|
California's Democratic Party does pretty well - they have all the state offices and a huge chunk of the state Congressional delegation, plus supermajority control of both chambers in Sacramento. Alas, the default mode is Feinstein-esque "corporate-friendly, but liberal on social policy" that really needs to be shifted to be more progressive on economics and spending. There's a decent bench but no clear line of succession behind aging Gov. Brown and Sen. Feinstein which should make things lively in the near future. And the state GOP is such a hopeless cesspool of failure with no future that even the Cal Chamber of Commerce has given up funding it - they seem reliant on self-funded vanity zillionaire candidates for high-profile state campaigns, their funding base has collapsed so badly - so CA appears to be on the verge of becoming a one-party state.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 20:32 |
|
|
De Nomolos posted:Obamamaniacs "Let me tell you something, brother, Obamamania is runnin' wilder than ever. The big man upstairs is smilin' down on us, dude, and when we get Republicans in that ring, you know there's no stopping us. So WHATCHA GONNA DO when Obamamania runs wild on YOU?!" (Politics always devolves into pro wrestling)
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
FMguru posted:California's Democratic Party does pretty well - they have all the state offices and a huge chunk of the state Congressional delegation, plus supermajority control of both chambers in Sacramento. Alas, the default mode is Feinstein-esque "corporate-friendly, but liberal on social policy" that really needs to be shifted to be more progressive on economics and spending. There's a decent bench but no clear line of succession behind aging Gov. Brown and Sen. Feinstein which should make things lively in the near future. And the state GOP is such a hopeless cesspool of failure with no future that even the Cal Chamber of Commerce has given up funding it - they seem reliant on self-funded vanity zillionaire candidates for high-profile state campaigns, their funding base has collapsed so badly - so CA appears to be on the verge of becoming a one-party state. The GOP is just doing what they've always done and will continue to do when the supermajority goes away - because of Prop 13, 2/3 of state legislature has to approve budgets and raise taxes. Republicans typically hold slightly over 1/3 of seats, but in 2012 got knocked down to less than that, where Democrats formed a super majority and then declared that they would fix the funding problem due to Prop 13. Then they just decided to big and fat on tech money instead because bubbles never burst.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Rick Perry has made a very impressive machine here in Texas. I think by definition parties who are in states they don't control would be less organized though because good organization can make up for a lot of other deficiencies. Rick Perry is a product of Karl Rove and the Bush family. You will never hear him admit it because the name Bush is kryptonite.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 23:05
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:"Let me tell you something, brother, Obamamania is runnin' wilder than ever. The big man upstairs is smilin' down on us, dude, and when we get Republicans in that ring, you know there's no stopping us. So WHATCHA GONNA DO when Obamamania runs wild on YOU?!" You know, it is almost like that. A lot of these people I've met at events from small counties would, you think, be more independent. But almost to a man they're just super super pro-Obama and not much else. I base this on Facebook posts mostly (which are of the "wow! Look at the president play basketball" variety). It's probably an extreme reaction to the extreme anti-Obama sentiment in their counties. Unfortunately, a lot of people involved I politics in the last 2 cycles are only motivated by that personality stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
Sad Banana posted:New Jersey's Democratic Party is run by a handful of bosses and machines but it does the job as far as winning most elections and getting out their vote. That might have a lot to do with an underfunded and incompetent opposition though. I don't know about the rest, but the Utah GOP is actually really lazy. They don't bother to campaign all that much, and they really just rely on the state's extreme social (and almost as extreme fiscal) conservative bent. I mean, they couldn't even beat Jim Matheson and Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams (who was the guy behind a lot of liberal-ish ideas that are finally getting traction) in the year of Romneygeddon. That isn't to say that the Utah Dems are good at their job; there's really stupid arguments between the Utah Dems who are non-Mormon (who tend to be anti-Mormon), and the moderate Mormon Dems. They're (as in the Utah GOP) also really dumb when it comes to corruption; with excuses that literally range from "I'm innocent! Liberal witch-hunt!" to "A virus conveniently ate my Gygaxian fucked around with this message at 01:38 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 01:33
|
|
|
Gygaxian posted:I don't know about the rest, but the Utah GOP is actually really lazy. They don't bother to campaign all that much, and they really just rely on the state's extreme social (and almost as extreme fiscal) conservative bent. I mean, they couldn't even beat Jim Matheson and Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams (who was the guy behind a lot of liberal-ish ideas that are finally getting traction) in the year of Romneygeddon. That isn't to say that the Utah Dems are good at their job; there's really stupid arguments between the Utah Dems who are non-Mormon (who tend to be anti-Mormon), and the moderate Mormon Dems. This is pretty much what the Texas GOP is like as well. The best party organizations are in close states, because both sides have to fight for their victories. When you're in a one party state, the party in power gets lazy and fat and the party out of power doesn't see any point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
