The netroots' impact on the blue wave
As the reality of becoming the majority party in America continues to sink in, it's certainly worth taking a look back and examining the impact we had.
The Democratic Party's series of huge wins across the country on Tuesday night were historic and decisive, and made possible by people power. Grassroots and netroots activists came together in huge numbers to volunteer and raise money for Democratic candidates across the country.
In many districts the progressive movement worked to support candidates recruited by the party's campaign committees in Washington, D.C. But in other districts, the movement took the lead in helping recruit candidates to run and then investing in their campaigns to make the fifty state strategy a reality.
The netroots helped put race after race across the country on the radar of the Democratic establishment, making the political landscape more competitive and forcing Republicans to play defense in an increasing number of districts. The movement put money and resources into long shot campaigns that were relegated to a low-tier status by D.C. political observers.
We achieved our goal of leveling the playing field, but we also (amazingly) won in many of the races we invested in. As Chris Bowers noted:
The right wing is obviously frustrated with the result of the midterm elections, and the online division of the Republican Noise Machine is already spinning away.
Some of the commentators I've read or heard seem to have forgotten that our movement actually invested in races besides CT-Sen (Lamont versus Lieberman, which we didn't win for a number of different reasons).
We invested in long shot campaigns in noncompetitive districts and we got a terrific return on our investment. That's worth celebrating. And by the way, if we're going to talk about win/loss records, how about the horrible showing of Rightroots?
Local Republicans (including the crew at unSoundPolitics) doubtless frustrated by their party's disastrous performance, are gamely trying to change the subject by talking about how "fractured" or "ideologically splintered" the new Democratic majority is and predicting it will fall apart before too long.
That's funny - we heard the same kind of gleeful sneers two years ago after Election Day 2004 was over. I can remember reading confident predictions that Bush and his congressional allies would have no trouble pushing their agenda through.
There was talk of a mandate. There were boasts about the strength of conservative power in Congress. There was gloating about the defeat of Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, who had been the Democratic leader.
And yet, despite having lost seats in Congress, Democrats pulled together and rallied. These last two years, they've been pretty united on a number of important issues. Social Security privatization was thwarted. Bolton's nomination was stalled (ultimately Bush used a recess appointment). Arctic drilling was successfully filibustered (that effort led by our own Senator Cantwell). That's the beginning of a long list of examples.
Republicans are saying the same things they said two years ago about the Democratic caucuses. The only difference between then and now is that this year we knocked the Republicans out of power and became the majority party.
Republicans would like to see a Democratic House and Senate get mired in big intra-party battles. Unfortunately for them, that's probably not going to happen. Democratic officeholders aren't going to forget the hard work that went into putting all these victories together, and congressional Republicans' self-destruction is undoubtedly fresh on their minds - as it is on ours.
We will stand up to the Democratic establishment in Washington D.C. if and when our representatives and senators make poor decisions. But we will also stand with our party's elected leaders in fighting off Republican attacks, especially those aimed at Democrats that we helped send to Congress.
There will be disagreement and fighting, but there will also be cooperation, between the movement and the establishment. And very likely more of the latter than the former.
It's also curious to see this talk of "fracture" given that the Republican caucuses don't seem to be in tidy order. The Republican ranks have been depleted and the GOP leadership is in sorry shape.
In the House, Dennis Hastert is stepping down. Tom Reynolds has barely survived a strong challenge in his own district. Tom Delay ("the Hammer") is gone and his seat is now held by a Democrat. Republicans have to reorganize and pick a new leadership team. They've got their own problems to solve.
The 2006 elections are, in most states and districts, over with. But our work - the work of electing a populist, progressive governing majority - will continue.
The Democratic Party's series of huge wins across the country on Tuesday night were historic and decisive, and made possible by people power. Grassroots and netroots activists came together in huge numbers to volunteer and raise money for Democratic candidates across the country.
In many districts the progressive movement worked to support candidates recruited by the party's campaign committees in Washington, D.C. But in other districts, the movement took the lead in helping recruit candidates to run and then investing in their campaigns to make the fifty state strategy a reality.
The netroots helped put race after race across the country on the radar of the Democratic establishment, making the political landscape more competitive and forcing Republicans to play defense in an increasing number of districts. The movement put money and resources into long shot campaigns that were relegated to a low-tier status by D.C. political observers.
