, since Dodd can't change who he is, but I would prefer to see him continue to lead in the Senate.

I appreciate your making the case for his candidacy, though. I get annoyed by people who say voters should only give the front-runners their serious consideration.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:33:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The lack of a Special Election Law in CT (none / 0)

worries me too.  A bill went through the Legislature last year but never came up for a vote.  I'm hopeful that it will happen in next year's short session.  


by Melissa Ryan on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:43:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

In NH, I keep looking for (3.00 / 1)

a candidate who best represents my values, and, surprise surprise, I keep finding Dodd.

In addition to being a leader right now in the senate, he's the one openly calling for a restoration of the Constitution within the first hours of his administration, and he's not afraid to say "carbon tax."

So my question is the same as Philip Anderson's from TAP: "Why not Dodd?


Wonder if Sununu's fired now.
by Dean Barker on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:09:00 AM EST

If you look at the post right above (none / 0)

yours it shows that if perhaps Dodd should win we would lose a Senate seat due to the fact that CT as a Republican Governor.

Combine that with the fact that Joe Lieberman might as well have an R next to his name and that would give the Republican Party in CT a big boost.


by merbex on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:53:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

A great guy but (none / 0)

I am a bit surprised that you support him since you have shown that you are concerned about the electability of a candidate (at least that is how I interpreted your initial concerns about Hillary).

Dodd is a Senator from the northeast who pretty much lacks charisma and folksy-ness. Why would he fare better than Kerry and Dukakis in a general election?


The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.
by Populism2008 on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:24:30 AM EST

Re: A great guy but (none / 0)

Kerry should have won.

He ran a poor campaign at first and focused on the wrong issues early.

Dodd can run a strong campaign.

I see no inherent electability advantage for the other candidates.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:38:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

well, I think Kerry did win Ohio (none / 0)

but I guess I should take that shit to DU...


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:42:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well, I think Kerry did win Ohio (none / 0)

Heh. I really don't think he won.

But, the larger point is all of the candidates can win Ohio AND Florida.

To me, electability is less of an issue now because all of the candidates, Hillary included, can win this thing.

Some have better general effects on the other races maybe. But I do not think that is as big a factor as in 2004.

I think this is an election where we really can support the candidate we favor the most and not have to calculate the effect in Ohio.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:45:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

redistricting is coming up soon (3.00 / 1)

We need at the very least a presidential candidate who will not hurt our candidates for state legislature across the country.

The state legislatures will be doing the gerrymandering after the 2010 census.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:38:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: redistricting is coming up soon (none / 0)

Do you think any of the candidates will? The top 5 or 6 I mean.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:41:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: redistricting is coming up soon (none / 0)

That would be a fascinating diary to write. One would have to explore the dynamics of each legislature--who controls which bodies, by how many seats they control them, and whether a flip is likely to be in reach for either side in the 2008/2010 elections.

My initial reaction would be that Hillary is the only candidate who really hurts us. There was a poll out that had her getting shellacked by all the Republican candidates in a general election matchup in Colorado and I'm worried about a similar effect in some of the other Western states that we could and should be winning in 2008. In 2010, there's also the potential for a 1994-style midterm backlash against anyone who is elected President, should the Republicans in Congress and the other Party leaders play their cards right. Obviously, 1994 was a special circumstance, and it is difficult if not impossible to predict what will happen in 2010, but it's probably important to elect someone who is going to be able to pass their healthcare bill and other major initiatives, as well as successfully bringing an end to the war in Iraq.


Never separate the life you live from the words you speak. -Sen. Paul Wellstone (Minnesota)
by Max Fletcher on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:17:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes and No (none / 0)

Kerry was a decent guy and would have been a great candidate in a different era. His overwhelming flaw was that he was unable to recognize the current reality in American politics -- that Republicans will lie, steal, and manipulate every lever of government that they control to win power.

Winning in Ohio required more than knocking on doors and phonebanking -- it required planning for, publicizing, and overcoming Republican malfeasance, including post-election counting trickery. Even if 51% of Ohians preferred Kerry as president, his campaign was unable to do what was necessary to win. Sad, but... c'est la vie.


by scvmws on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:50:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh, I think Kerry gets that. . .now (none / 0)

I also think he probably would have won if he'd made his campaign more about Iraq.


by andgarden on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:52:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great guy but (none / 0)

Dodd is an incredibly skilled public speaker -- a lot of charisma, though perhaps not so much folksiness.

I also feel compelled to suggest that Dodd would fare better than Kerry and Dukakis because he isn't a chickenshit on fundamental progressive issues.


by scvmws on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:58:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great guy but (none / 0)

I don't think Kerry is either, I just think his campaign was poorly managed (see: Bob Shrum resisting going after the swift-boaters). He could have been more outspoken on Iraq, but I don't think he had an easily explainable (in soundbite terms) idea of what he wanted to do with the war.


