DNC Chair Tim Roemer?

Ever since CNN declared that both Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid were backing Tim Roemer for DNC Chair the blogosphere has been working overtime to expose his positions on the issues.

It is true that Roemer will have zero credibility in the upcoming Social Security battle because he has already voted to privatize Social Securty. And yes, it is also true that the religious zealots are salivating over his anti-woman, pro-alley stance against choice. The only feather in his hat is that some believe his position on the 9/11 Commission will help Democrats on national security. Which is an interesting angle until you consider that the 9/11 Commission debunked the Al Queda/Saddam link and four months later 63% believed the link existed. So yes, he has national security credentials, but nobody listened to him and his ineffective communication may have cost us the election.

However, the greatest problem with Roemer is that he won't be able to unite Democrats around the DNC. If Roemer is elected it appears that there will be a mass exodus of volunteer and financial support. In the post-modern marketplace of progressive action, Roemer would be unable to compete with Howard Dean's Democracy for America or Simon Rosenberg's New Democrat Network. Don't believe me, see what others are saying.

MyDD has almost hit the 5 million reader milestone. Here is whay Chris Bower's says he'll do with his MyDD soapbox should Roemer be elected Chair:

The upcoming battle to save Social Security from destruction by lying, rampaging conservatives is the single biggest domestic issue we have faced in the country in a decade. During this fight, we do not need the chair of the DNC to be in favor of said destruction. Unless Roemer publicly, loudly and completely repudiates his recent position on Social Security, he is utterly unacceptable as DNC chair. Mark my words: if Roemer becomes chair without doing this, I will <u>actively encourage</u> all progressive activists to donate and volunteer to third-party groups instead of and at the expense of the DNC. The Fainthearted Faction has no place in the Democratic leadership. [emphasis mine]

Over at the DCCC's Stakeholder, True Blue writes in the comments:
In the last cycle I gave $500 each to Farrell and Sullivan, plus donations to Dave Thomas, Morrison, Herseth, Chandler, Barend, Ashe, etc. They totalled $1500, and that is a lot of money for me. (I gave significantly to MoveOn and Kerry in addition.)
Simply put, if Roemer gets the nod, I ain't giving in the next cycle. Nada. Zilch. Nothing.

Kos wrote, "Roemer is not a Reform Democrat, and, beyond that, clearly outside the party's mainstream." which set an avalanche of criticism of Roemer. Here are some choice quotes:
Colleen:
I assure you that anti-choice on abortion
is indeed a deal breaker for about 20% of the dem electorate. And these aren't people whose reaction will be anything simple like not voting for democrats and refusing to donate money. We will do serious damage. Imagine the reaction of the African-American community if the dems completely rolled on reinstating Jim Crow laws and then amplify that.

LISoundView:
The largest party in the country is actually the group of people registered as Independents. If the Democrats appoint Roehmer, I will become one of them.
And if Pelosi or Reid asks me for any money or time or even my vote the answer is, NO.

cscs:
Perfect!
Roehmer becomes Chair, which sounds like we'll be going down the all-too-familiar road of LOSING once again.
[...]
I'm so sick of Republican-lite.
Pro-life AND pro-privatization? Why don't we just put fucking Tom DeLay in as DNC chair???
If Roehmer is in as Chair, I'm out.

MimiKatz:
I gave thousands in this last election but not one dime for the DNC or his type of candidates if Roemer is the chair.

Boring Dem:
If Roemer is chosen as DNC chair, I will never donate to a democrat or to the party again, nor will I ever vote for one again. I'd say my politics are moderate left of center, but they don't include appeasement, and they aren't defined by sure-fire losing policies. This party has a chance to make something good happen now, but it also has a chance to become completely irrelevant. The choice is theirs---those few people at the top who don't listen to little folks like me. I'm not optimistic.

