Reconnecting DE Voters to the Democratic Brand
In yesterday’s Post Mortem thread, heragain made an interesting point that lead to some discussion of Party endorsements and Party future:
The Delaware Democratic party is now the victim of its own success. Anyone who wants to win runs as a D, so we have a slate full of people who have NO relationship with the party or its platform going into the general carrying our standard. [more]
I can’t even tell you how many of the people at polls and in the campaigns of these people are not even registered Democrats in Delaware, but they included most of the ones I talked to yesterday. I’ve had my own RD talk about putting people on the committee who were active in a campaign but ARENT REGISTERED DEMOCRATS.
Anyone want to firm up the rules in the party? Make candidates sign off on the platform? because although the folks that showed up to vote yesterday, registered Green, or I, or whatever, weren’t allowed to vote, that doesn’t mean they’re not picking our candidates.
The NJ this AM picks up a discussion we routinely have re: endorsements and frames it as the Parties having less influence than they once did.
I see the endorsements issue as a symptom, but not the entire problem. As heragain seems to suggest, the Delaware Democratic Party seems to have a branding problem. The endorsements by the party and their committees don’t mean as much as they used to, because the Party itself doesn’t mean as much as it used to. So that party endorsements are functionally decisions by committeepeople on how to spend their resources for an election. Primary voters are often people who have been paying attention for the duration of a campaign and by the time that endorsements are made, lots of folks have made up their minds. So what does an endorsement mean? Given the recent track record, it only means that the Party will expend its resources on your behalf. There doesn’t seem to be any effort to connect candidates to party platform or principles (the What We Stand For portion of the website) and if there is, there is little effort to communicate why these candidates get the Party endorsement. But more importantly, it doesn’t look like most Democrats care about endorsements or the endorsement process and the Local party doesn’t give the local Democrats a reason to care.
The City of Wilmington committee works abit differently, in that many of the ward chairs are sitting politicians or very reliable allies of sitting politicians. Committees themselves are typically long-term operatives and insiders. This could change if more people showed up, but the odds are stacked against the newbies. So that their endorsements are largely of each other and their allies, with city committees being something of an old-school loyalty protection racket. But much like the rest of the state, the City Committee doesn’t doesn’t communicate with the City Democrats in any way that might connect them to this committee. You just get pronouncements of endorsements without connecting any of that to platform or What We Stand For and then the expenditures begin.
This is John Daniello from the NJ article above:
Delaware Democratic Party Chairman John Daniello said endorsements still are valuable, as evidenced by the nine endorsed candidates who won. But he admits endorsements may not mean what they used to, and he fears the party may be weakening itself.
“I fear for our party and our candidates and our elected officers,” he said. “We’re riding on success through the last decade or maybe a little more. But if we keep going the way we’re going, that’s going to change.”
Recent Delaware primary history has demonstrated that party backing or endorsement doesn’t seal victories.
Go back and re-read that. What is missing from this comment? His Party’s voters, that’s who. Delaware Democrats are fortunate that the opposition party is so very weak. That is also the Party’s bad news too. A blue state’s official Party apparatus with a weak connection to their rank and file is ripe for exploitation. By candidates (including the Corruptocrat Wing and the stealth GOP wing) and by the GOP (if they could get their act together). In a Blue State with a weak GOP, it is the party itself that has to make sure that it is fielding a strong team AND that its voters have some connection to that team. Lackluster recruiting, iffy endorsements and largely no connection to its rank and file looks like lots of unforced errors to me. Here’s hoping that there is some new leadership SOON who will focus on the Delaware Democratic Party and not just its candidates.
Tags: Democratic Party
Excellent points. If the Democrats don’t actively adjust to fact that Delaware is a one party state in a positive way, it will surely adjust in a negative way.
Anyone interested in organizing a strong progressive caucus to influence the convention next year?
I tried to find out where my city committee met so I could become involved and was basically told “no thank you, we have enough members and you wouldn’t be able to vote anyway”. This is not the way to attract people to the party.
