Keeping Obama's Campaign "Army" Mobilized as a Force for Change in Peacetime
Gara LaMarche
Posted November 7, 2008 07:32 AM (EST)
Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gara-lamarche/keeping-obamas-campaign-a_b_142027.html
Speaking to tens of thousands of his supporters in Chicago's Grant Park, President-elect Barack Obama said his smashing victory was not about him but about "you." In his effort to unify, he meant all of America, but he also was crediting a very special group of people -- his "peacetime army" of millions of volunteers and contributors who grew the electorate and upended the electoral map in the name of change.
The key question now for Obama and all who support the change he called for is, "What happens to this peacetime army?" This powerful force was galvanized by Obama and his campaign. His Web site allowed any supporter to act immediately, and it reached millions with a flood of targeted e-mails and text messages. The campaign organized tens of thousands of events through which Americans reached out to other Americans. Many thousands of paid and volunteer organizers worked for months to register voters, identify supporters and get them to the polls. They travelled to battleground states to knock on doors and make their case for change in person. In many states, Obama's on-the-ground presence dwarfed that not only of the McCain campaign, but of the Democratic Party and virtually every other contemporary political institution and social movement in American society.
Ordinarily when a presidential campaign ends, organizers disperse and some of them join the administration, if the campaign has been successful. The list of donors and volunteers is often treated as a precious, proprietary political resource to be sold or loaned to allies. Obama's was no ordinary campaign, and that business-as-usual approach would be a mistake in this extraordinary year when so many want change.
While Governor Sarah Palin taunted Obama for being a "community organizer, whatever that is," Obama understands better than anyone who has been elected to the presidency that true political power and progress depend not only on presidential leadership, but on an engaged citizenry, and that elections are a crucial but only passing moment in the life of our democracy. To govern effectively and promote his agenda on economic security, energy, expanded health coverage, education, the restoration of civil liberties and other matters, Obama will need to keep his army mobilized. Doing this is as important as drafting legislation and picking cabinet secretaries.
Obama and all those who want to seize the moment for progressive change need these talented and passionate organizers who helped deliver the presidency to stay in the field and work with state and local organizations to deliver the change that Obama promised and they labored for. They would offer a huge boost to local coalitions and organizations, many of which are far less powerful and sophisticated than the Obama campaign.
These organizers are essential to sustaining the passion and engagement of millions of donors and online activists, who can take action in support of the agenda they share with Obama.
Progressives understand that this army needs to be a force for keeping the new administration true to its promises - supporting Obama when it agrees with him, pushing him when he needs to be bolder, and opposing him when they disagree. They did that this summer when thousands of Obama supporters used the campaign Web site to convey their dismay with his support for a Congressional compromise on government surveillance of U.S. citizens under the Foreign Intelligence Services Act. In the tough challenges ahead, this peacetime army can press Obama to stay true to his promises and his supporters.
Obama understands better than any other politician that the success of his agenda depends on his supporters being mobilized and engaged. What we have seen in the last year is a rebirth of participatory democracy, infused by the energy of millions. Imagine what this energy can do if it channeled into ongoing action.
"THESE ARE THE TIMES THAT TRY MEN"S SOULS"...AGAIN... TIME FOR PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY?
What we may not be so quick to recall, however, is that there was much debate between the founding fathers as to what model our system of government should follow. Those such as Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and Patrick Henry on one side favored a pure and direct democracy with the legislative power vested in the very hands of the people, while others such as James Madison, John Adams and George Washington held that a representative democracy would better serve the people than a true democracy because they believed it would protect the individual liberties of the minority from the will of the majority. Alexander Hamilton even went so far as to support the creation of a monarchy. In the end, those favoring representative democracy won the day and that is the system they put in place in the hopes of creating a "more perfect union."
Now we must ask ourselves, what would the founding fathers think if they were resurrected today to see what has become of their vision? One can only assume that they would begin to search for modern day patriots to meet them once again at the liberty tree in order to plan a new struggle for freedom and self governance. Although we continue to praise and honor those who founded our nation and sought to create a truly just form of government for it, do we really stop to reflect on whether we as a nation have in fact succeeded in preserving what they fought so hard to create?
Today, in contrast to our revolutionary ancestors, we as citizens of the United States generally observe politics from afar and the vast majority of us may participate in the political process only to the extent that we go to the polls once a year to vote. Over the decades and centuries we have allowed the erosion of the ideals of the founding fathers and the corruption of the principles which they enshrined in those so carefully conceived documents. We have been left with essentially no real power to influence our "democratically" elected officials. We may write an occasional letter to our senator or representative that generates a form letter in response and a statistical data entry that may or may not be weighed against the influence of some powerful corporate lobby. We may be permitted to participate in a march or demonstration of thousands or even millions, something our patriots of old would have marvelled at, only to be dismissed as a 'focus group' with no bearing on policy decisions.