David in Burbank:
Why would anyone vote for a fake republican when they could vote for a real one?
How is a policy of being more like your opponent going to win us national elections?
If the Demoicrats in DC shove this kind of approach down our throats again, I will really be pissed.

wph:
If Roemer is selected for DNC Chair this will absolutely kill my motivation. Watching Dean crash and burn seeing Bush get back in was heartbreaking to say the least. My only hope now is to get a "reform" chair so we have a realistic chance of winning things back. If they not only go for status quo but veer right to "appease" so called moderates I will lose all faith that the Dems seriously want to win election.

MJB:
Sorry Roemer, no DINOs
If Roemer or any other DINO becomes DNC chair, then it will be time for the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party to become its own party.

Anderson Republican:
I thought Democrats wanted.....
....to be different from Republicans.
This guy's about as different as a Nestle bar to a Hershey.
God, they really need to get over the fact that the grass roots thinks they're full of shit, swallow their pride, and take either Dean or Rosenberg.

Lestatdelc:
Fuck Roemer with his pants on
[...]
Fuck Roemer and fuck him right now.
This man is a fucking ignoramus and menace to the party and what we rightly stand for.

Alumbrados:
If Roehmer is chair...
...I'm done with the DNC. Not a single dollar will go to them. Until they decide to start representing Democrats, they will not be able to rely on me and I will let me friends know they shouldn't support them as well.
Support is a two way street.
If the Democratic Party isn't going to listen to me, I'm not going to listen to them. They have a choice to make. Represent the people of the Democratic Party, or continue to play CYA with their choices. If they decide to go with people like Roehmer, than I will abstain when requested to vote. If the Democrats can't differentiate themselves from the Republicans on the issues that matter to me the most, than there simply isn't any reason to vote for them at all.

fishwars:
Anti-abortion is a deal breaker for me
I'm seriously considering registering in the Green Party if this trend continues in the Democratic party.

Frederick Clarkson:
The DP will lose alot of people if theu feel sold out on abortion and/or social security. This would be a great big Christmas presdent to Ralph Nader, and probably save the Green party from oblivion.

hardleft:
If the democratic party is dragged further to the right, it will split. It will no longer be able to claim to be the voice of the working families.
It will be the party of the Hollywood agenda and Wall Street. I and most progressives will be gone.

Boring Dem:
We are totally fucked
There's no point even paying attention now.
The fact that Pelosi and Reid, the two biggest leaders in our party, are looking for another anti-abortion candidate, and one who favor SS privatization to boot, shows that Neville Chamberlain's ghost still haunts our party.
I am SOOO discouraged. There really isn't any reason to vote for Democrats any more, or give the party one cent.

These are just some of the comments about Roemer. I quoted the ones with swearing because I think it illustrates the passion against his candidacy.

Since the soft money ban (which Roemer opposed), political parties have come to rely on small donations from the very people who are making these comments. As the DNC website reminds us:

  • In 2000, the DNC only raised $35 million in small donations. Most of our resources -- over $150 million -- came in large donations. But in 2004, there was a remarkable turnaround. This year, the vast majority of our funding -- over $248 million -- came from average Americans donating what they could, while large donations actually went down to just $105 million -- less than a third of our total.

  • In the past four years, the DNC expanded its small donor base seven fold, from 400,000 in 2000 to 2.7 million in 2004.

  • Can the Democratic Party afford to elect Tim Roemer as DNC Chair?

    Tags: (all tags)

    Comments

    33 Comments

    more
    Here is Tim Roemer on some more issues:
  • Voted YES on banning human cloning, including medical research. (Jul 2001)

  • Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)

  • Voted YES on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)

  • Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)

  • Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)

  • Voted YES on Constitutional amendment prohibiting Flag Desecration. (Jul 2001)

  • Voted NO on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000)

  • Voted YES on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime. (Jun 1999)

  • Voted NO on maintaining right of habeus corpus in Death Penalty Appeals. (Mar 1996)

  • Voted YES on making federal death penalty appeals harder. (Feb 1995)

  • Voted NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001)

  • Voted NO on banning soft money donations to national political parties. (Jul 2001)

  • Voted NO on allowing suing HMOs, but under federal rules & limited award. (Aug 2001)