We achieved our goal of leveling the playing field, but we also (amazingly) won in many of the races we invested in. As Chris Bowers noted:
Welcome to our new generation of victorious netroots candidates:The effort to build a progressive governing majority in America is, as Markos has said, "a marathon, not a sprint." Compared to what happened in 2004, our successes this cycle have been remarkable, and we're poised to chalk up even more in 2008.I would like to point out that when we picked these candidates, none of them were top tier. In fact, I'm pretty sure that right up until the end most people thought Murphy, McNerney, and Walz would still lose. But they didn't.
- PA-07: Joe Sestak
- PA-08: Patrick Murphy
- CA-11: Jerry McNerney
- MN-01: Tim Walz
- NH-02: Paul Hodes
- VA-Sen: Jim Webb
- MT-Sen: Jon Tester
And we picked up a bunch more "hopeless" races as well, that dramatically expanded the palying field, and came far closer than anyone thought would come:And there is this history too:
- WA-08: Darcy Burner. Votes still being counted--outcome unclear.
- NC-08: Larry Kissell down by 400 votes, recount imminent.
- WY-AL: Gary Trauner down by less than 1,000 votes, race undecided.
- NY-29: Eric Massa not conceding, down by less than 2%
- NJ-07: Linda Stender loses by only 2%
- ID-01: Larry Grant down by 5% with most votes counted.
- IL-10: San Seals loses by only 6%
There isn't a single one of these races that was top tier when we picked them. We were trying to expand the battlefield. Even when we didn't win, we left a strong, local netroots scene in place for future challenges.
- CT-Sen: Ned Lamont shocks world to win CT-Sen primary.
- OH-02: Still competitive in 2006. We fought when few others would.
The right wing is obviously frustrated with the result of the midterm elections, and the online division of the Republican Noise Machine is already spinning away.
Some of the commentators I've read or heard seem to have forgotten that our movement actually invested in races besides CT-Sen (Lamont versus Lieberman, which we didn't win for a number of different reasons).
We invested in long shot campaigns in noncompetitive districts and we got a terrific return on our investment. That's worth celebrating. And by the way, if we're going to talk about win/loss records, how about the horrible showing of Rightroots?
Local Republicans (including the crew at unSoundPolitics) doubtless frustrated by their party's disastrous performance, are gamely trying to change the subject by talking about how "fractured" or "ideologically splintered" the new Democratic majority is and predicting it will fall apart before too long.
That's funny - we heard the same kind of gleeful sneers two years ago after Election Day 2004 was over. I can remember reading confident predictions that Bush and his congressional allies would have no trouble pushing their agenda through.
There was talk of a mandate. There were boasts about the strength of conservative power in Congress. There was gloating about the defeat of Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, who had been the Democratic leader.
And yet, despite having lost seats in Congress, Democrats pulled together and rallied. These last two years, they've been pretty united on a number of important issues. Social Security privatization was thwarted. Bolton's nomination was stalled (ultimately Bush used a recess appointment). Arctic drilling was successfully filibustered (that effort led by our own Senator Cantwell). That's the beginning of a long list of examples.
Republicans are saying the same things they said two years ago about the Democratic caucuses. The only difference between then and now is that this year we knocked the Republicans out of power and became the majority party.
Republicans would like to see a Democratic House and Senate get mired in big intra-party battles. Unfortunately for them, that's probably not going to happen. Democratic officeholders aren't going to forget the hard work that went into putting all these victories together, and congressional Republicans' self-destruction is undoubtedly fresh on their minds - as it is on ours.
We will stand up to the Democratic establishment in Washington D.C. if and when our representatives and senators make poor decisions. But we will also stand with our party's elected leaders in fighting off Republican attacks, especially those aimed at Democrats that we helped send to Congress.
There will be disagreement and fighting, but there will also be cooperation, between the movement and the establishment. And very likely more of the latter than the former.
It's also curious to see this talk of "fracture" given that the Republican caucuses don't seem to be in tidy order. The Republican ranks have been depleted and the GOP leadership is in sorry shape.
In the House, Dennis Hastert is stepping down. Tom Reynolds has barely survived a strong challenge in his own district. Tom Delay ("the Hammer") is gone and his seat is now held by a Democrat. Republicans have to reorganize and pick a new leadership team. They've got their own problems to solve.
The 2006 elections are, in most states and districts, over with. But our work - the work of electing a populist, progressive governing majority - will continue.