This will be Markell’s job over the next two years if he really wants to leave a legacy – shape the party infrastructure to his liking. More young people, more outreach, more candidates like himself four years ago who can generate enthusiasm.
Blue isn’t necessarily permanent ink. The GOP and unaffiliated/other party registrations are almost equal now, around 25 percent each. But the Republicans once tapped into that “other” category, and could do it again. People are fickle.
AQC, I had a similar experience. I showed up (with a neighbor) to a committee meeting and the leader of that committee (and the committee) was really put out that some strangers — Democrats both — showed up.
Cassandra – what would a better party structure look like? Committees, almost by definition, are exclusionary and tend toward status quo.
I don’t know if that issue is specific to the city or not, but when I spoke to a committee chair 4 years ago to ask what I had to do to get involved, she gave me a date and time for the next meeting and I was on and active in a few meetings. My current committee is ALWAYS on the lookout for new members.
But I am out in the sticks of New Castle County, so YMMV.
@Painesme, I’ve not thought about a different Party structure. But the committees could be more open, I think. For instance — how do you join or participate on a committee? As far as I can tell, there’s nothing on the website that invites new participants, there isn’t an email to the deldems email list that reminds people to get involved with committees (or the rules to do so) — basically the kind of outreach that tells Democrats to join in is missing. So if you aren’t even telling people how to get involved, that provides the opportunity for some exclusivity.
@LG, it always seemed to me that the NCCo county committees were more open (and less controlled) than the city ward committees. I wonder what the differences between the two organizations might be?
LG – who votes on committee membership? Members or registered Ds?
I believe that the initial vote after reorganization (every 4 years or after redistricting) is open to all Dems in the RD. Subsequent additions are voted on by the committee members.
I’d have to go back and read the bylaws a little more closely.
Here are the committee chairs in Wilmington:
http://www.deldems.org/about/local-party/wilmington
and in New Castle County outside of the city:
http://www.deldems.org/about/local-party/new-castle
Find your committee chair and call them and ask to attend their next meeting. Most are listed here:
http://www.deldems.org/upcoming-events
Committee membership is limited by the state and national by-laws. There are an assigned number of seats on a committee, and by ED. Each ED has 2 reps. Usually, if a committee is full of members from one neighborhood, they represent another, but if someone shows up from that neighborhood they’re given the seat. That means, in a long established (full) committee, having someone show up who just moved into town displaces someone who has served a long time. In a suburban area that hasn’t filled its spots, they just get added. When I joined my committee we couldn’t HOPE to fill all the spots, but now we have a full roster and “associate members” who participate in all meetings and activities but cannot vote or hold party office. In order to be seated you must have been a registered D in your district for at least a year, and officers are voted on by the committee after each presidential election.
I’m not sure what “influencing the convention” is expected to do. Endorsements are done locally. Candidates, IF they file in time and have their act together, request time to speak to individual committees to ask for recommendations for endorsement. In addition, I attended the Brandywine Area Democrats endorsement forum, which was open to the public. So I lived through TWO go-rounds of aspiring Democratic candidates before we held an endorsement meeting, which must be open, and is advertised as such for 2 weeks prior. Some candidates came to us. Some sent representatives. Some didn’t bother. We voted to recommend, or we didn’t, and our recommendations went to the County meeting. They looked at what all the committees had done and, I assume, so did Kent & Sussex, and then the endorsements were made.
There’s a lot of whining about keeping the ‘resources’ of endorsed candidates away from the noble souls who go up against “the party machine.” People think we shouldn’t do anything until after the primary. Well, in my opinion, if you do that you should just go to a system where people buy votes like raffle tickets. The “resources” candidates get consist of voter lists, and not much else, on the low end. Some candidates put together a campaign, some call me to walk the neighborhood. Some I’ve never met, except at a forum (I’m looking at you, Mitch Crane). I can’t vouch for every district in the state, but I can tell the people who run in mine, if they don’t know you it’s hit or miss whether they’ll vote for you. But I don’t want to hobble the statewides in fundraising nationally by not admitting they’re our candidates until the 12 of September. Where would that have left Chris Coons?
