Dean on DNC paid state directors, voterfiles, 4 wins over MS Haley Barbour

[madfloridian]

Not one single blogger, not one reporter, summarized Dean's Q&A at the breakfast with The American Prospect. Not one. Yes, it was a long session, but so many important things were said. I call our bloggers out on this.

Dean was very candid about the DNC goals, and no one is bothering to cover it. Here is the link to the audio, a large file, and not very clear....but worth it.

I have summarized a few parts from the audio, since those who were there apparently did not care enough to bother....so what is the purpose of going?

Here is the audio file in QT.

http://www.prospect.org/weblog/2006/04/post_142.html

Here are my summaries on the state political directors and their requirements, the voter files, and recent wins.

Republicans have been way ahead of us, they have had 4-year campaigns for years. We have had only 10 month campaigns.

Talking about the people being hired in the states.
4 requirements for people hired.

First, they have to be diverse. Said there had only been one Hispanic in the TX party, and you can't run things that way.

Two, they have to be trained by DNC, multiple times. Bring them to DC, 5 states at a time, train them, then they come back. Then we keep doing that.

Three, they have to sign on for four years. They can't get good at what they do and then run off and do something else. They get paid decently, and they get benefits.

Four, by the 2008 elections they must have a Democrat in charge in each precinct in their state. Someone willing to stand up and say I'm a Democrat, I'm organizing this precinct..no matter how Republican that area is.

My transcription of Dean's remarks on the voter file issue.

We're building a different kind of voter file. Because campaigns have not been continuous in our party, you pay a lot of a voter file, use it, then it disappears after the election. Candidates are generally very protective of their voter files. May be good for the candidate, but not good for the Democratic Party. Voter files do better the more you use them.

We are building an online voter file, we giving it away free to the state parties. The state parties set the rules for who gets it and how it can be used in their state. (I have a new appreciation for voter files, since hubby and I are starting to use one, get tallies, and figure out who and how to canvass with limited human resources in a very conservative area.)

The DNC will retain ownership of the database, and the local candidates will have use of it. Uploads and changes go to the DNC and stay in the database. His ultimate idea is that with this voterfile accessible at local levels throughout the country, then by the presidential race there is no need to pay for a 20 million dollar voterfile.

Then he goes on to tout that this appears to working. He speaks of 4 wins over Haley Barbour's tactics recently.

About winning locally:

He mentions how Haley Barbour decided to take over the MS state house before the elections by appointing conservative Democrats to state boards and commissions and running Republicans in their districts to try and win.

"We beat them 4 special elections in a row in MS."

"We won the mayorship of Mobile, AL, we won the mayorship of Tulsa, OK. We've won races in Utah and Missouri, all grassroots stuff. Not high-profile races, sometimes we put a little money into the state parties to help them, but usually just grassroots organizing. My philosophy is you can't win the presidential if you can't win the city council, the mayoral, and the school board. It 's a 4 year effort and its a continuous campaign."

And I recently posted this part in another thread, about small donors:

"One thing we're changing fairly dramatically is fundraising. We are still doing a lot with big donors. We did a great event Monday night with President Clinton and Al Gore. The official number was 1.3 million, but it will be higher than that.

And...that's great. But..what we're really pushing for is something called Democracy Bonds.
(He explains more about them and the steady source of operating funds they provide.) Emphasizes again they are small donors.

[JeffR]

1. Thank you for this summary

And kudos for calling the Left Blogosphere on this. Maybe the topic is just not sexy enough for some, but what Dean is doing here is impeccably smart and vitally important.

:toast:

[napi21]

2. I really love the idea of the training sessions.

I know when I was a volunteer for Dean, I was willing to do anything, but I hadn't a clue where to start. I remember, at one meeting, we were given six sheets of paper, six envelopes, 6 stamps, and six addresses of Dem voters in Iowa. We were told to hand write a letter to that voter explaining why they should vote for Dean. I did them all, but I gotta tell ya, I had NO IDEA what to say that would be a motivator, just from some words on a sheet of paper.

I think Dean is doing a much better job than Terry ever did! He's the ONLY Dem who can really convince me that we have a chance of winning!

[madfloridian]

3. First I heard about the MS wins. Why? Where are our bloggers on this?

If you get access to the DNC leader openly setting out policy issues, and it is not a secret...then why not report it?

Why was the only thing The American Prospect bothered to report a silly joke by Dean? Why did they just stick the audio up there with no other comment?

