DNC: Will they lead, listen, and mobilize the RNC disaffected?

The DNC has a leadership problem. America wants leaders.

Will the DNC reach out to the RNC disaffected, and create a viable plan to lead America?



Raw Story and Mark Crispin Miller already spoke last Friday, after Kerry's officer issued a denial.

Miller states that he feels as though Kerry's office statement completely misrepresented what transpired between Kerry and Miller.

In so many words, Miller is attempting to outline the various voting problems in the 2000 and 2004 election.

When asked about what the individual voter can do, Miller missed his chance and went on a tangent, discussing constitutional amendments, state reforms, and reforms in buying voting machines.

Miller's aware of the Philadelphia studies done on the exit polling. His book outlines a number of problems with the electoral process, and what the RNC is doing.

Miller has also expressed knowledge of the Conyers efforts to look into the voting problems of 2004.


Miller is aware of the DNC leadership efforts, Raw Story, and the Conyers efforts. But rather than focus on specific action that the voters can take, Miller is focusing on the larger solutions.

The problem the DNC has is that their leadership knows about the problems, but is still in denial. Yes, Kerry believes he was robbed of the election: The exit polling data is not consistent with the votes; nor is the Census data consistent with the actual results.

Some three [3] million voters thought they cast their ballots, but they were not included in the final result. The total number of reported voters is at least three [3] million less than those who thought they cast their votes. This problem doesn't include the number of voters who were dissuaded from voting.



* * *

When pressed again for what the typical voters can do, Miller simply says that the DNC leadership needs a call, and that the public needs to mobilize to let the DNC leadership know of their concerns.

Huh? Raw Story and Conyers are both fully engaged on the issue. Is Miller saying, despite the Miller' conversation with Raw Story, that the DNC leadership and Conyers' status as Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee isn't enough?

Let's not be confused why the country has a problem: It seems as though everyone in the DNC knows about the problem, the right players are energized, but the DNC despite their knowledge, still requires a wake up call from the voters.

That is, if the voters can wade through the long talk of solutions about "Constitutional Amendments" and "the locals not buying machines that don't work."

There's a problem with the DNC leadership if, despite the Ranking Member on the Judiciary Committee having open door access to the DNC leadership, that somehow "this issue" isn't getting the needed attention.

* * *

Does the DNC leadership really believe that the "solution" and "next step" is to wait for the energized public to raise their concerns and "get the DNC leadership" to notice what they "should" already know about?

* * *

The problem the DNC has is that it doesn't recognize what the RNC leadership is doing: Despite Cheney's drop to 19% favorable rating, McCain is now beating the brushes seeking others to join the RNC.

McCain recognizes there are problems. He knows there are evangelicals who may have taken control of the Party. But rather than taking this as inevitable, McCain is doing something the DNC would be wise to learn.

McCain recognizes the evangelicals are getting undue influence, and McCain is saying words to the effect, "If you believe they have too much power, then join the RNC and help center the discussion."

That's a smart move. And the DNC would be wise to do the same when talking to the RNC: "The DNC cannot organize or effectively communicate and plan, but we have a motivated group of knowledgeable voters who want to do the right thing: If you are in the RNC, and upset at what is going on with your collapsing party, then join the RNC, help provide the organization and leadership, and we can win back America from the forces of lawlessness, chaos, and corruption."

* * *

It's all well and good to talk about voting reform. But that's years off. It takes time to get reforms and pass a constitutional Amendment.

The DNC needs to ask whether they're serious about winning, recognizing their weaknesses, and reaching out to the RNC experts to create a credible platform.

Based on what I've seen, the DNC activists are more inclined to go back into their default-victimization mode, and scream about how unjust things are.

Brilliant! That doesn't change anything.

DNC needs to recognize what the RNC is doing, and take steps to work within that flawed system. Yes, that means accepting that the RNC is engaged in some nasty voting related stuff.

At the same time, rather than whining about it, the DNC needs to accept that this is what the RNC is doing.

What's the DNC's plan to mitigate these risks? That means gathering evidence.

If the DoJ won't prosecute, then DNC needs to accept that their actions are not unlawful.

But it does little to inspire confidence when we continue to hear from the DNC activists about "how wrong things are," but we have no indictments.

It's time to either make your case, and present the evidence to DoJ, and let the judicial system, take care of it; or you can accept what the RNC is doing, and work within that flawed system.

