website statistics

Author Archive for Not Paul Begala

Low Voter Turnout at Daily Kos?

MyDD on Daily Kos:

The ultimate community blog, with 120,000 registered users and nearly a dozen regular front-page writers. It produces over 500,000 new words of content every day, on virtually every topic in politics, and has attracted writing from virtually the entire Democratic leadership.

Yesterday’s dKos straw poll has me wondering: After 24 hours, why are there only about 25K votes overall? Wouldn’t you expect that number to be higher?

The percentage of registered voters who actually vote in national elections is somewhere around 60-70%. Granted, voting is only one of many activities occuring at dKos, but it still bears asking: why does a community of political activists with a half million visitors and 100K+ registered users not vote in higher numbers in these things? Anyone?

The First Thing We Do, Let’s Delete All the Lawyers

The greatest thing about the Internet is that the previous limitations of time and space have been thrown out the window. No more column inches to measure, or 2:30 segments to produce. Everyone can publish just about as much as they want.

But, the absolutely maddening part about this new found freedom is that some limitations were good!

I’ve been doing some fundraising work as of late and, naturally, I talk to lawyers. I got an email yesterday with 215 words in it only 58 of which were a message from the partner communicating with me.

This is the most ridiculous signature I’ve ever seen:

Notice from [LAWFIRM]: To comply with U.S. Treasury regulations, we advise you that any discussion of Federal tax issues in this communication was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any person (i) for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, or (ii) to promote, market or recommend to another party any matter addressed herein. This Internet message may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure. It is intended for use only by the person to whom it is addressed. If you have received this in error, please (1) do not forward or use this information in any way; and (2) contact me immediately. Neither this information block, the typed name of the sender, nor anything else in this message is intended to constitute an electronic signature unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message.

My favorite part is the, “if you received this in error… do not forward.”

Can I suggest a rewrite?

Despite the fact that I am too stupid to actually read who I’m sending emails to, no law in this country prevents you from forwarding this information, but I’m going to try and scare you with some legal mumbo jumbo.

If the lack of space limitations mean I’m going to get emails like this, at least make them funny.

Super Sunday Note: NPB will go with the experts out there: capitalism. Colts 27 - Bears 17.

Update: Just so nobody is confused by the Tradesports link up there, at the time I posted this, the Colts were trading at $6.80 out of $10, or a 68% chance of winning. To see how Tradesports works, click here.

Looks like the market was right, although if you check the history, the market thought the Bears were going to win after Devin Hester’s opening kickoff return for a touchdown.

Silly market.

Barack Obama and the User-Generated Movement

Anyone watching the invisible-but-linkable netroots primary has probably noticed that John Edwards leads the pack among Democratic bloggers. Let’s assume this is because Edwards is more savvy and more… shall we say, willing to let the dedicated progressive bloggers have a say in his campaign.

But are they missing the chance to support a candidate who actually believes in the same organizing principles they do?

The Archpundit blog points us to a 1995 article in the weekly Chicago Reader that delves into pre-stardom Obama’s thinking. Emphasis mine:

What makes Obama different from other progressive politicians is that he doesn’t just want to create and support progressive programs; he wants to mobilize the people to create their own. He wants to stand politics on its head, empowering citizens by bringing together the churches and businesses and banks, scornful grandmothers and angry young.

His own words:

In America … we have this strong bias toward individual action. You know, we idolize the John Wayne hero who comes in to correct things with both guns blazing. But individual actions, individual dreams, are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations.

And what people said about him then — Johnnie Owens of the Developing Communities Project:

A lot of organizers you meet these days are these self-anointed leaders with this strange, way-out approach and unrealistic, eccentric way of pursuing things from the very beginning. Not Barack. He’s not about calling attention to himself. He’s concerned with the work.

And Madeline Talbott, “lead organizer of the feisty ACORN community organization”:

He is committed to organizing, to building a democracy. Above all else, he is a good listener, and we accept and respect him as a kindred spirit, a fellow organizer.

Now, isn’t that what progressives are trying to do right now, build their own communities?

Related question: Is this ground-up/community-based/”wisdom of crowds” approach the best way to elect people or to govern? As Timothy points out in the comment section to Bill’s Colbert v. Wikipedia post, highly technical matters on Wikipedia are often flawed (one reason why Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger is working on a rival that includes expert review).

I’ve said before that I’m more of a top down guy and I very much believe in the need for experts. But I’m also not stupid enough to think that I know everything. Same for Obama — in fact, some of his best lines aren’t even his own.