I’m secretary of the 7th RD. Our next meeting is at Harry’s Savoy, in some meeting room or other, at 7pm September 17th. Anyone is welcome, although you won’t vote. Of course, probably nothing more momentous to vote on than the acceptance of the treasurers report will be available, anyway. ;D
Brooke,
How are the open meetings you mentioned advertised? I have never seen such a notice.
The list of committee members on the web can’t possibly be accurate. At least, I hope not.
It says there is one – one! – local Democratic committee member in the 41st District. Did everyone hate Atkins so much they up and quit when he switched parties?
And there are no – zero! – committee members in the 39th District? WTF is going on in Seaford? There’s not a single Democrat willing to stand up and organize things? Have Danny Short and Mike Vincent so demoralized everyone with their electoral muscle?
http://www.deldems.org/about/committee-members
I know this piece of advice is going to sound odd, but the problem you are talking about was a major problem over several decades for PRI in Mexico, and a number of political scientists have looked at it as a case study in what to do when you are running a party in a functional one-party state with an opposition party that does put up a fight but rarely wins.
Aside from constant warnings that in any one-party system there is a greater danger of corruption, what I vaguely recall from grad school is that PRI abandoned all endorsements when there was more than one candidate for an open slot and always allowed free-for-all primaries. Second rule PRI had (recalling Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment in some ways) was to always Always ALWAYS support the incumbent, even if he was under indictment at the time. Their reasoning was that the tradeoff of the necessity for party loyalty was worth it against the loss of candidate integrity.
Don’t know if any of this will seem relevant, but as an outsider I can see some interesting parallels.
(Oh, and to note, several political scientists found that in such one-party systems the part bureaucracy tended to get increasing conservative over time, regardless of the official ideology.)
Brooke – “I’m not sure what ‘influencing the convention’ is expected to do”? Have some imagination. May’s Convention is where we elect a new State Chair, vote on amendments to the by-laws, AND write our platform. As we are all fond of noting, the party establishment has a lot of things we take issue with. The convention would seem like a good fulcrum help it turn the corner, yes?
“Endorsements are done locally”. I’m at least aware enough to know that much. But what about the supposed resources that come with endorsements? I’m genuinely curious here DL people – do the people and money also come from the RD committees? Is it a mix of RD committees and State? What’s the split?
I am a little surprised that the entire question of whether the Democratic Party should endorse candidates is framed entirely as a tactical question when there is an unmistakable question of principle that precedes a bean counters obsession with tactics. The principle is simply this: the party belongs to its members and should be animated by their will and not vice versa. That means, Democratic voters should be determining whom the party endorses through their votes. The party should endorse the candidates the Democratic voters select in the primaries and not beforehand. End of story.
Dana – The Democratic Party is also representative. Since the majority of Democrats do something besides politic in their 9-5, we leave the handling of the organization to people who we elect to lead, be that RD committee people or Daniello. If I’m not paying attention enough to know the ins and outs of all the races and our long-term interests, I deserve to know the opinion of these leaders – leaders that we elected to pay better attention than us. Endorsements are no more than that.
Dana wins the prize. It is how it was and how it again should be.
SW, we post it to the deldems website, we email everyone who has signed up for emails, I make announcements in public meetings, if permitted. With a couple of exceptions we meet on the same evening every month, which we determine during organizational meetings. We ask people for emails and if they want to be notified when we do public events like Candidate forums. So far, the rush has been… um, light. What gravels me is that anyone who wants to RUN seems to be able to find the place, or anyone who has a friend who wants to run. But the months between, when we’re just organizing teams to do the Christiana River clean-up, or pick up trash in Claymont, not so much. I don’t know how other committees do it. My pond is small.
Dana, really. Reminds me of Henry Clay, who would rather be right than president. Mission accomplished. If you want to move the primaries to March, be my guest. With a turnout of 17%, people should be ashamed of themselves. All the people who didn’t spend the week before the primaries dragging people in by the short hairs, as I did, have no room to kvetch.