How then is the government held accountable to the voice of the people? Are the people meant to speak only at the polls when given a choice between a select few candidates that may be equally corrupt? No, as Jefferson and his allies rightly believed, the people should be heard much more than that.
In spite of their good intentions, the system of representative democracy that the founding fathers opted for has been systematically undermined and has ultimately failed in preserving the well being of the people of this nation. Most of us accept this reality as being beyond our control and continue to observe, comment, and complain without aspiring to achieving any real change. Our local leaders and activists in our communities, and even those local elected officials who may have the best of intentions are for the most part powerless to make real positive change happen in our neighborhoods, towns and villages when there is so much corruption from above.
We have become so accustomed to this failed system of representative democracy that it may not occur to us that there are other alternative forms of democracy. In various places around the world participatory or direct democracy has been instituted both in concert with representative democracy, and as a replacement for it. It is a form of democracy that is designed to take directly into account your views, and the views of your neighbors, and to politically empower you to make real positive change possible in your communities. Initiative, referendum & recall, community councils, and grassroots organizing are but a few ways in which direct/participatory democracy is achieving great success around the world.
This site will attempt to explore in depth the concept of participatory democracy and how this grass-roots based form of governance could help bring us back in line with the principles this country was founded upon if it were allowed to take root here. In the hope that one day we can become a nation working together as a united people practicing true democracy as true equals, we open this forum…
CLICK ON YOUR STATE FOR CURRENT BALLOT MEASURES - COURTESY OF BALLOTPEDIA
Monday, November 10, 2008
OBAMA'S ARMY: PARTICIPATION BEGINS, NOT ENDS, ON ELECTION DAY
Posted by
Democracy By The People
at
6:49 PM
0
comments
Labels: 2008 Elections, Activism, Barack Obama, Participatory Democracy, Youth Vote
THE NOVEMBER 5TH COALITION
We the editors have been saying for a long time now that the struggle for a more participatory and direct democracy must begin in earnest on election day 2008. The historic election of Barack Obama to the presidency of the United States does not signal the end of that struggle, but rather that our voices must be raised louder than ever, and our activism and participation in politics must be raised to the highest level possible. This is because with this election, the doors to the corridors of power in Washington appear to be opened ever so slightly, perhaps enough that for the first time in decades 'we the people' have a real chance of getting our foot in the door enough to bully our way in. This will of course require maintaining and increasing the levels of popular political activism we have experienced during this campaign. If we do not, we run the risk of missing an historic opportunity for change. Real change will come from the people, not from Obama alone. - Editor
New Civic Politics
Source: http://www.novemberfifth.org/
Enough is enough.
America's politics should be driven by the priorities of the people, not sound bites, special interest money, partisan gridlock, and polarizing rhetoric.
It is time for a change.
We believe that politics cannot and should not be a spectator sport. No politician, party or ideology will solve America's mounting problems alone. Only by providing authentic opportunities for the people to be part of the solution can we rebuild trust in our political institutions and create mandates for meaningful action on the critical issues facing our nation.
We challenge candidates and each other to recognize lessons from communities across the nation and around the world where citizens have played vital roles in addressing difficult problems that range from health care to education reform, from keeping communities safe to climate change. We need an outpouring of ideas about how Americans can build on this history, developing skills of working together across divisions of party, faith, race, income, and geography to address common issues. Such work is difficult. But it is crucial.
The November 5th Coalition is an all-partisan alliance committed to civic partnerships that address our biggest challenges. The Coalition is named for the day after the election in 2008 when a new chapter of America's civic history begins. Wherever the people gather they should be able to ask candidates “November 5th questions” about how they plan to tap the talents of the whole society, instead of posing as superheroes who will solve our problems for us. We will also develop leadership networks and civic policies that can serve as resources for a new administration. We encourage our fellow citizens to join with us in calling on candidates to rise above excessively divisive partisanship and to promote the common good.
We invite all Americans to help us shape a new civic politics that can galvanize the energies of the nation, drawing us from the shopping mall back into the public square. We must renew Abraham Lincoln's “government of the people, by the people, for the people,” to achieve a rebirth of liberty and justice for all in the 21st century.
Goals
We will intervene by:
Creating an environment in which it pays for candidates to engage with other politicians and citizens in more authentic, productive, citizen-centered ways. Modeling better forms of interaction between candidates and voters.
Making it more difficult for candidates to get away with fake versions of civic engagement on the campaign trail (such as town meetings that are scripted and controlled)
Creating an environment in which it pays for candidates to propose serious policies, programs, or ways of governing that will enhance citizen-centered politics. Making visible and strengthening the array of policy options and ideas for citizen-centered politics.