You’re So Vain…

You probably think this presidential campaign is about you:

Joe Biden's face appears seven times on the first page of his official campaign website

I mean, really. Joe Biden’s face appears seven, count em, seven times at the top of the main page of his website. Is that really the first thing you want to overwhelm voters with when they sign for the first time?

I hate to break it to you Senator, but Time’s Person of the Year was a metaphor.

The Power and the People

Reading this story at The Politico the other day made me chuckle. It’s vintage Iowa:

Pat named her cat Hillary and when she heard that Hillary, the presidential candidate, was coming to town, she got a friend to help her and they managed to get Hillary (the cat) to make a paw print on a picture of Hillary (the cat) to give Hillary (the candidate.) … She also said, “I have never heard a national candidate with such a fine-tuned knowledge of children. Thank you for your service to children.”

Hillary voter, right?

“I am not satisfied with her explanation about the Iraq war,” Pat said. But come on. After the cat, the blue eyes, the paw print, the red blazer, the knowledge of children, the 12 TV cameras and international press corps taking down every word, after all this, you are really not going to commit to Hillary? “Well, she is one of my top three,” Pat said.

It doesn’t matter who you are, what you’ve done, how much money you have or how much star power you bring to the table. They don’t care if you are not right on their issues.

These are votes you have to earn.

And there’s a very simple reason about why they are able to put you through the ringer to earn that vote: the caucus rules.

The rules are very complicated and the longer someone is a participant, the better they know them. Rural areas can yield you as many delegates as urban ones because of the previous year’s attendance and because many committed activists over a large area are grouped together into a caucus location. You have to attend a 3 or 4 hour meeting to cast your vote and then the viability rule might nullify your first choice.

Then the real fun kicks in. Every staffer who’s ever set foot in Iowa will tell you a story about the one “activist” you had to get because that guy or gal was the person who could reel in the delegates who pick candidates that don’t meet the viability rule.

Markos and other bloggers don’t like this system.

Sometimes I wonder why. After all, there’s something special about a group of people who both have power and are unimpressed by it.

Why I Deserve Your Money*

Chris seems to have a problem with people like me getting money from the blogosphere:

[T]he same Democratic political consultant structure that the netroots seek to reform… is actually being funded, reinforced, and strengthened by the netroots.

Like I’ve argued before, I think I’m pretty good at this. My full-time job is helping Democrats win. I love politics, I work hard, I’m pretty good at figuring people out and the clients I help elect support most of your agenda. Where we differ is that I think Mark Pryor should get some leeway. He’s from a red state after all; he needs to vote the way his constituents want (he does, after all, represent them). I do a little more top-down management than bottom-up, but I fully support both methods. I also see flaws in both methods. And, we agree more often then you would think, e.g. Joe Lieberman should get a swift kick in the junk for undermining the Democratic party.

Bloggers see overall numbers like $1.85 billion and get mad that political professionals get all that money. Hey, I do it, too. Ever see a piece of crap car commercial on TV and think about the money wasted on that advertising firm? Ever say to yourself, “I could do better than that!”?

There’s one problem with that kind of armchair quarterbacking: it’s a selective view. You need to judge the entire body of work a firm produces, what actually went into the production (clients drastically ruin (and improve) work all the time), the amount of material to work with and a whole host of other factors.

The point is this, Chris: we get paid well because that’s what the market has dictated. Nobody gets forced into using a particular pollster, mail firm or TV firm. We have to go pitch clients, cold call people that qualify for the ballot, and we face some pretty fierce competition in the industry every day. Lots of new firms have been opening up because there is a ton of business at the state and local level that was never there before (by the way, that’s where the real money is). And the Internet is making more information available all the time. More information equals more informed decisions.

Do people make money and viability decisions based on which firm you pick? Absolutely. Anyone who’s a consistent giver knows brand name firms. Just like you know Miller Lite but you might not know the Dead Guy.

Experience, name and reputation mean something in this world. That’s why the big firms have big market share and that’s why they make big money. And this notion that we don’t support the same principles and goals is just bullshit. We just don’t listen to everything you and the so-called netroots say (something which I don’t even think really has a good definition yet).

That said, I do agree with you on a major point. I think you deserve a lot more money than you guys are getting for your work:

Matt Stoller, has previously written about examples of full-time progressive movement activists who receive little or no compensation for their work. … local progressive bloggers typically lose money on blogging every year, even as they help transform local media and activist scenes. … As a handful of progressive bloggers are criticized for picking up the occasional establishment consulting job, the progressive netroots as a whole funnels exponentially more money into the establishment while receiving virtually no help in return when it comes to building our movement. … I am also pissed off at the Democratic and progressive establishment that is funded with our dollars, but which refuses to fund us in return.