Does this mean say "OK, we have to live with it?" No, it means: Accept that they are doing it, and work to overcome what they are doing, rather than simply whining about it.

* * *

Let's go over a couple of examples. First, there's the talk that the RNC was telling potential voters that if they voted, the pollsters would find out who had warrants, unpaid parking tickets, and then the potential voters would walk away and not vote.

OK. Time to accept the reality that the RNC is telling people incorrect information, and communicating things with the objective of dissuading voters.

You have two options: Either work within the existing statutes; or communicate to your voters the facts.

That doesn't mean spewing out ads. It means having people at the polling station that are telling people to tell their friends on their cell phone about the latest rumors, and providing the correct information.

If people in line who are wearing DNC buttons are getting targeted or pulled out of line, then there need to be cameras of that activity. Voters need to be reminded that there are cameras there to dissuade harassment.

If there are people who are sitting in cars who appear to be with the RNC, then their identifying information needs to be logged and forwarded to law enforcement.

If there are people taking photographs, they should be required to have official DNC badges showing that they are affiliated with the DNC and there to dissuade harassment.

Whatever the RNC is doing, there needs to be a plan on how this will be mitigated.

* * *

Let's consider the problem of bogus DNC efforts. Apparently some in the RNC have been masquerading as "liberal pollsters" and "gathering information about social causes" then getting people to register to vote. The DNC-registrations were getting trashed.

OK, rather than whine about that: What's the DNC's plan to correctly communicate "who a bonafide registration-taker is" and "when information like this is known, how will it be quickly disseminated?"

Think about the internet: Is there a central place people can go to report unusual behavior, so that the DNC leadership can effectively send out warnings through the media, their own organization, of what the risks are?

Again, the goal here isn't to make the DNC respond to the RNC. Rather, the goal should be to look at what the RNC was doing in 2000 and 2004, then extrapolate from that, and ask, "OK, this is what they are doing in general terms; if we wanted to do that, what would we have to do; and then prepare and mitigate for what the RNC is likely to do in 2006."

The key is to quit complaining about the RNC is or isn't doing; accept that they are doing it, and that they are doing it because the statutes are no effective in deterring the conduct.

They key is to engage with the attorneys over what the RNC appears to have done in 2000 and 2004, and work with them to develop plans to gather evidence, and forward it to the US Attorney and FBI.

If DoJ cannot prosecute, then DNC needs to suck it up, and work to develop mitigation plans. This needs to be done in advance.

* * *

Was the election in 2000 and 2004 stolen? Maybe, but we still have many claims without specific evidence that warrants the award of $200,000 dollars.

If you think you have evidence, then forward that information to Congressman Conyers.

If you want to complain about the problems, but are not part of the pre-planning to mitigate those risks, those in the RNC who might want to look for an alternative, are not as likely to come forward.

* * *

The DNC has for too long gotten into the habit of taking comments personally. It's time the DNC take the information for what it is: Feedback from the RNC about what the DNC needs to do to win back the country and constitution.

DNC activists need to quit their petit arguments over what Rove or Wilson did or didn't do/say. These are no longer political matters, but matters of criminal law.

What's curious is that despite Fitzgerald continuing his Grand Jury work, the DNC feels as though it needs to "defend" Joe Wilson.

You're taking the RNC bait. Let' me explain what the RNC is doing.

RNC right now knows that both their men in the White House, Cheney and Bush, are toast.

RNC also knows that Wilson's statements about his wife status are unrelated to what Fitzgerald has on Libby.

And that's the trick that the RNC is playing: Rather than answer the question of, "If all the RNC defenses and explanations are valid and there was no crime, why did Libby apparently lie before the Grand Jury?"

We have no answer. This is why Fitzgerald is still working.

The current game the RNC is playing is to ignore the issue of why Libby did or didn't lie to the Grand Jury, and throw up distractions over whether Plame's identity and status was or wasn't known; and who said what in e-mails between Wilson and his attorney.

Fitzgerald has already stated that what was going on with Fitzgerald and Plame is unrelated to whether Libby did or didn't lie to the Grand Jury.

Thus, there's no sense in the DNC "defending" Joe Wilson: The RNC is smearing him not simply to distract attention from Libby, but to waste the DNC's time, energy, and resources that could be better spent recruiting RNC members to the DNC side.

