Dems 2014 “Get Out the Vote Project” is bullshit and doomed to fail
Without knowing anything about the project beyond this….
WASHINGTON — The Democrats’ plan to hold on to their narrow Senate majority goes by the name “Bannock Street project.” It runs through 10 states, includes a $60 million investment and requires more than 4,000 paid staff members. And the effort will need all of that — and perhaps more — to achieve its goal, which is nothing short of changing the character of the electorate in a midterm cycle.
…I can tell you that this Democratic effort is bullshit and doomed to fail. Why? Because it is a one off “project” and not a sustained brand message. DC Democrats STILL think of GOTV as some kind of “project” that you put on around election time. (Is it even possible that it is 2014 and I am still having the write this same post for the nth time?)
It has yet to sink in that GOTV starts with some coherent BRAND. It gathers voters to it – it doesn’t CHASE voters. I’m just disgusted. With so-called Democrats as the only alternative to Republicans that this country has, we deserve the Republican Senate that this project assures will be elected in November.
Instead of asking why the voting rates of core Democratic constituencies — blacks, Hispanics, unmarried women, younger voters — historically drop off considerably in midterm elections, and giving these voters REASONS to show up – the Dems with mindlessly throw money at the problem and hope for the best. Great plan!
I eagerly await the results of your own GOTV brand-building experiments. They must be quite conclusive for you to be standing so firmly against what the DSCC is doing.
Perhaps if Obama would share is machine with others, Dems wouldn’t have to do things like this.
Um… dude it’s called PR. Democrats have a sustained culture when it comes to field, it is often quoted as one of the biggest divides between the two parties on the infrastructure side. Go look at the targeted races, I think you’ll see they are building grassroots infrastructure right now. There is plenty to be mad at when it comes to the natl cmtes but this is hardly one of those reasons. Also SussexAnon, may want to check this out http://www.campaignsandelections.com/campaign-insider/444397/ngp-van-touts-dncand39s-and39project-ivyand39.thtml .
PainesMe – I’m not the DNC or even the DSCC.
hmm – 1) “dude it’s called PR” No shit Sherlock.
2) When the PR is out in support of an engaging candidate I’ll admit it can make a difference. When it is employed to support “We are better than Republicans” during mid-terms it has failed utterly. (And you know that)
3) “There is plenty to be mad at when it comes to the natl cmtes but this is hardly one of those reasons.” Wrong.
I wouldn’t give yourself so much credit.
You’re saying that it’s doomed to fail because of the PR packaging of it being a project. It’s common knowledge that the D side has long term infrastructure in place to keep ground work a priority, so the core part of your argument is flawed.
Yes, it’s going to be difficult to motivate the base to get excited for the mid-term, but guess what that’s the reality of mid-terms for the incumbent party. However, the DSCC is taking the smart approach to make the best investment possible to try to make a tough cycle as successful as possible.
Yes OFA in 2010 did not do too well, but remember it was also tied directly to a President facing re-election in two years. Judging the internal mechanisms of a party cmte from process articles isn’t the most accurate way to get an idea of what’s really going on.
“…core part of your argument is flawed.” No it isn’t.
“Yes, it’s going to be difficult to motivate the base to get excited for the mid-term, but guess what that’s the reality of mid-terms for the incumbent party.”
So, more of the same, only dress it up with a nice PR-y name. Brilliant!
“the DSCC is taking the smart approach to make the best investment possible…” No it isn’t. The best investment would be around building a more coherent brand , but you can;t do that with “centrist” ass-wipes like Carney and Coons fucking everything up and muddling the message can you?
You are all wet (and you know it.) A populist, progressive Democratic Party would mop the floor with the GOP.
But hey. If you think PR can trump having coherent values, let’s make a gentlemanly $1.00 bet. I say that because they don’t have a brand that makes sense to voters (Thanks Coons et al !) Democrats lose the Senate.
Fair?
Yup it’s the superior GOP brand that’s killing the Democratic party. You win!
Ha. That’s the most disingenuous comment you’ve ever made here. I win again. (You seriously suck at this. Where did you go to school, Brown? )
If you think that we’re going to lose because of centrist values (have you looked at the map?) then I win! FYI I’m pretty damn progressive, but that doesn’t change the facts.
You are progressive and that’s why you are having a hard time with this line of argumentation. You know I am right. You know full well that a unified, populist, progressive Democratic Party would mop the floor with the GOP.
You know that values trump PR. The only reason my $1.00 is remotely at risk is because the GOP can’t get out of its own way.
Jason – I understand that you’re not the DNC/DSCC, but that didn’t seem to stop you from brandishing your opinion as fact. I just thought that as an empiricist you would have some data behind your post rather than some vague gut instinct around messaging, loosely informed by personal anecdotes.
I mean there’s a pretty obvious reason why there’s not a “national brand” for the senate campaign committee, right? Because the dynamics of each race are different. Udall has to be a different kind of candidate than Markey, than Hagan, than Booker. I probably don’t need to tell you this, but candidates want to stand on their own two feet as their own brand, not under the umbrella of national Democrats. Not to mention that in our most vulnerable areas, a progressive and populist brand would actually be unpopular – even if voters agree with every policy idea – simply because it’s coming from “Pelosi Democrats”.