I started to worry about the Democratic party in DE when they welcomed John Atkins with open arms after the Republicans actually did the right thing and tossed his sorry butt out. Dems should not have touched him with the proverbial 10 foot pole. They embraced a damaged politician for one simple reason: it got them a seat. I’m not one of those guys who wants ideological purity like the GOP is going for, but how about putting up candidates who are decent people and who can be expected to support the party line at least a majority of the time? I don’t think Atkins has changed a single position since he changed the letter behind his name from “R” to “D” has he?
Brooke: Thanks. I’m not trying to be argumentative, but I’m curious how effective those web notices are for people not already “in the know.” I just clicked through quite a few, and for almost all of them there was no location listed. There were dates and times, but no meeting place! One actually had a room number … just no building identified. It seems like there’s just not much of an effort to welcome people in on a practical level.
By contrast, when I visit the Sussex GOP committee site, I can find out with a few clicks when and where the next meetings are. You don’t have to sign up to get more information, or be on a mailing list. They make it easy.
Totally agree SW. It’s dreadful. It’s also amateur.
Wen I first started on the committee it was a TERRIBLE barrier to me that it was held in a bar. I had neither money nor inclination to buy drinks, and I was embarrassed to be there. However, I also sat on a board that had meetings 4 months of the year at a private swim club. That added “hazardous” to my list of trials. I also attend a town meeting that runs for hours and offers no childcare. Pretty big barrier to parents of young children, I’d say.
They’re sadly imperfect systems. Jump in and help perfect them. 🙂
2 worst websites I ever look at are the ones for the State of Delaware and the Disney empire. Why, with the resources they have, that should be so beats the heck out of me. By contrast, deldems is Apple.
This is an excellent discussion. Perhaps now you can understand why we are rebuilding the Green Party here. You have given us this opening. There are tons of disaffected Dems who are looking for a home. We’re better working together (Greens/Dems)than apart, but too many progressives can’t seem to find an ear with the Dem party. We’re going to get these issues out to the public and we’re willing to stand up and make a statement. Dems need to return to their roots and drop all this money/influence/DC crap and come home. Don’t act like the Reps just because they fellate billionaires for money. What the party stood for is much more important. If you want to get single payer HC, college loan remediation, future-looking energy policy, end these stupid wars, and better education policy, you must remember the huge victories from the past and consider the Green Party a polite nudge to get you guys pointed in the right direction. I’m working on Carper. The rest is up to you.
Cassandra made a brief mention of the primary timing here in Delaware. Both parties are hobbled by the September primaries but the Democratic party more so because we are committed to making our endorsements small d democratic. It is an old hackneyed story that our party determines endorsements in smoke-filled rooms.
In fact, every endorsement comes up the line from the district committees’ recommendations, with the endorsement going to the candidate who receives the majority of those recommendations. It is a long, arduous process that starts in the early spring. Long before the filing deadline in July. And, therein lies a large part of the problem.
If Delaware held its primaries in the Spring and all the other dates were pushed back to accomodate this, it would be make this democratic process much more sensible. As it is, we are dealing with reality as it exists six months before the filing deadline which isn’t always the reality going into the primary.
auntie, I definitely agree that the late primary date is a big issue. But as I read you talk about endorsements, I really wonder what is small d democratic about that process — when only a few people are involved and are entitled to vote. It seems to me that the small d democratic way to do this is to stay out of the way of primaries and let everybody who *is* qualified and entitled to vote can do so.
So, cass, do you think turnout in the primaries is reduced because people think the endorsement process covered it?
No I don’t. I think that there are a small number of people who are connected to the endorsement process and a way bigger number of people who are not. If you can’t connect the larger population of Ds to endorsements in some meaningful way, why continue to do them?
I agree about that. I think the committees are responsible for recruiting decent candidates (which is more difficult with the “buy in” for filing) and turing out the vote, as well as endorsements. Frankly, I don’t think all the committees do much of a job at that. However, asking someone to take the day off from work in order to poll watch and GOTV for a primary is asking a little too much, in some cases. But I’m not sure turing the whole thing over to lower information voters and big money is an improvement, kwim?
