Something I don't understand about the Democratic Party and getting a message out.

[Skidmore]

I've talked about this before and over a period of years on this board. Heck, I've even written the DNC about this. Now, if the party has an official position on something and these stupid news shows need to interview people about Dem positions, why doesn't the party have a "stable" (for want of a better word) of designated go-to people who are experts on different topics and can address them in interviews. I'm sick of seeing Begala, Carville, and Brazile as the faces of the Democratic Party. I don't think they represent us well nor are they experts on anything but spin. Right now people need to hear truth, not spin. I have no problem with elected officials being spokespersons, they need to speak to the nation to let us know what they are doing and why.

It just seems to me that the Dems could come up with a better communications system. It has improved somewhat but there needs to be some new faces and I believe that it needs to be made clear that there is a set number of people who can speak to official party positions on different issues.

Now I'm sure some poli sci person will be on this thread shortly telling me a dozen reasons why spinmeisters should be embraced and given contracts in this life and the next. I'm not interested so save your keystrokes. I'm interested in some truthmeisters.

[Mr Rabble]

1. I think you likely dont understand the process.

My understanding is that people like Begala, Brazille, etc...are NOT chosen by the DNC, but by the networks.

Larry Johnson explained this process in Outfoxed.

The last thing that GE/Disney/Viacom wants to do is have a coherent Democratic spokesperson.

[bluedeminredstate]

2. You're absolutely right on this.

In fact a few months ago, W'Hora O'Donnell was on Hard Ball bitching that the DNC wouldn't return her phone calls to get a spokesman on the show to comment on some big news story (I can't remember what it was, but it was around the time of the election). She pissed and moaned that she had tried for three days to get a Democrat on the show with no luck. She may have been full of shit, but it certainly isn't the kind of thing the party needs reporters and pundits complaining about on television.
It looks so amateur.

[Mr Rabble]

3. She's full of shit.

No chance in hell that's at all true.

What she meant was that she couldn't find a DNC spokesperson who was willing to be thrashed and beaten over a manufactured "news" story.

[madfloridian]

4. First of all...

No one can keep Carville and Begala off TV. They may be working informally or formally with Clinton's campaign, but they are hired by CNN.

Now, guess who is in charge of message control in the new congress...Rahm Emanuel. It is his job.

When Dean took over chairman of the DNC, Reid and Pelosi told him he would not be involved in setting policy. When he speaks his mind he gets not so nice reminders, from what I have seen.

So talk to the Rahmbo about message, Nancy Pelosi put him in charge of it.

[blm]

5. I've said the same for YEARS, Skidmore. There was no stable of spokespeople

for the Dem party except those from the 90s schooled only in defending Clinton. They were incompetent and knew little about Gore, the 2002 candidates and Kerry, the 2004 nominee.

Ignorant of other Democrats by design? Quite probably.