Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Me.

(35,454 posts)
Thu Apr 13, 2017, 12:05 AM Apr 2017

Democrats Say They Sometimes Need To Ignore Elections In Order To Win

‘Trying would have backfired, they say — though they lost anyway.

The Democratic candidate James Thompson, an attorney and Army veteran, ended up losing the race by 7 percentage points. And because he was never expected to make it that close, Democrats now are asking not just whether more could have been done, but why the party continues to assume it can’t help out (some of) its own without hurting them.

“I don’t buy that if the race is close, that you can hide it to the other side and they’ll fail to nationalize it the way they could,” said Jeff Hauser, a longtime progressive operative. “The DCCC couldn’t prevent [anti-Thompson] ads from happening by staying out. He’s a Dem. If the best way to attack him is to claim he would support [Nancy] Pelosi, well, it is true. The notion that they can suddenly prevent that is bullshit.”

“But in both Michigan and in Kansas, the conclusion was reached by the party that the harder the race was contested the harder it would become. (Clinton only stopped in Michigan the day before the election, and her team left a negligible footprint compared to Democratic candidates of the past; in Kansas, the DCCC did 25,000 live get-out-the-vote calls on behalf of Thompson just one day before the election.)

And in making those calculations, both the Clinton campaign and the DCCC picked at an insecurity that runs through many Democrats: the feeling that top officials often obscure or hide their progressive skin rather than proudly own it.” Cont…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/democrats-national-strategy_us_58ee8596e4b0b9e98488f39e?zqq&ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009


6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Democrats Say They Sometimes Need To Ignore Elections In Order To Win (Original Post) Me. Apr 2017 OP
did he ask their help? maybe outsiders rushing in would be a bad thing for the candidate nt msongs Apr 2017 #1
He Did Me. Apr 2017 #3
Exactly, Democratson't win without party backing Warpy Apr 2017 #2
Precisely Me. Apr 2017 #4
+1 n/t jaysunb Apr 2017 #5
! Me. Apr 2017 #6

Warpy

(111,120 posts)
2. Exactly, Democratson't win without party backing
Thu Apr 13, 2017, 12:10 AM
Apr 2017

which is something Dr. Dean successfully demonstrated when he was party chair.

I often complain bitterly at the party inside the beltway, clogged with dead wood conservatives who only spend money in "safe" districts, making sure there are fewer of those every year because sometimes safe districts still change hands. They have done a huge amount of damage to our party and their policies need to die.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Democrats Say They Someti...