We had a DLC president, and we lost power... we are in this mess because the Republicans were strong and united. And our response was to be weak and DLC divided.
It is bad political strategy to move towards the artificial "corporate" center.
Look at the DLC results of complete handover of government to the Republicans. Count me out. I bet that the newly awake grassroots will count themselves out too. They will push for their own world view and their own policies.
Republican lite is not a viable solution, people just vote for the real republican. And everyone loses.
I just know from personal experience that many of the people that I have met online are out in the real world at meeting, working with candidates, talking to voters.
I know this becuase our daily Kos group in Austin meets in person regularly and is made up people that have either never been involved before or had not been involved for a while.
So my personal experience is very different from yours. But we both agree that getting out into the "real world" is very important. And hopefully there are a lot of people like me that have the experience of being with people that are going out into the "real world."
Yes there are many people online that aren't doing things offline.
However there are many people online that are doing very important things offline.
"issues oriented massive jerk off which passes for electronic activism today."
That issue orientation is what allowed us to block the Social Security privitization scheme. There was not a coordinated voice on the issue initially other than ONLINE. Without the strong direction that the democratic internet sites gave, there is little doubt (based on past democratic strategy) that the democratic response would have been to propose a counter solution rather than aggresively attack by saying that Bush was making up the crisis.
By the way, I sell for living, and I never have had the opportunity for closing the sale by using the words
"massive jerk off"
I guess that you are a better salesman though, maybe some day I will learn.
I missed getting in on contributing to your laptop.
When you post comments like this, which are so damn "on the money", it makes we want to jump for joy that there are people out there that are getting what we have to do.
Let's review the issue of targeting. Our political objectives require us to think in these terms: base voters and swing voters, right? But our commercial success requires us to target the most valuable customers: the customers who spend the most money and can be acquired at the lowest customer acquisition cost.
...
* 1- Preach to the choir
* 2- Activate the choir and generate revenue
* 3- Use that revenue to target swingers and the unconverted
* 4- Return to step one with an expanded choir
The narrowing of the dKos columns makes it much more difficult for me to scan quickly. Aggreed about making changes here at the same time there are changes there.
These sites are driven by functionality and ease of contributing content. Form can always be improved but should be analyzed carefully to maximize content. To me the ability to scan the page quickly to gather information of interest is part of content. You must have access to content quickly.
We bloggers in Austin, Texas are excited about seeing bloggers from all over the country!
We will have a bloggers table for the duration of demfest and are having a blogger's Caucus on Friday. The bloggers table will be a way for people to keep in touch.
The Republican Party's current advantage with the center makes up for the fact that the GOP-oriented groups, when taken together, account for only 29% of the public. By contrast, the three Democratic groups constitute 41% of the public. But the imbalance shifts to the GOP's favor when the inclinations of the two major groups in the center are taken into account - many of whom lean Republican and most of whom voted for George W. Bush.
Downloaded and studying the report. Aslo studying the Dean supporters report from April that I hadn't seen.
Below is a response to an artcle on Alternet on this topic. The way to combat this is not talking about ideological bent, but by talking about adherence to facts!
While it is good to see that there is more discussion about the media in general and PBS in particular, Democrats and progressives are letting the Republican right wing frame the debate once again. The real issue is not whether there are too many :"liberal" points of view in the media, or whether the conservative right wing is taking over the media, it is about whether the media is giving people the truth or ideological spin.
If the facts favor one point of view or the other, it doesn't matter - as long as that point of view is backed by the truth. For example, before going to war in Iraq, it was the media's place to look deeply into whether there was credible reason to believe that Iraq had WMDs, whether there was a connection to the terrorist attack of 9/11, etc. The truth was that neither of those claims were based on any known facts. Does that mean that if the media had aired these facts that they were showing a liberal bias? Similarly, since Social Security is not "in crisis," does publicizing the actual numbers show a liberal bias?
Telling the truth should be the basis of discussion, not the issue. If, knowing that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and was not connected to the 9/11 attack, Republicans still believed that we should invade that country, their point of view should have been heard - as should the opposite view. Unfortunately, the media has become an arena in which any two opposing points of view are presented without having the facts play any role. If Dr. Frist states that AIDs can be transmitted throught sweat and tears, and known scientific fact can prove that it is not, should his opinion be given equal play in the interests of "fairness?" Unfortunately, this is not fairness, it is misrepresentation.