* * *

Let me say this again: The Vice President's approval rating is at about 19%. That means that 81% of the country have a neutral or unfavorable opinion of the Vice President.

This means that the DNC is in a "no excuse not to grab market share" from that disaffected group of Americans.

But what is the DNC doing? For starters, it's not effectively using its resources. Rather than focus on the "big picture" of winning 2006, it's spending time and resources mobilizing voters and activities on issues related to the election reforms.

That is backwards. As already stated, the reforms are going to be slow in getting implemented. The quick solution is to educate the voters of the problems and RNC tactics; and then prepare DNC-sponsored efforts that will mitigate the RNC alleged misconduct.

Once the DNC wins the 2006 elections [and that is not a given], then the DNC can move the "issue of voting reform" onto the national agenda.

Right now, the problem the DNC leadership has is, despite the communication between Miller, Raw, and Conyers, the activists are still trying to mobilize voters on very nebulous things.

The voters want something they can do, not simply think or dream about.

* * *

The DNC leadership, activists, and voters need to pull their head out and realize that the RNC, despite its low approval rating, continues to be better organized.

In their words, despite being given a "can't lose situation" the DNC, because it is more poorly organized than the RNC, looks likely to lose a "can't lose election."

That, in itself, deserves a vote of no confidence, as evidenced by the high voter "non voting" decision.

* * *

In order to lead the country, the DNC has to mobilize and win the election. This is self-evident.

But the key to winning isn't simply getting voters mobilized, but it is to create a framework and credible structure for action: A national plan.

This is where the DNC is falling down, and why the DNC needs to reach out more effectively to the RNC-disaffected who are more capable at doing this.

The DNC right now, despite the pendulum shift against the RNC, appears to not recognize that a "mass outrage at the RNC" doesn't translate into a default vote for the DNC.

The voters want to be convinced that the DNC has what it takes to lead. This means communicating, listening, and not taking RNC-feedback personally.

The DNC's activists' problem is that they take all general comments about the state of the situation personally. This is a sign of a self-esteem, confidence, and leadership problem.

* * *

The public wants leaders, and it wants a system and mechanism in place that will reign in the SES leadership.

The RNC and DNC appear to both "recognize" that there's a problem with special interests.

OK, what are the solutions, besides what has already not worked?

It's time to talk about National Referendum's or other political tools that take out the special interests and bypass the unresponsive Congress.

That's only one option. Regardless what the solutions are, the goal should be to create in the minds of the voters a viable structure that will not simply get their vote, but get their support in terms of "How do I, as a voter or person, contribute, where is my place and what can I do?"

The DNC and RNC voters do not care "about the big issues." they care that their individual action is going to lead to something, and that there is something worthwhile that they can do right now that is going to improve things.

Yes, the "ultimate solution" may be a Constitutional Amendment. But your voters want to know what can they do right now, this minute, that will make a difference.

* * *

At this point, it is clear that as Fitzgerald does more investigation, more facts will surface.

The DNC has already had since April 2005 when it knew something about the Downing Street Memo. We're now seven [7] months later, and now people are finally waking up realizing, "Gosh, the President might have a problem."

Hay! We already knew that 7 months ago. So "what Fitzgerald is or isn't doing" isn't news; you've had seven months to position yourself.

But what do we have? We have authors still not getting heard by the DNC leadership; we still have activists "defending" what is irrelevant; and we have no plan by the DNC leadership to reach out to the RNC disaffected, listen to them, and build a viable solution and platform to not simply win the election, but show the public that the DNC has the mechanism in place to lead.

Seven months!

Now the DNC is still scratching its head. If you wait another seven months, you'll be "too close to the election" to do anything. Then we'll be right there all over again, and the voter turn outs will shrink.

* * *

The key the DNC leadership needs to realize is that the RNC is imploding, and now is the time to formulate a credible plan to speak to both parties.

Listen to what McCain is doing: He's recognizing there are problems within the DNC, and creating a door and opportunity for others to step forward and provide a balance.

The DNC needs to do this, but speak to the RNC membership who are annoyed by the lawlessness in this White House.

The upcoming 2006 election is one for the DNC to lose. The DNC has a communication, leadership, and organization problem. It's activists are more concerned about "defending their position," when they fail to see that that position need not be defending.