Never separate the life you live from the words you speak. -Sen. Paul Wellstone (Minnesota)
by Max Fletcher on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:21:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A great guy but (none / 0)

You're probably right about Kerry vs the Kerry Campaign, but at a certain level every campaign is built atop the political judgement of the candidate. If Kerry chose nothing but hacks, idiots and assholes for his inner circle, so that dumb advice was the only advice he heard, then he was destined to lose from the start.

(IIRC, this was the main case for Dean with a lot of his supporters -- Not Genuises did a post back in its heyday saying that Kerry would be a better president, but that he could never win because he had practically no political judgement and a cabinet full of frauds.)

Whether Dodd is talking with Tagaris or MBH personally -- or if people with a similar willingness to be aggressive in support of core progressive values are placed in high-level advisor roles -- I have a lot more confidence in his ability to get and follow good advice.


by scvmws on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 01:43:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Chris Dodd Won My Support: By Leading On t (3.00 / 1)

I think that Chris Dodd is a fine man and a strong supporter of all things Democratic. He is so right about so many issues. I am especially fond of his environmental proposal. And for the life of me I don't understand why he hasn't polled better. He is smart, to the point and forceful in his beliefs. And he is usually right. Some say that he yells when he talks at these debates, I see it more as being passionate. Regardless of how he fares in this nomination process he is an important and necessary voice in the debate.


by DoIT on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:31:23 AM EST

no signature issue? (3.00 / 1)

The Des Moines Register ran a piece on Tommy Thompson the other day and why his candidacy failed. The analysis was that you either have to have a lot of money or a signature issue to gain traction.

So Romney has a ton of money to promote himself as well-rounded and qualified, and Huckabee has the fair tax, but Tommy Thompson didn't have either.

Biden and Dodd have raised similar amounts of money, but Biden has chosen to make his partition plan for Iraq the signature issue of his campaign, while Dodd has proposed a lot of great ideas on the environment, civil rights, national service, education, etc.

Maybe Dodd has also been hurt by the Kerry candidacy--has it made voters less willing to give a liberal senator from the northeast their serious consideration?


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:41:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chris Dodd (3.00 / 1)

Senator Dodd is currently my third choice in the race.  I appreciate his values, and my problems with him are superficial.

I think he speaks like an auctioneer.  WAY too fast and he uses way too much Senate-speak to connect with the average Iowa or New Hampshire voter.  In the last debate, Dodd and Biden formed up as Senator Clinton's wingmen, attacking Senators Edwards and Obama.

He has definitely brought up some great issues and great ideas.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:36:46 AM EST

Re: Chris Dodd (3.00 / 1)

I think his speaking style at the debates has been largely due to trying to make the most of his opportunities is he is given much less time than the other candidates.

When given a fair opportuniy, such as at the YKOs Forum, he can perform quite well in the debate format.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:39:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Ooops (none / 0)

This is a response to DOIT.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:40:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ooops (none / 0)

Actually, it serves as a response to Vox Populi.

I was confused.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:49:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ooops (none / 0)

No problem. And I agree with you about trying to get in what he can with the limited amount of time he is normally given at these debates. I have admired him for many years and always found his depth on the issues and insight to be amazing. When he is just talking he is very persuasive.


by DoIT on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:07:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Chris Dodd (none / 0)

The problem, however, is that his speaking style is not just limited to the debates.  I was watching C-Span's "Road to the White House" a few weeks ago and there was Dodd in Iowa, at a BBQ place.  He talked so fast that I had to think "why the hurry?"  I don't think he intends to do that, but it is off-putting.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:49:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

an east coast thing? (3.00 / 1)

Having lived on the east coast (Boston area and New York City), I noticed people do tend to talk faster.


John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."
by desmoinesdem on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 01:17:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He was amazing (none / 0)

at the YKos debate. In fact, I have found him very impressive every time I've seen him speak.


by taylormattd on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 03:11:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Chris Dodd Won My Support: By Leading On t (3.00 / 1)

Great post! I'm so glad to see people finally giving Dodd consideration.  He's right on so many of the issues and you're absolutely right about his leadership.  


by Melissa Ryan on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:41:09 AM EST

Thanks (none / 0)

The leading now thing is really what got me.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 08:50:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think that (none / 0)

This ad expresses the point you make here about as well as could possibly be done in 30 seconds. (No embed in the comments at MyDD).


by andgarden on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:39:41 AM EST

Re: I think that (3.00 / 1)

Thanks.

I added it below the fold.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:55:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Now at the top of the post (none / 0)


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:03:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

the web folks at chrisdodd.com (none / 0)

deserve credit for making it easy to find. Tim Tagaris?


by andgarden on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:05:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the web folks at chrisdodd.com (none / 0)

Chris works for Dodd of ocurse.