I understand state-level parties are pretty so-so. But my original question was why Florida, the 4th largest state in the country, can't field a Democratic candidate other than former Republican Charlie Crist. Why doesn't Debbie Wasserman-Schultz atleast put in an effort?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 02:54
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:I understand state-level parties are pretty so-so. But my original question was why Florida, the 4th largest state in the country, can't field a Democratic candidate other than former Republican Charlie Crist. Why doesn't Debbie Wasserman-Schultz atleast put in an effort? Her role as the chair of the DNC could also be used as a rallying cry by the right to the otherwise lukewarmish Rick Scott. I can't imagine she has any desire to go back to state politics, given her current leadership position in Washington. There was some speculation that Bill Nelson was interested in the job, but apparently he recently said he wouldn't run. Otherwise, there really is no Democrat with the kind of name recognition across the state. We might be turning purple in recent nationwide elections, but don't kid yourself, on a local level this state is quite red. Remember, before Charlie Crist announced he was running, the Democratic front-runner was Nan Rich. Who, you might ask is Nan Rich? The answer is loving nobody, and that's a pretty good description of the Democratic Party of Florida right there. Ballz fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 03:22
|
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:Rick Perry is a product of Karl Rove and the Bush family. You will never hear him admit it because the name Bush is kryptonite.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 03:53
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:Is there any state that has a well-organized Democratic or even Republican Party anymore? It seems like in the former case it's always a bunch of hacks playing like they matter and in the latter it's either a Senior Citizen Club or a shell for Tea Party or Ron Paul orgs. I know in VA the GOP is definitely swinging between Ron Paul and general Teabaggery (usually breaking down based on whether there's a military base nearby) and the DPVA is a handful of old line Civil Rights activists and a bunch of white guilt NoVA liberals, with a few Obamamaniacs from red areas who just want a friend thrown in. The white people with the money and their hack friends run things, which pretty much explains Terry McAuliffe. The Massachusetts Democratic Party is actually well oiled and unlike the FDP focuses on field and how to build candidates. Florida on the other hand is a mess of people trying to extricate money out of the few viable Democrats with no real vision of the future. edit: When I was in Florida there was actual structure problems with the FDP and long time Florida activists have told me that all the FDP cares about is raising money. Gerrymandering is a problem but should of been a bit alleviated back in the last election with the 2010 ballot initiatives. Their state house is a term limited joke and because of the limited number of Democrats making the bench shallower. The FDP has no real liaisons to the counties and offers no plans or strategies. Awful. Mooseontheloose fucked around with this message at 04:48 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 04:43
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:I understand state-level parties are pretty so-so. But my original question was why Florida, the 4th largest state in the country, can't field a Democratic candidate other than former Republican Charlie Crist. Why doesn't Debbie Wasserman-Schultz atleast put in an effort? Because the Dem Party is totally happy with semi-Dems like Crist, and such semi-Dems fit the party's national agenda for things like charter schools and austerity cuts. How many of the Dem's leadership openly supported Meeks over Crist in the Senate race a couple years ago? Very few, as I recall.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 04:46
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Because the Dem Party is totally happy with semi-Dems like Crist, and such semi-Dems fit the party's national agenda for things like charter schools and austerity cuts. How many of the Dem's leadership openly supported Meeks over Crist in the Senate race a couple years ago? Very few, as I recall. Also Meek had no shot at winning, which divided the party. Meek barely campaigned and had no real compelling message.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 04:51
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:Also Meek had no shot at winning, which divided the party. Meek barely campaigned and had no real compelling message. Which came first, chicken Dems or the chicken eggs? Meeks may have had his flaws as a candidate, but to end up with Rubio as the winner Crist had to have split the Dem ticket more than the GOP ticket, no? eta the data supporting my contention, from CNN's exit polling: 
Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:The Massachusetts Democratic Party is actually well oiled and unlike the FDP focuses on field and how to build candidates. Florida on the other hand is a mess of people trying to extricate money out of the few viable Democrats with no real vision of the future. To be fair, the MA Democratic Party has a much easier time being well-oiled than many states', given the relative ineptitude of the MA GOP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Which came first, chicken Dems or the chicken eggs? Only if you assume that Meek gets 97 percent or so of Crist's support, which seems more than a bit high given Crist's position in the race. Rubio did get 48.9 percent in a three way race.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 04:59