Time is of the essence. It is time for the DNC to accept what the RNC does during elections, and develop mitigations for those approaches.

If the DNC is not serious about winning, organizing, listening, and creating a bridge for progress, then you might as well save your money, and pull out of the 2006.

Rather than try to "get organized in 1 year," how about develop a three year plan for victory in 2008?

Either way, the RNC is still imploding, Fitzgerald is still marching forward, and the RNC machine will still fool you again.

The DNC has a communication and leadership problem. The disaffected in the RNC could provide that, but the DNC activities are more interested in fighting than in admitting they have personal issues.

Leaders develop plans and they outline visions. If you want to be part of the solution, it's time to put the "big plan to reform the elections" on hold; and look at the specific actions you in the DNC can do to win over the RNC disaffected, listen to them, and stop taking their comments personally.

If you want to win an election, you need to learn to be leaders: That is recognizing what is going on, knowing when to keep your mouth shut, and work on the most important objective: Organize to demonstrate you are credible leaders, can listen, and inspire a nation, not just those who like to complain.

It's time to accept your RNC opponent, although it is down and out, is till better organized, and can more effectively communicate.

You must accept your opponent as they are, not try to create an illusion of "how things should be." Your RNC opponent wants you to lose. They have shown they will do anything to achieve that, whether it be play stupid about torture in Abu Ghraib, or lie to Grand Juries.

Wake up. Your opponent does not recognize the rule of law. Accept that, and your job is to accept that "that is how they are" and you must defeat them in a manner that inspires confidence, not in a manner that says, "Woe is me" or "does more of what the RNC does."

Either you are going to lead and be diplomatic; or you are simply self-justifying engaging the same misconduct, propaganda, smearing, and abuse as the RNC. That does not inspire.

Your job is to recognize that the larger DNC organization, however you may wish to believe "is right," is defective, unresponsive, and poorly organized.

It is not the job of the voters or disaffected in the RNC to save the DNC; nor is it the job of voters to remedy a self-evident communication problem between the media, DNC leadership, and the activists.

It's time to show what you have, or get off the stage. At this juncture, despite the RNC implosion and seven months to get ready to take advantage of what was already known, we've seen nothing but pie in the sky, unspecific actions, and no credible plan to reach out and mobilize both the RNC and DNC in order to justify confidence in the leadership.

The DNC for 2006 need to either put up, or shut up. The RNC has already shown it will trash the laws and ignore the rule of law. But it is not the job of Fitzgerald to whittle away at the RNC, and hand the DNC a victory.

Leaders need to lead, not simply sit back and wait for someone else to hand them that job. If you can lead a political campaign, or can't communicate across your own activities, why should we believe you can lead a country or effectively communicate with the world?

The inability to do the small things when it "doesn't matter," are simply signals of "what won't work" when times are more complicated. If you cannot demonstrate an ability to see the big picture, and defer to the courts matters of law, then there's no reason anyone in the public should believe the DNC leadership can effectively manage, much less plan or visualize, a national agenda.

Where are the DNC leaders? They're inside the RNC, waiting for their chance to help you. All the DNC activists have done since the Downing Street Memo is burn more bridges, destroy more confidence, waste time, and not focus on the national issues which the voters want to see addressed.

That is not leadership, and it invites greater contempt. You've had seven months since the Downing Street Memo surfaced, and you find yourselves where you are.

If you win, it is because you are mobilized, listening, reaching out, organized, and providing a credible plan to move forward.

If you lose, it is because you only have yourselves to blame, you were not organized, you failed to reach out, and had no effective plan "Despite the can't lose situation."

At that juncture when the DNC loses the 2006 elections, there will be no sympathy: The RNC will continue to trash your constitution, and there will be fewer people who believe the DNC is a credible alternative. It remains to be seen to what extent the DNC, at that juncture, will create more excuses and spew out more propaganda to avoid responsibility or find scapegoats to explain away what is an inherent structural flaw in organization, leadership, planning, and thinking.

If you fail to organize and win, you not only deserve to lose the election, but your Constitution and basic freedoms. At that juncture, in 2006 you will have proven that a free people, although they face an imminent threat, are not willing to stand up, assert their rights, organize and create a plan for the future.

You will have demonstrated that you are free people unwilling to assert your rights or your mind, and are far more secure if you are "protected" by the forces who would treat you like mindless animals.

How do I know?

You wished for this.