But no, your tipoff is what got it for me.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:08:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I mean (none / 0)

that it was easy for me to find. I give the Dodd folks credit, and assume that Tim had something to do with the design of the site.


by andgarden on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:12:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Ah (3.00 / 1)

I assume so but do not know.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:14:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I mean (3.00 / 1)

ChrisDodd.com v2.0 (what the current site) was designed by Erik Moe, Tim Cullen, Tim Tagaris, and Brett Schenker -- the Dodd internet team as it stood in early May. Obviously the site reflects both the design style and the information structure that the campaign wants presented -- I'm glad that you like it! Disclosure: I proudly work for Chris Dodd's presidential campaign.
Disclosure: I am Mark Begich's Online Communications Director
by Matt Browner Hamlin on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:31:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Right (none / 0)

thanks Matt.


by andgarden on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:39:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Great case for Dodd. nt (3.00 / 1)


by bookgrl on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:41:02 AM EST

Dodd was my second (none / 0)

choice.  After he teamed up with Clinton, I am not so sure, but on issues he generally is fine.

For me, though, Dodd brings nothing to the table that is not already there with John Edwards.

Edwards has led on progresssive issues and put them on the agenda this campaign.  

Dodd is a good man and has good positions on many issues.  I just think Edwards is better.

Nice post for Dodd.


by TomP on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 09:45:48 AM EST

Teamed up w/ Clinton? (3.00 / 1)

This is from last week:

   KEENE, NH -- Today, Presidential Candidate Chris Dodd released the following statement on Senator Clinton's categorical statement on military options as reported by the Associated Press:

   "I was disappointed to learn that Mrs. Clinton, like Mr. Obama, would make such an unwise categorical statement about military options. If nothing else, these kinds of careless statements expose the difference in the candidates' depth of experience and understanding when it comes to the complex world of foreign policy and military affairs.

   "The next President will require a level of understanding and judgment unprecedented in our history to keep America safe. With over a quarter of a century of experience helping to resolve conflict around the world, I offer that kind of leadership."


Wonder if Sununu's fired now.
by Dean Barker on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:24:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I like Dodd (none / 0)

especially his leadership on Habeas Corpus. But he's not nearly strong enough on economic issues. He's far too close to the banking industry, for example, and is reluctant to piss off his hedge fund supporters. For example, he hasn't come out in favor of closing the loophole for hedge fund managers and partners. He also supported Bush's tort reform. Obama also supported it, but he seems to be moving in a more populist direction; Dodd should too.


by david mizner on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:25:07 AM EST

Re: I like Dodd (none / 0)

Dodd did oppose the bankruptcy bill, fwiw.


by scvmws on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:13:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Chris Dodd (none / 0)

What was Chris Dobb's original vote on the war?
I have a litmust test on the original war vote which makes it impossible for me to vote for anyone who supported the war.
Can you say with a straight face that Hillary has been a strong leader in the Senate?
by AnthonyMason2k6 on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:52:45 AM EST

Re: How Chris Dodd (3.00 / 0)

I have a litmus test too. It is about voting to get us out of the war.

As I understand your view, so long as a candidate voted against the war, they can continue to fund it, escalate it, perpetuate it, etc., and still have your support.

But if they made the mistake of voting for it, and the vote was overwhelmingly in favor the war, no matter how hard they work to end it, they will not get your vote.

Time is frozen for you in October 2002.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 10:59:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Chris Dodd (none / 0)

I think if Dodd had voted against it, his opening would be much larger, as everytime Obama made it an issue, Dodd would be there to take the credit.


by Jerome Armstrong on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 11:58:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Chris Dodd (none / 0)

Of course what you are highlighting is Obama's missed opportunity, along the lines you laid out in your post a while back.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:03:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Chris Dodd (none / 0)

Obama should have loudly opposed the funding last time around. I don't think we would have got that many (if any) more votes from the "cover" it would have provided, but it would have had a shit-or-get-off-the-pot effect on the Clinton campaign. Definitely a missed opportunity.

I know it's not the best way to get out of Iraq, but it's clearly the only choice at the moment


Never separate the life you live from the words you speak. -Sen. Paul Wellstone (Minnesota)
by Max Fletcher on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:27:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I blame Axelrod (none / 0)

I really do.


by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 12:53:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why I don't trust Chris Dodd (none / 0)

In 1995, Congress passed a bill limiing stockholders' right to file lawsuits against company executives when they cook the books or otherwise violate the law. When President Clinton courageously vetoed the bill, then-Democratic National Committee Chairman senator Chris Dodd (CT) led the successful fight to override him, earning himself a quarter of a million dollars in accounting industry campaign contibutions. As one market analyst noted after the Enron scandals, the measure "paved the way for corporate chieftans basically to lie without fear of being sued."

Hostile Takover by David Sirota, p. 264 (hardcover edition)

When Dodd posted on DKos recently, I asked him to respond to what Sirota wrote. Funny, he never answered the question.

Dodd may talk pretty, but he's just another Washington hack. Nothing to see here folks. People are ignoring his campaign with good reason.


"We are building a political movement - not one that wields the power of lobbyists and corporate interests, but the power of millions... who seek change." -Dean
by Jim in Chicago on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 01:23:04 PM EST

Re: How Chris Dodd Won My Support: By Leading On t (none / 0)

Dodd is my second choice behind Clinton.


BlueSunbelt.Com Netroots for the Sunbelt states robwire.com My personal blog
by robliberal on Thu Aug 16, 2007 at 01:54:12 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.