Beyond that, field wins close elections. Field is also expensive. Early national investment in field infrastructure for key races frees up the senate campaigns to spend more time building their local brand, and makes sure that quality people are in those roles (not just somebody’s friend/nephew/insurance agent). It’s the best bang for their buck, and that investment will still be paying dividends in 2016.
Ugh…another apologist for mediocrity.
“…candidates want to stand on their own two feet as their own brand, not under the umbrella of national Democrats.”
…they would if the brand made sense to voters.
But hey, take me up on my gentlemanly bet. I have a dollar that says that this empty PR campaign is bullshit and destine to fail.
I’ll take you up on that bet.
What exactly is the Democratic brand you wish to sell, Jason?
Exactly!
4k staff and tens of millions isn’t what I’d call an empty or campaign…
$1.00
Exactly?
Thanks. That was helpful.
Since you claim this plan is doomed, one would think you would have a genius can’t fail plan to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.
Or we can just throw rocks from the sidelines like usual.
I know, “exactly!”
I’ve supported the same plan for eight years. This isn’t rocket surgery. When Democrats unify behind a coherent progressive message, they win. When they bullshit around and confuse voters with a mish-mash of pseudo-republican bullshit, they lose.
They will lose the Senate and more seats than predicted in the house. It is a stone cold lock.
Yup Pryor and Manchin will win as strong principled progressives…
Jason’s point is that Manchin and Pryor would be stone-cold locks if they stood behind a message of (for example):
Social Security needs to be better funded, not cut to cat food levels
Banks need to be regulated so that we don’t end up footing the bill
Medicare and Medicaid are important pillars of our society, they should be improved
You can’t starve the poor into wealth
But Jason is getting in touch with his inner Will Rodgers and realizing that he isn’t part of an organized party.
I’m getting in touch with, It is 2014 can’t fucking believe the DC brainiacs still don’t get the simple truth you just eloquently captured.
I’m well aware of what Jason is saying. Being a populist is hardly a new idea in southern districts, but Manchin and Pryor are never going to become socially progressive, nor will Landrieu or Begich ever go against the energy lobby. To think otherwise is to be willingly politically tone deaf. These are statewide races, not one nationwide race.
Yup Pryor and Manchin will win as strong principled progressives…
No, they will lose as ersatz Republicans.
Take the bet. A teabag like Paul Broun in Georgia might save you, and the Senate…again.
That’s a hell of a strategy, but where would Democrats be without the kindness of Teabags?
OK here’s jason’s point made in a nutshell: I just received this email tonight from the DCCC. If you can think of a more defeatist fundraising opener, just let me know:
BREAKING: House Republicans just announced how much they raised for tonight’s mega-fundraiser:
$15 million.
You read that right: $15 MILLION. In just one night. You can bet Speaker Boehner and Paul Ryan are high-fiving in the hallways of Congress over their record-breaking haul.
We have to be honest, this could be a crushing blow to President Obama’s agenda. If we get massively outraised on this first quarterly fundraising deadline, we might as well throw in the towel on the 2014 elections.
Followed (after the usual link to give money) with this:
Look — we know we ask a lot, but the only way we can land a crippling blow to Boehner’s majority is with an unprecedented surge of grassroots support before the FEC fundraising deadline.
There is no appeal to ideas, to brand, to anything else but “we gotta raise more money than they do”–I mean, read that “the only way we can land a crippling blow to Boehner’s majority” and you tell me if this sounds like an organization you confidently want to give money to.
“When Democrats unify behind a coherent progressive message, they win” – examples please.
Again, it’s easy to sit here and say that a big majority of Americans support this policy or that principle, but when it comes to the ballot box, it just doesn’t play out that way. People constantly vote against their own self interest and put party ahead of policy. Otherwise we’d have Mitch Crane, not KWS.
So you can sit here and whine that they aren’t saying the right words, but I for one am happy that they’re moving away from the TV consultant mentality (if only we can say the exact right thing our message will carry the day!) and starting to focus on dragging our people to the polls.
But you keep on honing down your magic words for winning everywhere. Start shopping it around, I’m sure there are some office holders in Sussex and Kent that would be up for some snake oil. Abra kadabra.
Steve – those emails are about raising money, not confidence. Confident people don’t give as much as nervous people. Simple metrics. Once Dems started mentioning the Koch Bros, some campaigns saw contributions triple. This trend of defeatist subject lines will continue as long as they’re raking in money hand over fist.
PainesMe–sorry but I disagree. I understand the “nervous people” aspect. And I’ve seen the Koch brothers rhetoric. This was still the single most defeatist fundraising email I’ve ever seen from the DCCC. “Time to throw in the towel”?
Not even a nod toward how they need your money to get out a brand or candidate message that will resonate with the people if only they can hear it? Nope. Just “send us money now or we’re done.”
Inspires confidence, it does, says Yoda.