No one here is arguing for a lock-step march within the party, we are arguing for integrity, trust, and a government that is responsive to voters not powerful corporations.

The reason there’s no ‘trust’ right now is pretty straightforward in my mind. Progressives in the netroots see themselves as having worked really, really hard to win back the Congress, and the Dems in DC were happy to have all the volunteers, money, etc. And then the Dems win and the first thing that happens is a whole big discussion about how the radical liberal netroots will take over the party if we’re not careful. So, Harry Reid posts a “thank you” note on Kos, but the rest of the conversation shifted to “Oh, no! Someone call pest control before these progressives ruin everything…”

How should Reid improve communication between the netroots and the party leaders? Well, for starters Reid needs to make a public statement acknowledging how glad he is that the grassroots of the party helped win the election. That has not happened, yet. I mean…HELLO! Instead we get the sudden return of James Carville–who was in the restaraunt business last time I checked.

So…how about a hat tip, Harry? How about a little more than an invitation-only conference call with a few selected bloggers?

The Dem leadership had the trust of the netroots–and they lost it in the 72 hours since Wednesday morning. And now, frankly, we’re all waiting around to see which Democratic Presidential candidate is going to stand up first and accuse us of being what’s wrong with America.

The risk is huge, here, and the Dems in DC do not see it yet. They do not see how much the netroots invested of themselves in this election, and how much people felt a sense of exclusion after the victory. Those kinds of snubs have a lasting impact, but there is still time to make it right.

Breaking that connection, ok moderating it to where its not the gorilla in the room, is a big part of getting some integrity back in US politics.

You’re not going to get that from Schumer or Clinton. We have to keep talking about it and maybe, maybe, someone one will eventually listen. But at this point its a tail wagging dog venture,with the comeback being “antisemitc, antisemitc! To put it crudely, that puppy’s gotta be drowned.

I’m a life long democrat. make phone calls and canvas for the democratic party, worked in FL in 2006 – I’m an independent, free-spirited person and don’t like the military march you’re singing for conformity within the party. Reading this entry I had flash backs to Animal Farm. How horrible is that?

Might I suggest L. Chaffee as our first Senator. I agree he had to go as a repug, but as our candidate he would be an excellent choice.

I hate having to type this, but as a great (ass of a) president once said, “Fool me once….”. We all know where this is heading, and I DON’T LIKE THE SCENERY ON THIS RIDE.

Together!

Peace, out…

If you’re still around.

Most of us are acutely aware that the middle of a distribution has more in it than the tails. We perfectly understand the politics part of what Schumer is doing.

There’s a right way and a wrong way to do what Schumer is trying to do, preserving the gains post-victory. The right way is to spread credit around, bring everyone together, recognize the contributions, and use the left wing of your party for two purposes: to pull the cultural discussion further your way (Google “Overton Window” if you don’t know what I mean by this), and to slowly lead the voters. In fact, if you have a very trusting relationship with them, you can even demonize your left wing a little. If I really believed that the Schumers of the party trusted us, wanted us, listened to us, then I’d be perfectly happy to be cast occasionally as the bad cop.

You are 100% right that voters turn off anything too far away from them; just as I see students turn off anything that’s too far advanced for them. But that just means you slow down and build up to bring them along. It doesn’t mean saying “They’ll never understand.”

The Schumer approach, as it is playing out publicly, is essnetially saying, “We can’t educate the voters, we can’t convince them, they’ll never understand, so we should just go where they are.” That’s not leadership, and it’s a waste of a big victory. As I think Emma Anne said, we’ll go back to sucking.

Over the last two years, we have educated the voters. Nothing essential has been learned since 2004. In 2004, Iraq was a disaster, Bush had lied about it, Bush was grabbing all the power he could, Abu Ghraib had already happened, and everyone who cared to know about all of this did. The corruption of the Delay machine was well-known. Every single issue that voters gave for the voting in 2006 was already on the table in 2004. Yet he was reelected.

What changed was we educated people over the last two years. “We” here is everyone, but I think the netroots did play a special role in that–especially in pushing an a position of open and unembarrased opposition for the 2006 campaign. Lamont absolutely, positively led to this; there’s no doubt among anyone who will speak openly with you about it. People forget how unlikely he was considered to win even the primary just four months ago. It scared a lot of people in DC.

My midwest farmer 65-year old father, precisely the sort of person you’d probably say we’re completely turning off, has become an Americablog fan. We’re reaching people you’d be very surprised at.

And $19M may or may not be pocket change, but the point is: this time, we won the Senate only by a pocket-change margin. It’s a simple fact: had that $19M been spent in VA or MT, we wouldn’t be talking about how to preserve our victory. We wouldn’t have one.