  • Voted NO on Prescription Drug Coverage under Medicare. (Jun 2000)

  • Voted YES on banning physician-assisted suicide. (Oct 1999)

  • Voted YES on deploying SDI. (Mar 1999)

  • Member of Democratic Leadership Council. (Nov 2000)
  • by Bob Brigham 2004-12-26 11:36AM | 0 recs
    Roemer for RNC Chair!
    I think Roemer is running for chair of the wrong party. Are there any issues where Roemer agrees with the Democratic party postion?
    by Gary Boatwright 2004-12-26 01:55PM | 0 recs
    Can we just copy the comments from dKos?
    The more who see this the better! Thanks for cross posting.

    With a little more thought on this, I think one key effort I hope to see made at some point from the left blogosphere is some sort of a coordinated action from the progressive blogs.

    I hope Chris and Marcos and Duncan and the rest are talking with each other and will launch some kind of coordinated effort for the blogosphere to influence the DNC chair choice.

    As mentioned in your post, the blogosphere was a great new source of campaign cash for the DNC this year. If they push a guy like this DINO as the chair of the party, it's time to take away their funding. I'd rather we fund progressive Dems or people like DFA or NDN.

    But we will need a coordinated effort to do this.

    by michael in chicago 2004-12-26 02:17PM | 0 recs
    Re: Can we just copy the comments from dKos?
    Very good points. I love the fact BlogPAC is interviewing -- maybe they should also make an endorsement.
    by Bob Brigham 2004-12-26 02:20PM | 0 recs
    Thanks
    I'd like to see more than just an endorsement. I'd like to have a display of some type - either letter writing or focused donations or something.

    Maybe I'm nuts, but I think the future of the party is in the blogosphere. I'm not sure just how much of a percentage we represent of the party yet, so I don't know if this is possible to do effectively or not. It might help or hurt our cause. But I'm sure tired of sitting by while our "leaders" back status quo, let's lose some more, GOP-Lite candidates.

    by michael in chicago 2004-12-26 02:30PM | 0 recs
    Rove's Choice for DNC Chair - Tim Roemer
    The more I read the more it is clear that Tim Roemer has spent much of his
    career working with Republicans against Democrats.  In vote after vote he
    seemed to side with the GOP against Democrats.

    He is pro-life, has bragged about his endorsement from the national right to
    life committee and has attacked other Democrats who dont agree with his
    position as having a moral blind spot.

    He sided with the Republicans in this decade to pass their budget-busting,
    anti-middle class tax cuts.  In 1993, when it came time to work with
    President Clinton on his economic plan he was one of only a handful to vote
    with the GOP.   The Democratic plan created the strongest economy in
    history, and he was on the other side.  The Bush plan has created one of the
    worst economies in history and Roemer was there with the GOP.

    And now, as we come to the great struggle over Social Security, we once
    again find that Roemer has already gone over to the other side, siding with
    the GOP in  2001 with only a handful of other Dems to support the so-called
    Filner amendment.

    His labor record is bad, he supporterd various tort reform measures and his
    had a long history of dissing Israel.

    Has he raised money to help Democrats, the DCCC or any other group? What
    makes this guy want to be head of the DNC, or believe with his record and
    views he can do anything but split the party apart? What has he done to earn
    the respect of his Party?

    What are Pelosi and Reid thinking?  Is he Karl Rove's choice for the DNC, or
    ours?

    by jimmy 2004-12-26 04:57PM | 0 recs
    Roemer is not going to have a chance
    But he's got such obvious marks of failure, that he's probably the best anti-Reform candidate to have hanging around as their alternative.
    by Jerome Armstrong 2004-12-26 01:28PM | 0 recs
    Re: Roemer is not going to have a chance
    Looking forward to what you say in the next Cattle Call.

    I hope he doesn't have a chance, but I wanted to make sure people know the stakes prior to the vote.

    by Bob Brigham 2004-12-26 01:35PM | 0 recs
    This isn't the point
    The point isn't whether or not he's got a chance. The point is that the Democratic leadership, with the likes of Pelosi and Reid, are publically backing the guy.