But your *lower information voters* (as well as pretty informed voters, the majority of which are *not* on Democratic committees) are already deciding primaries, not Democratic committees.
Perhaps committees should focus on helping *lower information voters* get more information, GOTV efforts, poll watching and checking and get out of the business of endorsements since they aren’t especially meaningful (except for the expenditures of Party resources) the a majority of D voters, low information or no.
Have I mentioned the “volunteer” part, recently? What do you suggest I can do to rouse even the other members of my committee? Due to my personal efforts, 3 members of my committee spent time at the polls, greeting. A couple of others that I know of also worked. Now,if I wanted to toss out committee members who did very little (ime) for their districts, what kind of committee does that make us? John Daniello checked my polling place mid-day. He had something at work in the morning. We organized public forums, BEFORE endorsement. We went to facebook. I personally went door to door with more than one candidate. But there is not one single darn thing I can do about the candidates and committee members who do less. And I don’t believe that holding our meetings on random curbs in the district to include everyone will make the process better.
I’d bet most of DL would agree with the list of recommended candidates my committee sent to the state.Those recommendations pretty accurately reflected the viewpoint of this district, which is what it’s supposed to do. It didn’t represent the viewpoint of the city, apparently, because the committees there do that. More people who voted agreed with those.
How is this NOT good democracy?
What do volunteers have to do with endorsements? I don’t belong to any party committees (since I’ve lived here) and volunteer at polls and for candidates all of the time. How is that list of volunteer work and forums and Facebook at the like connected to endorsements?
I’m still interested in this question:
I think that there are a small number of people who are connected to the endorsement process and a way bigger number of people who are not. If you can’t connect the larger population of Ds to endorsements in some meaningful way, why continue to do them?
Or let’s ask — if your District voted pretty much they way that your committee endorsed, are you saying that your endorsement made a difference here?
I’m suggesting the weakness in the party apparatus is that the party doesn’t always work to support endorsed candidates, not that it shouldn’t endorse candidates. I think if we have a process that selects people, we ought to work for them. And I don’t want every Tom, Dick, and Gordon to have access to the records. There’s a lot of data in there, and I’d like a screening process, thankyouverymuch. Ideally, the committees are made up of activists from the district. Often, the members of the committee are narrowly self-selected. That’s a problem, however, it’s one of the problems that isn’t best resolved by “democracy.” You’re a great example of someone the party needs to build its brand. I don’t know why you’re not on a committee, whether you were rejected, or felt it wasn’t necessary to your purposes, or what. But it’s a problem for the party that you aren’t.
As to whether the endorsement made a difference here, I would say yes, in a limited way. Some old school voters wouldn’t open the door to a non-endorsed candidate, and it probably did for them. Many people asked me for recommendations, knowing I’m involved, and knowing I’d spent more time listening to these folks than average. I could answer some questions that weren’t in the flyers. I’m not sure how successful this ultimately was, because I have yet to look at the ED breakdowns, but anecdotally it seems to have helped. I know that a lot of people who were upset that Paul Clark was endorsed, and told me so, were a lot more upset when Gordon won. I hope that increases activism in the general, that’s what I hope.
I don’t know if this answered your question. I’m only trying to give you the view from where I sit, and I’m in the cheap seats. 😉
Cassandra – an interesting point about the volunteers. I wonder what a Party structure based on volunteers – rather than elected committeepeople – would look like?
I’ve heard talk of convention-style endorsement processes. Any thoughts on that?
“And I don’t want every Tom, Dick, and Gordon to have access to the records. There’s a lot of data in there, and I’d like a screening process, thankyouverymuch.”
What data and records are you talking about? Information candidates submit to the committee to be endorsed?
This doesn’t sound like transparency to me.
“Now,if I wanted to toss out committee members who did very little (ime) for their districts, what kind of committee does that make us?”
A committee that does not tolerate laziness.
“But there is not one single darn thing I can do about the candidates and committee members who do less.”
