We need an issues comparison sheet for DNC chairman.

[genius]

Where does each stand on the death penalty?

Where does each stand on canceling NAFTA?

Where does each stand on withdrawing from the WTO?

Where does each stand on restoring the estate tax?

Where does each stand on Yucca Mountain?

Where does each stand on stopping low medical malpractice limits?

Where does each stand on issues involving monopolies and corporate takes-overs?

Where does each stand on industry vs. environment?

Where does each stand on Gonzales?

Where does each stand on immediate withdrawal from Iraq?

Where does each stand on restoring good relations with Cuba?

Where does each stand on the theft of the 04 election?

Where does each stand on stem cell research?

Where does each stand on stopping privatization of Social Security?

Where does each stand on ending "welfare to work?"

Where does each stand on choice?

Etc.

[rigel99]

1. NO YOU DON'T, JUST PICK DEAN

Dean is the man to pick. He is the only one of them all that has experience raising money, $40M versus Kerry being broke thru most of his race till Iowa, challenging Bush and given he learns PR, winning elections. He also has done more than any other candidates to get Democrats elected with his DemocracyForAmerica.

But if you want, I can forward this list to his PR person so let me forward it right now.... just so you can have further reason to pick DEAN!

The bottom line is that DNC folks make the decision and they are guided by forces that from what I hear have already chosen Dean as head..

[genius]

3. What makes us different from the Bush supporters if we are just followers?

They voted for Bush despite the issues. I believed that was wrong and stupid. The last thing I want to be is like them.

[mzmolly]

2. Issues 2000.org is a good place to start for some ... Great idea!

Tim Roemer :puke:

http://www.issues2000.org/IN/Tim_Roemer.htm

Howard Dean

http://www.issues2002.org/Howard_Dean.htm

Simon Rosenthal has similar ideas to Dean, though he's not got the name recognition:

http://nebraskademocrats.blogspot.com/2004/12/future-of-democratic-party.html

[leyton]

4. I don't think these are as important as his approach to fixing the party.

The chairman doesn't vote in Congress or submit legislation. He's an organizer; he raises money, recruits candidates, shapes a message, coordinates state parties, and sponsors a convention. Though the chairman should in general support the Democratic platform on the big things like the war, we should focus on someone who can execute the duties of the job well. Stances on Yucca mountain and stem cell research don't matter because the chairman doesn't affect policy and legislators in Congress are going to figure it out for themselves.

[genius]

5. He can orgnanize a party of 1 but it would be better to support the people

The lives, livelihood and health of a great many Americans depend on the issues. Most activists who have left the party have done so because of the issues. If the party fails to focus on the issues, more and more people will desert. Dean's organizational skills didn't do much to get him the nomination. He may be the best on the issues of those running for DNC chairman. I don't know. But I would like to see where all the candidates stand.

He also acts as the voice of the party. Dean has said he would not overturn NAFTA. This automatically puts him on the opposite side of most workers, more of whom may leave the party after they lose their jobs to NAFTA. NOw, if Dean, or whoever the chair is, is willing to call for abandonment of NAFTA and the WTO, then workers concerned about their jobs are likely to stay with the party. If a chairman takes the party into a pro-death penalty position, they've lost me and that is not easy to do. People trying to get doctors to give adequate medical care to their loved ones will not be happy with anyone who wants to lower liability limits rather than restore more rights to sue doctors and hospitals.

[cali]

6. How many times do you need to be told?

The chairman of the DNC can't take the party into a pro-death penalty position, a pro or anti NAFTA position, or any other policy position. The chair doesn't make policy. S/he raises money, organizes and develops strategy. Ideally, this person is someone who is not beholden to Washington Insiders, and who listens to and works with people on the ground in all fifty states.