    I don't care if he doesn't have a chance. Why are the party leadership backing a guy who doesn't have a chance and represents near capitulation to the GOP mindset?

    That's just wrong and infuriating.

    Jerome, you and Chris have a great blog here. I hope you will team up with others in the blogosphere to put forth a unifed effort to influence the choice of DNC chair. This status quo GOP-lite stuff has got to end, for the sake of the party and the country.

    by michael in chicago 2004-12-26 02:26PM | 0 recs
    pro choice vs pro-life
    I am a pro-life democrat and I believe that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.

    The GOP labels us as being the party of abortion on demand--that is an utter distortment.

    While I am pro-life, I would not appoint a judge to overturn roe v wade.

    also, a point to look at is the blogosphere is 5% of the party which makes it look like an echo chamber.  i stop going to kos except posting in the open threads because they flamed me too many times for being a moderate democrat.

    my point is, we have to moderate our image.  wanna win in 2008?  Go with a moderate Democrat from a red state.  wanna loose?  Nominate Hilary.

    Personality politics does not make the Democratic party what it is.  A third party only hurts our cause.  Threatening an exodus is the worst thing to do and it only hurts your cause.

    I am split between Roemer and Rosenberg but I am not a DNC member.

    by kydem 2004-12-26 02:56PM | 0 recs
    Re: pro choice vs pro-life
    I didn't threaten an exodus...but there are a helluva lot of people who are threatening just that. Ken Mehlman has carte blanche authority to continue modernizing the RNC, if we don't reform the DNC it won't matter who wins the nomination in 2008 because they'll be toast.
    by Bob Brigham 2004-12-26 03:04PM | 0 recs
    Re: pro choice vs pro-life
    It does matter who gets the nom in 2008.

    Well, the Dems threatening an exodus are not loyal and true Democrats I believed them to be.

    We are not Republicans and WILL NOT STOOP TO THEIR LEVEL OF NAME CALLING AND VULGARITY!

    by kydem 2004-12-26 03:21PM | 0 recs
    making a machine
    Personally, I lean towards Dean/Rosenberg for DNC-to-be, but if Roemer gets it, so what???
    Actually, none of these guys tickle me too much.  I don't care what a guy has or hasn't voted for.
    I don't care if a guy got on TV repeatedly during the last primary and was made to look like an angry fool. I don't care if ACT actually had convicted child molesters from out of state knocking on my neighbor's door for Kerry last summer (actually, that did bug me).

    I care to win.
    And to do that, the DNC-to-be needs to IMMEDIATELY hit the ground running to turn our next campaign into one massive GOP crushing machine.  This can be done through organization, taking away their weapons, and having a set of cast iron indestructable BALLS.

    So, while people get their panties twisted over this guy or that one, I don't have problems with that.  Just make sure we put pressure on the actual winner to engage us so we all can coordinate our message and plan to win.

    If that's Roemer, great.  He better be ready to work his butt off with us.
    If it's Dean, even better, just as long as he gets himself ready for prime time this go-around.
    If it's Rosenberg, fine.  Just please no more former rapists in my front lawn.  That don't play well in the papers.
    Thank you.

    by Sam Loomis 2004-12-26 04:05PM | 0 recs
    Re: making a machine
    on the subject of ethics, we almost took a senate seat in NH until Burt Cohen's campaign manger ran out of town with all the finances.  Cohen was looking like a strong frontrunner.
    by kydem 2004-12-27 03:47AM | 0 recs
    Re: pro choice vs pro-life
    Cheers to you kydem for being a "smart pro-lifer." At last I see that some people who are pro-life are not pro-alley.
    by sam89 2004-12-26 04:52PM | 0 recs
    Re: pro choice vs pro-life
    from some comments i have seen at my blog, i am not the only one...
    by kydem 2004-12-27 04:31AM | 0 recs
    Re: pro choice vs pro-life
    Even if you hate pro-life positions, you have to admit there are a good number of pro-life dems or dems that are at the least confused on what to believe about the subject.  

