Aftermath
Stuns? No. Carney knew he was in trouble from the minute this race started. In Delaware, we do not have the advantage of publically released polling that I can analyze. And whatever internal polling the campaigns do is kept a closely guarded secret, with only leaks to the press or to us here at Delaware Liberal of the most advantageous information. But I think we can now say this with extreme confidence: Carney was always going to lose this race. The only reason it was close at all was the Delaware Democratic Party’s expenditures of our party money on Carney’s behalf. Had the Del Dems not engaged in that unethical machine politicking, Carney would have lost by 5 to 10 points at least.
John Carney is a good man. I hope he takes some time off after his term as Lt. Governor is over, and rests with his family. But I want him back in our politics. I want him to run for Congress in 2010, should Karen Hartley Nagle not be successful this year. I will join his campaign and be a tireless volunteer for him. Perhaps he will be choose to fill Joe Biden’s seat in the Senate. I would welcome that move as well.
John Daniello and all those in the Delaware Democratic Party involved in pilthering party funds, which were originally collected for the purpose of defeating Republicans in the general election, for the benefit of rescuing John Carney’s primary campaign for Governor, please do something for me.
On Return Day, you will all announce your retirements from the Delaware Democratic Party leadership and you will all leave Delaware politics forever. If you do not, we here at Delaware Liberal and elsewhere in the progressive blogosphere nationwide, will consider bringing legal action in the Chancery Court to audit the records of the Delaware Democratic Party. All contributions. All expenditures. If you do not think I am serious, try me. I will raise the funds to do it. I can’t imagine you will want to stay, and I can’t imagine the next Governor and leader of the Delaware Democratic Party, Jack Markell, wants you anywhere near his government or party. Hopefully Jack can fire you all, but if he cannot, we will.
Winning against the machine candidate last night is only a half step. The next quarter step is winning in November, and then finally, the last step is reforming our Delaware Democratic Party into the progressive vehicle it must be so that all progressive and Democratic candidates in Delaware can get support, rather than just one. Reforming the party necessarily means Daniello and his staff are out, one way of the other. And I am here to tell them today, we will do everything in our power to see them gone. Winning did not satisfy us. It only made us want our party back more.
Thank you! Well written and spot on. Daniello and the rest have got to go! I am not willing to allow our victories to be minimalized by the broken machine.
I do agree with you that the Democratic Party establishment must go. However, how do we do that? How involved in Democratic Party are we all involved here?
If we want to change the Party, we need to do the following:
1. Sign up as a Neighborhood Leader.
2. Go to a local meeting.
3. Contact your Representative District Chair.
These are just some thoughts. Any others?
Why not add Tom Carper to the list of people who have to go but will stay?
Stay tuned. I will have a post about Tom Carper later this morning.
DPN, thank you. I needed that.
Has anybody seen the turnout numbers of eligable voters? I haven’t seen them, but I’m just getting used to being switched to night shift.
well said dd. i think we should just go ahead and start the lawsuit now. You know damn well that theyare not leaving
“But I think we can now say this with extreme confidence: Carney was going to lose this race”
I don’t think you can, you were also very confident that Reed, Northington, Gordon and Protack would triumph.
Those were predictions based on what I thought the turnout was. And my Northington prediction was just wishful thinking.
I’d sign on to that lawsuit! Like DV said, draft up those papers!! I’m a Democrat now. I’m thinking I won’t switch my registration…yet! Because I’ve definitely got major beef with the party!
Democratic Voter Turnout = 28 %
From Dept. of Elections. When I thanked the woman for her help and congratulated the department for doing a good job, she informed me I was the beacon of light in a stream of steady invective calls beginning yesterday and continuing today. Take it easy on (some of) the state workers people!
They all do yeoman’s work without any thanks. I had no problems voting, and indeed, I have never had any problems voting in Delaware.
The workers are great.
DelDem–your post is riveting and has certainly thrown the gauntlet down….Congratulations on all your “endorsed” wins tonite. I am encouraged the public has finally overcome a “Designated Democratic Darling” to clearly appoint whom they feel will do the best job….
Sorry about your Northington lost…unfortunately his last bump here couldn’t carry the name recognition elsewhere.
I’m relieved about Coons…but will sure keep my eye on him…..and lastly……
You must talk to the good brothers and sisters down in Sussex about their 41st misdeed…we all have a black sheep in the family, but I never expected us to cross breed from across the aisle…oh well he’s your relative now!!!
Enjoy your new successes….
What lawsuit???
If you’re thinking about filing in Chancery re: Dem Party. Do Not, under any condition, appear before Deputy Chancellor Strine…he is a Dem Party flack on the bench. The party sent Chuck Darante to help party members in place.
Some of us, here in the city, sued the party several years ago…everything was cool w/a Republican judge, including the rulings, until we got reassigned to Strine. He kept the party status quo and always ruled against party members ‘ complaints.
If you want the unpleasant truth talk to the ‘last man standing’ Paul Faulkowski.