[mzmolly]

7. Dean baby!

;)

[genius]

8. No need to be insulting - particularly when you are wrong.

The DNC chair speaks for the party. If he has a position on an issue that will encourage people or discourage them from joining the party. Organization is only a small party. In CA, the party chairman is tried to get the party to oppose prop 66 (three strikes revision) and back prop 69 (right of government to take DNA from people not charged with any crime). He appoints all members of the committee that determines the recomendation and it takes a super-majority (2/3rds or 3/4ths) to go against the recommendation. So if the Chair recommends that we shoot all puppies and gets appointed members of a committee to agree with him, there better be a super-majority of puppy lovers present and voting to overturn the recommendation. You need to learn how the party structure works.

[Selatius]

10. That's perhaps my greatest criticism of the structure

It operates as if it were a top-down hierarchy where decision making powers flow down from the top, not from the bottom-up where it usually would be expected emanate in an organization where everybody supposedly has an equal voice. It becomes problematic if we're talking about removing corrupt or incompetent folks at the top or careerists who won't rock the boat when it needs rocking.

[welshTerrier2]

14. what the hell is wrong with you ???

do you really expect anyone to discuss the issues you've raised ... no one cares what we're fighting for, we just want to get "our guy" put in charge ...

what kind of nonsense are you peddling to ask about the positions the different Chair candidates hold? it's all about fundraising and party structure ... you know about fundraising ... you tell the people want they want to hear so they'll give you more money ... the last thing you'd want in a Chair is to have them locked into some kind of policy position ... gotta be fluid ... gotta be flexible ... the job of the
Chair is to robotically parrot back the message of whoever the next nominee is ... standing for something and having the courage of their convictions is a fool's errand for a Party chair ... we need to find a bureaucrat who's good at organizational structure ... it's so obvious ... we need a CEO, not a person of conscience and character ... that wouldn't be consistent with how the American people see the Party ... the last thing you'd want is to be seen as standing for something ...

leave all that policy nonsense to the pre-election polling and the next nominee ... then, and only then, we'll know what we stand for ...

[genius]

9. I was leaning towards Dean.But why are his people afraid to discuss issues

I post questions about issues and all I get is follow Dean and forget the issues.

[XemaSab]

11. I'm not afraid to discuss issues.

I don't agree with Dean's opinions on everything 100%, but personally, I trust his judgement and his leadership and I have a lot of respect for his opinions because I feel they weren't derived from a focus group.

You're right in that Dean was initially pro-free trade and NAFTA. He has since stated that he has revised his opinions on those topics after seeing how NAFTA has hurt American workers while campaigning for the primaries. He's got several other stances that I wasn't initially with him on 100%, such as gun control and medical marijuana, but his views seem to be from a position of deep thought, and I have learned to see things from his perspective.

But I'm not 100% with Kucinich either (I'm pro choice), and I'm certainly not 100% with Kerry or Edwards or frankly, any other politicians.

These issues would be more critical if we were supporting a candidate for congress or the presidency, but the position of party chair is more about raising money and organizing campaigns, and I think Dean's desire to have grassroots organizations and run in all 50 states is commendable. What we're doing now sure ain't working.

Ultimately, Dean has demonstrated an ability to motivate the grassroots, which none of the other candidates has demonstrated.

[genius]

12. He also appts committee people who determine party positions on issues

If the DNC chair wants to guy patients rights with malpractice reform, then he will appoint people who are anti-patient to the resulution committee. California has no priavacy rights activists on its resolutions committee because Art Torres is really bad on that. So they refuse to oppose right wing appointees.

In 2004, Art Torres and the E-board of the CA Dem Party decided to back Arnold in making funding of necessary programs subservient to tax cuts for the rich. They did it between the State Central Committee meeting and the E-board meeting so people didn't have a say. The DNC chair could do likewise.

The issues are more important than anything else.

[XemaSab]

13. This is a much simpler list

Than the list posted in the OP.

I'm not sure what Dean's stance is on these issues, but I'm sure he has one. (I very highly doubt he's in favor of tax cuts for the rich being subservient to social programs, though.)