    To me a pro-life dem doesn't care for abortion but isn't into telling others what to do if an uncle rapes them and they get pregnant.

    To be dissmissive of them just because most pro-life proponents act like morons is a mistake.  You can invite them back into our party without giving in on the issue.

    But, then again, you need a spokesman/candidate who will actually talk about it. But they avoid it cause they are intimidated by religious megaphones and get painted as a party who LOVES aborting babies.

    We just need a DNC-to-be with BALLS.  Cause you can't have someone paint your house if you don't allow them in your yard.  And we have let them in our yards for too long.

    by Sam Loomis 2004-12-27 06:34AM | 0 recs
    Give me a Break...
    It's fine with me if you want to throw around perjoratives and jump up and down threatening to take your toys and go play somewhere else if Roemer gets the nod; however, if you do leave then maybe you aren't so tolerant and open-minded as you have professed to be in the first place. I, too, support a more moderate agenda for the democratic party but I will stay and work my ass of if a progressive gets the nod because this is my party just as much as it is yours and if you don't like it then it's your problem, not mine. But in the meantime, lose the foul-language and temper-tantrums. It brings us all down when you go  for such vulagrities. If you can't argue your point without resorting to curse words then why should I listen to you. You demean yourself but even worse you demean my democratic party and I am not happy with that in the least. Grow up!
    by lobejammer 2004-12-26 03:16PM | 0 recs
    Re: Give me a Break...
    I agree completly. I am a real liberal however I think that we should welcome moderates and even some conservatives into our party. However Roemer doesn't just seem moderate. He seems even more right wing than that. Simon Rosenberg is a moderate but at least understands the need for reform.
    by sam89 2004-12-26 04:49PM | 0 recs
    are you literate?
    I didn't swear, I quoted people. And I mentioned that. Furthermore, considering the quotes were on an entirely different website, complaining about it here probably doesn't make much sense.

    I didn't threaten to leave and I've never claimed to be either tolerant or open-minded. I simply pointed out a very important reality that many people will support other progressive organizations if Roemer wins. Which is true. Ask Chris Bowers of the blog you are reading.

    I'm glad you'll stay if a progressive wins. Considering that progressives won't stay if a DINO wins it makes the choice pretty clear.

    You should listen to my because I am right. But I am not going to listen to you if you put words into my mouth, lack the ability to understand "quotes" and then tell me to grow up. Learn to read, then learn to comprehend and then learn to reason. And please don't claim the Democratic Party until you stop being the poster-child for the failures in our education system.

    by Bob Brigham 2004-12-26 05:08PM | 0 recs
    Re: are you literate?
    Okay lets remain civil and not treat people we don't agree with like the Republicans treated Arlen Specter.
    by sam89 2004-12-26 05:11PM | 0 recs
    Re: are you literate?
    It is fine to bash the trolls. We need to block their comments and send them away before they get too annoying.
    by Bob Brigham 2004-12-26 05:43PM | 0 recs
    Re: are you literate?
    who said he was a troll?  just because some people join and than rarely post, they are trolled?

    don't troll-rate someone you disagree with---that makes you look like a republican.  We are free free speech...but freedom of speech only goes so far.

    by kydem 2004-12-27 03:50AM | 0 recs
    troll
    When some dude's first comment on mydd puts words into people's mouths, shows a complete disregard for discourse and is inflammatory then yeah, I'll consider him a troll.

    The dudes an ignorant republican who is causing trouble by attacking people without reading what they have said.

    by Bob Brigham 2004-12-27 04:54AM | 0 recs
    Re: troll
    Uh, last I checked, Lobejammer was a registered Democrat in Indiana.  Last I checked, he volunteered for Gen. Clark's campaign in 2004.  So under your criteria, that makes Michael Moore a republican since Moore endorsed Gen. Clark.  Am I correct in that assumption?

    Lobejammer supports Evan Bayh in 2008.  So does that make me a republican then?  Zell Miller is a republican as far as I am concerned.