I recommend David L. Finger, Esq. to you. He’s been involved w/challenging the Dem party.
Good luck!
Imagine that. The Democratic Party Leadership. directing the Party, who is the chosen candidate.
What can be less democratic than that?
Affecting a primary race?
How to change this. Add your presence to every and all democratic meetings. Sorry, you will have to wait 3 1/2 years to vote for the party leadership. It happens the Summer before the election. — want a suggestion , MOVE the ELECTION of PARTY OFFICIALS to the SPRING/SUMMER after the election.
ALLOW the new winners to elect their party officials.
This is the point. Now that MARKELL is in, he still has a shadow Democratic PARTY that does not fully support him. Whereas, now, MARKELL should be able to continue his VICTORY, by influencing the PARTY LEADERSHIP.
WHO is more influential in the Party, TODAY, the NEXT GOVERNOR, or the PARTY EXECUTIVE. Who is more intouch with the people? I’d say the one who inspired the Volunteers and voters, and not those paid party workers.
MARKELL, please break the Party Leader Stranglehold.
If you want the unpleasant truth talk to the ‘last man standing’ Paul Faulkowski.
Correction,
FAL – KOW – SKI
Should I post as
“Last Man Standing”?
Yes, this is ME. Paul Falkowski, Browntown. That is WHY I made the above suggestion about the PARTY elections. BACK then, the party did not honor their rules, and used the courts to bypass the rules.
I was the only one to file correctly and on time. And the Judge admitted it was correct. It was the Judge who was quoted that “I would be King”. I replied, that “I was the last man standing”, after eliminating those who did not file on time and correctly, according to the party rules. Leo Marshall, MADE everyone file on time. Leo died, and no one TOOK on his responsibility. ONLY I followed the rules. The JUDGE took away my legal protection.
Then he applied judicial corrections.
So locally, we face legislation, from the courts. What we need is to review, who profits and gains from the bias and control.
I warn everyone to STOP judges from making their own rules when they do not like the LAWS as written. If you do not like the rules and laws, THAT is corrected in the LEGISLATIVE branch of the GOVERNMENT. NOT the BENCH.
Court of Chancery will not help. If the best Chancellor (?) in the State, can or did read the Bylaws of the IPOD, and then voted against all its membership, giving 4 unelected’s the right to do anything they wish….good luck with Court.
Problem is that the Courts hate these cases, and just turn them over to freshmen lawyers.
It is shocking the Court of Chancery who supposedly have such a great reputation for being fair, balanced and just, just told the members of IPOD you have no voice.
In fact if we could get all the members together at a Convention, the unelected board does not have to follow the will of its own membership.
LIZ,
What does IPOD bylaws state as written. If they used a standardized incorporation skeleton,
It probably does allow the BOARD of DIRECTORS to make those decisions.
Go back and re-read the IPOD rules. If the rules allow the Board to make those decisions about candidates, and meeting rules are vague, …
I suggest that those concerned IPOD members call for a Convention to review the bylaws.
Paul.
I had a really pleasant conversation with Molly last months. I think she’s pretty even handed. I’d go so far as to say (without having spoken with her) that she had no say in the endorsement process and was totally left out. Again, I’d like to hear her side. All of this seems to have been directed by the Dark Overlords in the party — some of whom are likely not on the payroll in any way.
You are right Mike. I should have fixed that this morning.
Paul: The Bylaws gives all power to the Board of 4. It is clear that regardless of whether the 646 members of IPOD got together and ELECTED officers, the unelected Board could overrule their decision.
In essence there is no party. We are not needed in the Party its just an unelected Board who do not believe that voters have a right to any decision. Its a consitutional violation of rights and thats what should have been argued and addressed by the Court. This Board has never stood for election themselves, the Judge simply didnt comment on that major consitutional problem for party members.
It all reminds me of the “Leo Marshall” style of politricks in the city of Wilmington.
The Bylaws gives all power to the Board of 4.
Game, set match.
This is not he US constitution.
The Bylaws are a legal agreement within IPOD.
Why did no one recognize this problem that 646 members have with an all powerful BoD?
IPOD needs to read their rules. The membership needs to demand a ‘convention’.
Ask if you can get 150 members to resign, to the elections board, and then reduce your numbers below the 500 threshold for a valid 3rd party. Although, it may be 500 at the time of candidate filing.
The only rights an IPOD member has, are those written in the bylaws. Rights that are not enumerated may be a topic for litigation in a court of law. AS you said. The BoD has the rights to make the candidate decision, not the 646 members.
Read the Lipstick, YOU and 645 others need a rules change.
Those who did not like the SCOTUS decision of the presidential (S)elections, must realize the need for good laws, understandable laws, laws that can be understood and enforced. Those who claim selection by the court, should not try to use the courts to do their bidding.
AGAIN, Call for a convention.
UH, 300,000,000 citizens.
535 representatives and senators.
The US constitution, gives them the POWER. 535 members of the BOD of the USA, plus the president and the judiciary.
Surprise, we have no say as members or citizens. Except at the convention and during elections.
.
.