So, let's begin to frame the issue as being between providing known truth and ideological statements, not between liberal and conservative bias.
jeromearmstrong Our Polarized and Money-Driven Congress: Created Over 25 Years By Republicans (and Quickly Imitated by Democrats http://bit.ly/ewXlXI #bblue
It is bad political strategy to move towards the artificial "corporate" center.
Look at the DLC results of complete handover of government to the Republicans. Count me out. I bet that the newly awake grassroots will count themselves out too. They will push for their own world view and their own policies.
Republican lite is not a viable solution, people just vote for the real republican. And everyone loses.
I just know from personal experience that many of the people that I have met online are out in the real world at meeting, working with candidates, talking to voters.
I know this becuase our daily Kos group in Austin meets in person regularly and is made up people that have either never been involved before or had not been involved for a while.
So my personal experience is very different from yours. But we both agree that getting out into the "real world" is very important. And hopefully there are a lot of people like me that have the experience of being with people that are going out into the "real world."
However there are many people online that are doing very important things offline.
That issue orientation is what allowed us to block the Social Security privitization scheme. There was not a coordinated voice on the issue initially other than ONLINE. Without the strong direction that the democratic internet sites gave, there is little doubt (based on past democratic strategy) that the democratic response would have been to propose a counter solution rather than aggresively attack by saying that Bush was making up the crisis.
By the way, I sell for living, and I never have had the opportunity for closing the sale by using the words
I guess that you are a better salesman though, maybe some day I will learn.
When you post comments like this, which are so damn "on the money", it makes we want to jump for joy that there are people out there that are getting what we have to do.
...
* 1- Preach to the choir
* 2- Activate the choir and generate revenue
* 3- Use that revenue to target swingers and the unconverted
* 4- Return to step one with an expanded choir
This is great stuff.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/063005O.shtml
I hear alot of water-cooler-talk about this case. Not a good decision.
Some sites of interest...
http://austinkos.blogspot.com/
http://kosatdemfest.blogspot.com/
These sites are driven by functionality and ease of contributing content. Form can always be improved but should be analyzed carefully to maximize content. To me the ability to scan the page quickly to gather information of interest is part of content. You must have access to content quickly.
Having said that I do love the crisper look.
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/6/24/12522/0510/85#85
The idea is that just by putting in your Zip code you could get the nearest people's screen names to view their diaries and contact them.
Here is some research...
http://www.growtheparty.blogspot.com/
This would greatly assist the roots to develop their social/political infrastructure very quickly.
There is a large blogging contingent coming to Demfest.
http://kosatdemfest.blogspot.com/
We will have a bloggers table for the duration of demfest and are having a blogger's Caucus on Friday. The bloggers table will be a way for people to keep in touch.
Read more here...
http://www.kosatdemfest.blogspot.com/
It will be great to see everyone. Demfest is going to be phenomenal.
Downloaded and studying the report. Aslo studying the Dean supporters report from April that I hadn't seen.
Great Stuff!!!
If the facts favor one point of view or the other, it doesn't matter - as long as that point of view is backed by the truth. For example, before going to war in Iraq, it was the media's place to look deeply into whether there was credible reason to believe that Iraq had WMDs, whether there was a connection to the terrorist attack of 9/11, etc. The truth was that neither of those claims were based on any known facts. Does that mean that if the media had aired these facts that they were showing a liberal bias? Similarly, since Social Security is not "in crisis," does publicizing the actual numbers show a liberal bias?
Telling the truth should be the basis of discussion, not the issue. If, knowing that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and was not connected to the 9/11 attack, Republicans still believed that we should invade that country, their point of view should have been heard - as should the opposite view. Unfortunately, the media has become an arena in which any two opposing points of view are presented without having the facts play any role. If Dr. Frist states that AIDs can be transmitted throught sweat and tears, and known scientific fact can prove that it is not, should his opinion be given equal play in the interests of "fairness?" Unfortunately, this is not fairness, it is misrepresentation.
So, let's begin to frame the issue as being between providing known truth and ideological statements, not between liberal and conservative bias.
Source: The Real Issue, Posted by: chitijdth on May 10, 2005 4:36 AM
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/21971/