    The last thing I want is our party falling to shreds and from what I read online it is.

    Are we not the party of the people?  Are we not the party of all-inclusiveness?  I may be pro-life but I am most certainly not anti-roe v wade.

    Do your homework before calling someone a republican.  I hate being labeled a DINO for being a moderate Democrat as much as anyone else does.  The GOP can no longer say that they are the Party of Lincoln.

    We have lots of work to do.  But factioning into spliter groups only hurts our party.

    by kydem 2004-12-27 05:21AM | 0 recs
    Re: troll
    agreed
    by sam89 2004-12-27 05:25AM | 0 recs
    He's not a Reformer
    Much of this left v. center stuff is completely beside the point.  It doesn't much matter whether he's liberal or centrist.  What matters is that the DNC Chair be a uniter of the Democratic party, a fighter, and a reformer.   Harry Reid himself appears to be a fighter.  Roemer, with his questionable record on Social Security, will be neither a uniter of the Dems nor a fighter.

    Nor, as Jerome points out, is there any chance of him being chosen.  But I said that about George Bush when he beat McCain in 2000, so what do I know:-?

    by conchis 2004-12-26 08:27PM | 0 recs
    Rove's Choice for DNC Chair - Tim Roemer
    The more I read the more it is clear that Tim Roemer has spent much of his
    career working with Republicans against Democrats.  In vote after vote he
    seemed to side with the GOP against Democrats.

    He is pro-life, has bragged about his endorsement from the national right to
    life committee and has attacked other Democrats who dont agree with his
    position as having a moral blind spot.

    He sided with the Republicans in this decade to pass their budget-busting,
    anti-middle class tax cuts.  In 1993, when it came time to work with
    President Clinton on his economic plan he was one of only a handful to vote
    with the GOP.   The Democratic plan created the strongest economy in
    history, and he was on the other side.  The Bush plan has created one of the
    worst economies in history and Roemer was there with the GOP.

    And now, as we come to the great struggle over Social Security, we once
    again find that Roemer has already gone over to the other side, siding with
    the GOP in  2001 with only a handful of other Dems to support the so-called
    Filner amendment.

    His labor record is bad, he supporterd various tort reform measures and his
    had a long history of dissing Israel.

    Has he raised money to help Democrats, the DCCC or any other group? What
    makes this guy want to be head of the DNC, or believe with his record and
    views he can do anything but split the party apart? What has he done to earn
    the respect of his Party?

    What are Pelosi and Reid thinking?  Is he Karl Rove's choice for the DNC, or
    ours?

    by jimmy 2004-12-26 04:59PM | 0 recs
    Re: Rove's Choice for DNC Chair - Tim Roemer
    If he really did diss Israel we can't pick him. The Democrat party lost a ton of Jewish votes this year because we were portrayed by the Republicans as anti-Israel. Thats one of the reasons why we didnt do so well in Florida.
    by sam89 2004-12-27 05:23AM | 0 recs
    Re: Rove's Choice for DNC Chair - Tim Roemer
    with regards to Israel, do you have any credible proof?
    by kydem 2004-12-27 06:42AM | 0 recs
    Moderates should not support Roemer
    Because a split party will be bad for all Democrats, liberal and moderate alike. The DNC chair should be a balance between all the wings of the party, not just a representative of one. He has not even taken moderate positions. What type of a moderate would support the privitization of social security and be anti-abortion/pro-alley and oppose Clinton's middle class taxe cuts and economic program?

    No a moderate Democrat

    by sam89 2004-12-26 05:08PM | 0 recs
    If Roemer wins, we all lose
    If Roemer's picked, I predict many Progressive Dems-- particularly younger voters-- will leave for the Green party or they'll create a new party of their own  This would indeed be disasterous.
    by bellarose 2004-12-27 05:46AM | 0 recs
    If Roemer wins, America loses
    by sam89 2004-12-27 06:03AM | 0 recs

    Diaries

    Advertise Blogads


    ----------- myDD - skin -----------