I am looking on the audio for the comments by Dean about the private database Harold Ickes is forming, which the DNC can not legally use.
There is so much on there.

[ananda]

4. Great idea..

.. Democracy Bonds! Smiling smiley.

Go Dean!

Sue

[madfloridian]

5. About the Harold Ickes private database.

Question about the Ickes database. (Harold Ickes is an advisor to Hillary Clinton. He is setting up a database, a private one....they were critical of the DNC's efforts on it.)

Questioner says it will be proprietary, and many are wondering if Hillary will benefit.

Dean handles this graciously, says Hillary had nothing to do with the database, it was just speculation. He says Ickes wants to build a proprietary list and that will present some legal problems for its use by the DNC. He says Ickes want to incorporate lists from sympathetic organizations such as environmental groups, etc. He thinks that is a good thing.

He further emphasizes that the party needs it own base, using the states as the sub-strata for building it, that can be used by all candidates without fear of who is going to be running the proprietary voter file. I guess he is saying there have been issues before about the voter files not being available to local candidates as they should be.

I am not sure what he means by all this, but I still think the Ickes move stunk. I think Dean is being far more gracious about this than I would be.

[MaineDem]

6. There are a number of companies that gather these voter lists

For a price. Ickes' group is for-profit, I believe.

The DNC and the states are partnering to develop an excellent resource for the DNC and the state parties. If Ickes wants to buy it, that's great. There is certain proprietary information that belongs to either the DNC or the states that won't be shared though.

[madfloridian]

7. Ickes is paying 10 million to start his own.

That is what I meant. Probably wasn't clear. He was critical of Dean and the DNC about theirs. Said they were worried about big donors for November and in 08. Dean's goal is different, to run a continuous campaign, to prevent the last minute rush to just a few states.

I have a new appreciation for databases. This is the first I have worked with an online one. I never fully realized just how Republican our precinct is...well, I knew it just never took it in. Most of the Democrats who are in our precinct are older, much older, and the younger folks most appear to be Republican.

Since we are just getting started here after years of almost inactivity in this area by the party, we are scratching our heads as to how to proceed. One thing I noticed is that a neighbor who acts, speaks, and in every way comes across as a conservative Republican...almost extreme...is actually a registered Democrat. Our jaws nearly fell to the floor.

I think the database by Ickes wouldn't have bothered me per se, it was the criticism that accompanied it. The DNC can not legally use it.

[calimary]

8. Hey, thanks, madfloridian! Thanks for the postmortems on this!

Get thee to the Greatest Page, so more people can read your documentation of Howard's good words.

He couldn't be more spot-on. And it's getting results. I'd like to see how Terry McAuliffe matches this. We're WINNING by taking the Good Doctor's prescriptions. AND we're healing our party, too.

[madfloridian]

9. Why thank you for that.

If it were at DailyKos I could post Tip Jar, but I don't like to beg for recommends.

It just irritates me that of all the people there at the breakfast..no one could post any of the things said. Well, they did post about Dean's saying he would ask Bush to declassify the info, and he did ask. But nothing else. That's what bloggers are for, to post information given them. That's why we see so many posts here about where are the Dems, where's Dean, etc. The info is there, it just never makes it around.

[OzarkDem]

10. All good ideas

I especially agree with the remarks about the voter files, I've been saying the same thing for years. Voter files should be accessible to local party organizations and should be worked even during non-election years.

[madfloridian]

11. More on focus on 06, 08, and beyond, and some more on the database.

My basic job here is to establish a long term plan for the Democratic Party. Chuck and Rahm need to focus on 06, and I am trying to be as helpful as I can there. But I'm focusing not just on 06 but on 08 on 2012 and beyond. There needs to be ongoing campaign that is always campaigning. They have that on the other side of the aisle, we need to build it and that's what we're doing.

Question: When will you data files be as sophisticated as the Republicans claim theirs is with all the consumer lists, etc.?

Answer from Dean: We already have that data. Terry got that data in before. It's all commercially acquirable and we did all that. The problem was the platform was too small, folks at the state level weren't trained to use it. Basically too much data, (unintelligible..sound muffled) became essentially unusable.

So we don't have to reacquire the data, we have to build a different kind of platform so we can make it work. Then we need to train the heck out of the people at the state level.

[shance]

12. Governor Dean is doing a terrific job. My concern is he and others

are working on things that cannot be effectively accomplished without dealing with the core issue.