Yes, you can. You can kick them off. If a committee member isn’t out there working, they’re not doing their job.
Keep in mind that these committees are organized at the Representative District level. That means that, when D’s have a strong edge in the Delaware General Assembly, as they do now, these committees are generally extensions of the representatives’ reelection campaigns, which the membership reflects.
And decisions, including endorsements, are often made in that context.
As someone who spent many many years on a committee, but no longer do, I think endorsements, at the minimum, are at least a perk/reward for volunteer work that generally goes unnoticed. Hey, the fact that there are what many would consider ‘flawed electorates’ in place on some committees is a mere by-product, not a symptom.
I’m now in the Cassandra camp, volunteering often, but outside the party structure. I prefer to be there, and I don’t lament my absence from the endorsement process. Not after Daniello stuffed Carney down our throats on our RD committee 4 years ago.
Always worked better as an outsider anyway, even when I was an insider.
When I attended the Mid-County committee forum, it was widely discussed that there was at least one district who endorsed immediately prior to the forum – for Clark and Taschner. It was an insult to Bill Dunn and Bill Shahan (Bullock and Gordon hadn’t even entered their races yet).
During the forum, it was pointed out to me that the monderator and active committeeman, Jim Hussey’s, wife worked for Paul Clark.
Later when Jim was soliciting support for Renee from active DEMs — who told him they were bothered by his blatant conflict of interest — he said it was ok because his wife was set to retire in December.
That nepotism and cronyism of the party machiner spreads to the committees is obviously a problem. But it’s commonplace that reward for working for campaigns is the promise of jobs for family and friends.
I think it first hit home for me when I examined the political relationships between the NCC Ethics Commission and elected or appointed state level families – at the time it was a Keeley and a Danberg.
Then Smiley and Clark came out with an Ethics Code reform ordinance that called for the elimination of the prohibition of Ethics Commission membership for persons elected to political party positions.
Their justification for the change was that it was just so damned difficult to find good people in NCC to serve. The pool was too small not to include powerful Democratic Party insiders. Yeah. It is bad enough to have to see tons of high-profile family members on our county commissions and boards as it is. (Not that these people vote or behave completely inappropriately. It is as always with Ethics, a matter of appearance of impropriety.)
Nancy: The reason it’s difficult to find people to serve is that they’re not looking at the entire pool of people in the county — just the ones who will rule in their favor. Ask Tom. He alienated the entire ethics board, everyone resigned, and he then appointed his cronies in their place.
To be fair, that’s what most other chief executives in his position have done and would do — which is why ethics boards are a waste of time and talent.
@Painesme — the committee members are volunteers themselves (normally). They’ve just been elected in accordance with the rules to be officially seated on a committee.
The Minnesota DFL has a series of caucuses and conventions that endorse candidates and take care of other party business. When I lived there, the caucuses in particular were fairly well attended (at least in the precincts where I lived) and were open to everyone who was a D. Caucuses also had some legal protections, including the right to take time off from work without pay to attend one. Delegates elected from caucuses went to organizing unit and Senate conventions to work on further party business including endorsements. I don’t know any more how connected the DFL is to their D voters, but the caucus process was an open door for every D to jump in, be heard and vote.
Is that a model to replicate here? Maybe it is worth talking about. This is certainly a model that builds in more openness. But Minnesota is a big place and this model was built when the DFL ran the state. It seems to me that DE is small enough to engage more of its Ds in an endorsement process, but I still can’t see why getting out of the way and just let voters do their thing isn’t a cleaner way to go. I get that endorsements can be a perk to committeepeople, but I’m wondering what kind of perk it is when those endorsements don’t reliably connect to voters. Turning out more committee volunteers to work for endorsed candidates might be a solution, but then why would any committee want to be part of any candidate’s campaign operation prior to a primary? I’d prefer to see committees work more on education, GOTV and tasks common to all campaigns that perhaps a committee can do. Like run a transportation to the polls operation for their District.
@heragain — I talked about why I don’t belong to a committee in a response to AQC earlier in this thread.