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:Only if you assume that Meek gets 97 percent or so of Crist's support, which seems more than a bit high given Crist's position in the race. Rubio did get 48.9 percent in a three way race. Almost half of all Dems chose Crist over Meek. Twelve percent of the GOP favored Crist over Rubio. Crist split the Dem ticket, and was irrelevant to the GOP ticket.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:00
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Which came first, chicken Dems or the chicken eggs? Look at that Independent split again. There is no guarantee those Independents break towards Meek and in fact that year most likely would of gone to Rubio. Take a look at the Klein/West. Also, this totally ignores the shenanigans of the FDP which essentially said Meek was the man and wouldn't let anyone challenge him from within the party.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:01
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Half of all Dems chose Crist over Meeks. Twelve percent of the GOP favored Crist over Rubio. Crist split the Dem ticket, and was irrelevant to the GOP ticket. And yet in a straight one on one race Rubio still wins unless literally 97 percent of Crist voters had Meek as a second choice. This is completely implausible, even if you assume that every single Dem and indy Crist voter would have voted for Meek, Meek still needs nearly three-quarters of Crist's Republican supporters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:02
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:When I was in Florida there was actual structure problems with the FDP and long time Florida activists have told me that all the FDP cares about is raising money. This is still true. Earlier this year, the FDP elected as its chair Allison Tant, a lobbyist from the firm that purged almost 60,000 African Americans from the voter rolls in the 2000 election (and whose husband led the legal team of the Bush campaign's efforts to subsequently stop the recount). Why? Hurf durf fundraising!
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
To have half of Dems break for the once-Republican over the Democrat was a massive failure for Dems, and a failure due in part to Dem leadership's weaksauce support of Meek and its flirtation with Crist during the campaign.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:To have half of Dems break for the once-Republican over the Democrat was a massive failure for Dems, and a failure due in part to Dem leadership's weaksauce support of Meek and its flirtation with Crist during the campaign. That's a lot of revisionist history going on there Willa and ignores a lot of Meek's own problems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:09
|
|
|
StarMagician posted:This is pretty much what the Texas GOP is like as well. The best party organizations are in close states, because both sides have to fight for their victories. When you're in a one party state, the party in power gets lazy and fat and the party out of power doesn't see any point. This isn't true in Virginia, the quintessential swing state at all. NoVA Dems hate the rest of the state and refuse to support any non-NoVA candidates, which would have cost them this year had McAuliffe gotten a challenger (many of them even opposed a progressive like Periello) and Bolling run. They're already talking about throwing the new LG (from a Norfolk-based district) under the bus in 2017 because he's "not exciting," but neither is Mark Herring, the NoVA preference. Outside NoVA, the party is either mostly black city machines with no real activists (Richmond, Hampton Roads) or incompetent (Roanoke, Montgomery County, a swing county where they lose consistently by running urban candidates that the rest of the county hates and sending out pro-choice mailers in rural areas) or non-existent (everywhere else). I mean, would a competent party let Terry McAuliffe just choose to be the nominee? Obama winning VA was all Obama, and McAuliffe winning was all Cuccinelli.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:12
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:To have half of Dems break for the once-Republican over the Democrat was a massive failure for Dems, and a failure due in part to Dem leadership's weaksauce support of Meek and its flirtation with Crist during the campaign. The teacher's union endorsed Crist in that race. That particular outcome was less the fault of the FDP in particular and more a result of the general discombobulation of the left in Florida.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:13
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:That's a lot of revisionist history going on there Willa and ignores a lot of Meek's own problems. Crist is a perfect fit with the current Dem Party. He'd have been a perfect fit within the current Dem Senate. But any revisionism is coming from those who forget how the Dem leadership played out its support in FL during 2010, Meek's flaws aside. As I recall, it took a lot of pressure to get Obama and other Dems to even openly state that FL Dems should support the Dem ticket. And, as the party split in the results show, it was too little too late.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
Ronald McReagan posted:The teacher's union endorsed Crist in that race. That particular outcome was less the fault of the FDP in particular and more a result of the general discombobulation of the left in Florida. But the teachers union had reason to back him after he shot down a tenure reform bill that the assembly passed. Crist was strategically more likely to win. Not sure how much more electable (for FL) Meek would have been.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:16