The core issue being, that almost all of our votes are owned by privately backed Republican companies.

The issue of Republican owned companies is not nearly as important as the fact that ANY PRIVATE COMPANIES own our votes and our voting data. That is the issue and that is now a very sobering fact.

It affects every single American, irregardless how we vote.

The primary stockholders in our votes are Diebold and Election Systems and Software. When private companies own our votes, it means we have simply no way of ever knowing the true and factual outcome of any election because there is no traceable record, or if there is one, it is one that can far too easily be erased with a little help from friends.

I'm wondering how many more fraudulent elections will we need to endure before our leaders pay us the respect to hear the truth?

They know. They have to know now.

Why then, won't they address the most important issue affecting the future of this country and every single one of us, including them?

Many of our leaders might have the luxury of moving to Costa Rica or some other place if things get too bad here, however, most Americans don't.

Why is it so hard to address this issue? It is the only issue that will save any element of Democracy we have left.

[madfloridian]

13. We have been winning locally all over the country.

In this interview Dean really criticizes Diebold. He says he is talking to states about the problems. But I did not post it because I would be hearing but oh no he likes optical scans! So I won't bother to say that he and the party realize Diebold and other machines are a problem.

I do NOT get into the voting stuff anymore. And I won't. I do what I can for the party, but I get attacked when I express concerns that there is no moderation on this. I have been attacked here too much on the issue of voting machines, yet we are winning local and state elections even in the South. How? I ask but no one answers.

I think that congressional leaders should take care of this, don't you?

[shance]

14. MF*, it's not just about Diebold, its about the privatization.

Diebold is merely the symptom of the larger problem.

Floridian don't feign the victim and refuse to talk about the "voting stuff" anymore.

That is where our voice is.

It's not a trivial issue.

It is THE ISSUE.

It is our survival.

It's that important.

And the leadership has every responsibility to know this, it's their job. It's their future as well.

[madfloridian]

15. I did a lot of work on it, I know the issue is privatization.

But I am not playing a victim....God I hate it when people do that to others....geez.

I happen to agree, but I never agree enough, I am never positive enough, and so I gave up. No victim, just tired of being put down about it.

How are we winning? How did we win 4 state races in MS recently if the machines are that bad all over?

No one ever answers me.

Victim, no, that is a cop-out for people to try to use against others.

How did we win that OK mayor's race in Tulsa? Notice the others I mentioned as well.

[shance]

16. How did we win 4 state races in MS recently if the machines are that bad a

That's a good question, but not that difficult to answer.

Have you ever thought "they" may actually be bright enough to realize the value in prioritizing their so-called
'winning' races, and understand and use rational caution from being too obvious in producing fraudulent elections so it might blow their cover and create a legitimate class action lawsuit and/or too much unecessary publicity?

Mississippi is not exactly the bastion of bipartisanship, is it?

What better place to control the outcome without any unecessary scrutiny and/or concern?

I have no idea, nor of course do any of us know about Mississippi.

But we should have very justifiable doubts, not to mention, are those Democrats really Dems just because they SAY they are?

The most important issue is we have NO, along with any other Mississippi citizens, NO immediate public access to their voting data.

It's primarily, no, excuse me, ALL in the hands of those who say "trust us". Those Republicans nonetheless who say "trust us". I hope I am wrong, I don't think I am.

So that should say to most, that the fix is in.

How can you prove those elections are legitimate Floridian? How can you prove just because Democrats won?

THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE OR THE CORE PROBLEM. IT IS IRRELEVANT IF NO ONE CAN ASSURE IT IS FAIR AND TRACEABLE.

There is a lot to be said in being too obvious.

Just look at the last few "close" races. How in the hay do we actually know and prove they were close? We don't. We just have to trust those that have proven not to be trustworthy.

They've got bigger fish to fry Floridian, than in Mississippi.

[madfloridian]

17. I agree with a lot of what you said.

However, I am going to let others work on that. I tried it for a long time, and I got scammed and misled, and when I tried again people here went after me for not trying hard enough.

There is enough work to go around. I will do my thing, and I will avoid the subject of the machines in the future. It is a topic here that makes people hurt other people too much.

[shance]

18. This IS the issue Floridian.

Everything else unfortunately is irrelevant until Americans and our leaders have the guts to face this one.

[madfloridian]

19. How to keep up with what is going on in your state.

http://www.democrats.org/local.html

You can go to each state's website and blog from this page.