I’ve said before, you deserve better because you provide a service (the part about leaked polling numbers). We politico/consultant types love politics and you provide us with discussion material all the time. Before, we had to wait for Meet the Press to air, or catch our updates from Inside Poltics. We had to subscribe to Roll Call, the Evans-Novak Report or (those of us that worked for rich lobbyists or big NGO’s) National Journal and CQ.

You’re providing most of this stuff for free and we should find a way to support good advertisers that are catering to what we want. I promise you this: when I start my own political consulting firm, I’ll buy a Blogad. And I have a feeling that one day, when you get a pitch from my firm for a race you may be running, you may just think I deserve a buck or two for my services.

*And, to be fair, why you deserve mine.

Is Hillary Netroots?

Kos says no. Well, more like not so much.

I think the definition of “netroots” is the only answer to this sort of question.

I consider myself part of the netroots insofar as that’s where I get a majority of my news. I’ve been a reader since 2002, and I frequently vote in the netroots polls. But, I don’t really post (except here and only in the last 6 months on the invitation of Mr. Beutler) or comment and I don’t give any money. My philosophy probably also doesn’t fit neatly with the netroots. I’m philosophically pretty liberal, but more of an institutionalist than say, Atrios.

So, does Hillary get to claim all her accomplishments as “netroots” support or is Kos right that most of the netroots don’t support her?

Depends on the definition, I guess. Obama is breaking new ground as well, but neither is he leading the polls at dKos.

I guess I don’t know what net-roots means, and I don’t know how to spell it, either.

Who Cares About the State of the Union?

Well, bloggers seem to at the moment.

For the most part, NPB isn’t much of a SOTU fan. I’ll watch it — with alcohol — read a little analysis here and there and then forget it tomorrow. I’m much more interested in stuff like this. That, at least, tells me something about the state of our union besides “strong.”

The truth is, I actually wanted to comment about the SOTU on a few SoapBlox blogs I was reading this morning. And I couldn’t, because the only account I have is on Daily Kos. And it’s not worth filling out the form, checking my e-mail and verifying the registration, all for a comment.

I totally understand why blogs need account registration — to fight the war on trolls and spammers. But can somebody please come up with a system where my Daily Kos login works on MyDD or RedState (need to tweak you wingers every now and then)? Blogger, Typepad and WordPress all have separate regimes, too. Why not create a portable comment ID that works across all systems?

I think a lot of political folks would participate more in the discussion if we didn’t have to sign up for an account on every damn site* we read.

Programmers, bloggers, entrepreneurs, get to work!

*I have 80 some blogs in my RSS reader.

Not a Sincere Bone…

Politicians in Washington tend to develop reputations. McCain is the maverick, Kennedy is the liberal lion and (one of my favorites), the most dangerous place in all of Washington is between Chuck Schumer and a camera.

Hillary has one, too, and her people absolutely go berserk if you say it in front of them: She doesn’t have a sincere bone in her entire body.

Stuff like this gives us ammunition:

Hillary Clinton uses the armrest

Notice how she’s been giving interviews in a living room setting, on a couch, with her elbow up on the armrest. This is supposed to convey a warm family scene with her kicking back and inviting you, the viewer, into her home.

Now, I dare anyone in Hillaryland to tell me that she’s just doing this on her own and that her political team didn’t consciously decide to portray her in this new way to give her the humanizing, “woman’s touch” look for her presidential run. It’s so obviously contrived it’s funny.

Is it any wonder why we’re so cynical?

Update: This is exactly what I mean.

She and her advisers need a living room scene in order to “humanize” her. What more proof do we need that people don’t think she’s sincere?

A Sign of Things to Come

So Hillary is in. Campaign lore says that your announcement is the best day you have in a presidential campaign. All the rest is downhill until you win or lose.

And what else happens today that will be right next to her announcement in every major newspaper tomorrow? 13 soldiers killed in a helicopter crash. The Internet already reflects that reality:

Hillary and Iraq on Google News

As Kerry was haunted by his 2002 vote to authorize the war in the 2004 campaign, Hillary Clinton will be haunted by this war every single day. Obama said in 2002 that the war wasn’t the right thing to do, and while many anti-war bloggers haven’t made much of the fact, at least some have.

The war in Iraq and the events on the ground are constantly driving the Bush presidency. No matter how much he tries, he can’t escape it. Given how close 41 and 42 have become, it’s more than a little ironic that those same events will be driving her campaign for the presidency. Days like today are just a hint of what she will have to face every day of the primary, until she wins or drops out.