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Crist is a perfect fit with the current Dem Party. He'd have been a perfect fit within the current Dem Senate. Can you actually name any of Kendrick Meek's accomplishments or where he stood on issues? He literally inherited the safest seat in the US based on his mom's name and had no coherent message of what he would do in the Senate. Take that aside. The Democrats still had no real clue of how the powerful the Tea Party was until that summer and that's when the split started to occur because shock Kendrick Meek didn't do anything with his campaign. And no amount of wishing would of made him a viable candidate. The Democrats were hosed no matter who came out of that race. Some of that is the FDP fault but to say it was because Meek didn't support austerity is literally baffling to me. It completely ignores what ACTUALLY went on in Florida or nationwide that year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:24
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:But the teachers union had reason to back him after he shot down a tenure reform bill that the assembly passed. What exactly was wrong with Kendrick Meeks? Was he just not a good campaigner, or did Charlie Crist suck up all his access to media and funds? It's sort of a mirror image of Connecticut in 2006, with a different ultimate result.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
How did Meek win the state party's nomination if he was such a horrid candidate? (Serious question; I don't know the machinations that were involved.) Was it due to the decimation of the DNC's 50-state strategy after Dean was ousted, or to something else? In any case, now that Crist is officially a Dem the party support at the national level won't have to be faked anymore. Like I said, he'll be a perfect fit with the party's stances.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:39
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:How did Meek win the state party's nomination if he was such a horrid candidate? (Serious question; I don't know the machinations that were involved.) Was it due to the decimation of the DNC's 50-state strategy after Dean was ousted, or to something else? It was because the Democrats were generally expecting Crist to be the Republican nominee and virtually unbeatable in the general so the A and B teams all passed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:40
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:But the teachers union had reason to back him after he shot down a tenure reform bill that the assembly passed. Crist did do some favors for the union, I agree. But the second part of your post drove the decision to endorse more than the first part. It just wasn't a very strategic year all-around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:44
|
|
|
StarMagician posted:This is pretty much what the Texas GOP is like as well. The best party organizations are in close states, because both sides have to fight for their victories. When you're in a one party state, the party in power gets lazy and fat and the party out of power doesn't see any point. Yeah, and I think that applies to close districts and counties as well; the only halfway decent organizations in Utah this last time around were Matheson's and Ben McAdam's campaigns. I mean, hate on Matheson all you want (I hate him too), but you could write a freaking dissertation on how well-oiled his campaign was. Dude managed to win in literally the worst possible circumstances. And Ben McAdams did pretty well too; he won Salt Lake County 55-45, while Obama got 38% in the county. He basically appealed to the Utahn sense of "safe quirkiness"; calling himself "Eagle Scout, not Eagle Forum", driving around in a big orange campaign bus, and being Mr. Personable all the time. And apparently his campaign manager is one of those Atwater-esque wunderkinds. But I guess you have to run amazing campaigns if you're running as a Utah Democrat in the year that Mitt Romney is on top of the ballot. De Nomolos posted:This isn't true in Virginia, the quintessential swing state at all. NoVA Dems hate the rest of the state and refuse to support any non-NoVA candidates, which would have cost them this year had McAuliffe gotten a challenger (many of them even opposed a progressive like Periello) and Bolling run. They're already talking about throwing the new LG (from a Norfolk-based district) under the bus in 2017 because he's "not exciting," but neither is Mark Herring, the NoVA preference. What's up with the NoVA hate towards the rest of the state? Is it just a different sense of culture there, the stereotype that the rest of the state are hicks, or what?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:51
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:It was because the Democrats were generally expecting Crist to be the Republican nominee and virtually unbeatable in the general so the A and B teams all passed. Sounds like the Dem party's fault then. Boy, was it stupid of them to shitcan Dean, especially after the 2006 results.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:57
|
|
|
Gygaxian posted:What's up with the NoVA hate towards the rest of the state? Is it just a different sense of culture there, the stereotype that the rest of the state are hicks, or what? Basically, yeah. NOVA's essentially part of the northeast megalopolis outside the more far-flung parts like Fauquier County. Willa Rogers posted:Sounds like the Dem party's fault then. Boy, was it stupid of them to shitcan Dean, especially after the 2006 results. Did Dean run for the gig again in 2009? I was under the impression he left to do other stuff, leaving room for Tim "put the car in D" Kaine. 
Alec Bald Snatch fucked around with this message at 06:02 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 05:59
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Sounds like the Dem party's fault then. Boy, was it stupid of them to shitcan Dean, especially after the 2006 results. That sounds like exactly the opposite, actually.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 06:13
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:Basically, yeah. NOVA's essentially part of the northeast megalopolis outside the more far-flung parts like Fauquier County. As I recall he was open to continuing but he really wanted HHS.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 06:13
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Sounds like the Dem party's fault then. Boy, was it stupid of them to shitcan Dean, especially after the 2006 results. I mean, much as I wish the state or national party could dragoon people into running, I'm not sure how top-tier candidates taking a pass on an election based on their reads of the political landscape can be construed as the party organization's fault.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 06:21
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:To have half of Dems break for the once-Republican over the Democrat was a massive failure for Dems, and a failure due in part to Dem leadership's weaksauce support of Meek and its flirtation with Crist during the campaign. Willa Rogers posted:Sounds like the Dem party's fault then. Boy, was it stupid of them to shitcan Dean, especially after the 2006 results. I mean it's pretty obvious you've got a narrative you'd like to push here - the usual one - but you're really blatantly ignoring troublesome facts in favor of just pretending they don't exist and reiterating your preferred narrative. It's transparently dishonest at this point. I would bother citing more specific factual reasons why you're wrong but it's not like you're going to address them, you're just going to reword your argument and just keep saying it regardless of what the facts are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 06:24
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I mean it's pretty obvious you've got a narrative you'd like to push here - the usual one - but you're really blatantly ignoring troublesome facts in favor of just pretending they don't exist and reiterating your preferred narrative. It's transparently dishonest at this point. I would bother citing more specific factual reasons why you're wrong but it's not like you're going to address them, you're just going to reword your argument and just keep saying it regardless of what the facts are. What are you contesting, exactly? My point was that prior to 2010, Dean would have never shrugged his shoulders and said "Welp, the GOP looks like it's gonna win this one, so let's not bother." If that's wrong, then tell me why, tell me what those facts are that counter what you imagine to be "my narrative," rather than my describing events as they happened. Do you disagree with the contention that Dems gave up on FL when they thought Crist would win the primary? (eta: If so, then your beef is with jeffersonlives, who posted that.) Do you disagree with Dean's stance that Dems should fight for every seat, and run challengers even for seats they are likely to lose? It's not about me or "narratives"; it's about the party's recent history. Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 06:41 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 06:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 20:32 |
|
|
The Warszawa posted:I mean, much as I wish the state or national party could dragoon people into running, I'm not sure how top-tier candidates taking a pass on an election based on their reads of the political landscape can be construed as the party organization's fault. Oh, I was specifically addressing jeffersonlives' contention that the party didn't really bother fielding a strong nominee because it looked like Crist would win the primary then walk away with the general election. As I said, under Dean the philosophy on open seats was to field the strongest candidate possible no matter what the odds, because poo poo happens, like the "favored" candidate's losing the primary of the opposing party. But I don't recall any Dems stronger than Meek expressing interest in the seat even before Crist lost the GOP primary. Who were the other candidates who would have done better than Meek in the general, in your opinion?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 06:50
|
|