Reconceiving the campaign as about all of us -- and what we will all do after the election, not simply to get someone elected
Using the campaign season to direct attention to citizen-centered activities that are already going on and groups already doing public work
Ensuring that we have a political system and democracy that welcomes the participation of everyone (rather than prohibiting it
Posted by
Democracy By The People
at
6:42 PM
0
comments
Labels: 2008 Elections, Activism, Nov. 5th Coalition, Participatory Democracy, Youth Vote
Sunday, June 1, 2008
MYSPACE - MTV DEBATES
We can certainly hope that efforts such as the Myspace and MTV debates earlier in the campaign will be successful in raising awareness about the issues at hand and empowering youth to participate in politics. With growing consequences of the economic problems confronting young people each day, and their implications for future generations, it is imperative that we take advantage of every opportunity to wrest control from placating politicians who would just as soon silence young oppositional voices. In order to create the change we want to see, the doors to Washington must be opened even further to the youth of today. The Winter Soldier events around the nation and continued protest against the war in Iraq show that some young people are taking a stand against violence and destruction, but the pressure must continue especially after the elections to adequately change policies that have traditionally left youth feeling powerless and ignored politically. -Editor
The blogosphere seems abuzz with optimism about the forums, the latest evidence that 2008 won't be your mother and father's election. "MTV and MySpace have hit up an interactive format with the potential to pioneer a whole new way of doing candidate debates/forums," writes Michael Connery , co-founder of Future Majority, a prominent blog with well-done reporting on progressive youth politics.
I'm trying to remain hopeful that the forums will "empower [young people] to connect with presidential candidates in a much more meaningful way," as MTV President Christina Norman promises. They do seem to have the potential to provide much more substantive and straightforward insights into the candidates' views than both the traditional debates, which Connery notes are "nothing but 60 second sound-byte marathons," and the CNN/YouTube debate, which felt like nothing more than a sound bite marathon with that dreamy Anderson Cooper rephrasing questions from viewers who had no chance to ask follow-ups. Candidates will be hit with questions submitted live via instant messaging, text messaging and e-mailing (would've been nice to see some Skype action and viewers will have the chance to rate candidates' responses in realtime through a continuous live poll.
These could be the ingredients for a new kind of truly democratic debate where candidates will refrain from going on talking-point tangents filled with nonspeak. But I'm still a bit skeptical that the MTV/MySpace debates will be able to succeed where the YouTube debate fell flat. No candidates really had their feet held to the fire in the YouTube debate because CNN editors chose what questions were used rather than, say, letting viewers vote on which question they'd like to see asked. How will the MySpace debates be any different if MTV editors are simply letting young people submit questions and then letting candidates have a go at the ones they want answered?
Despite my doubts, these new debates will give young people a chance to inject themselves into the national discussion leading up to the election. I wrote last week that campaigns must focus more on engaging young voters. Participating in these debates seems to be a step in the right direction. My only fear is that some student who's just dying to know whether Barack Obama wears boxers or briefs or if Ron Paul lights up ("Aren't libertarians just Republicans who smoke weed?") will make the entire millennial generation look bad.
These debates are clearly an idea whose time has come as the media has failed in its coverage of the race so far, focusing more on cleavage than policy and turning the election into a two-person contest months before the first vote will be cast. I just hope MTV and MySpace find a way to use the forums to generate a truly participatory debate, not just advertising revenues.
Posted by
Democracy By The People
at
8:54 PM
0
comments
Labels: MTV, Myspace, Youth Vote
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
STUDENTS RALLY TO PARTICIPATE
As this transcript from Democracy Now! demonstrates, young people in geat numbers are getting involved in the presidential campaigns. This has much to do with the message of change pushed by the candidates in the democratic party and the hope people have to make it happen. Widespread participation in the campaigns has the potential to grow into more widespread participation in this country's democratic process to ensure that the promised changes are cariied out. In order to create a successful campaign and a legitimate government that adequately responds to the people who seek to combat and reverse the injustices imposed by the current administration, candidates must continue to foster participation from diverse sectors of society and acknowledge their contribution by effecting tangible changes in the current oppressive system. These excerpts from debates and personal accounts of the pre-primary jubilee below exemplify that participation, in this case straight out of New Hampshire. - Editor
In the Democratic race, two new polls show Barack Obama with a whopping double-digit lead over Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, after earlier ones suggested he had just drawn even. A USA Today/Gallup poll said Obama had opened up a thirteen-point lead over Clinton. The same poll showed John Edwards running a distant third.
On the Republican side, surveys indicate John McCain is leading in New Hampshire. The USA Today/Gallup poll said McCain had a four-point advantage over Mitt Romney, with Mike Huckabee, the Republican winner in Iowa, way back.
New Hampshire has been flooded with campaign volunteers of every stripe, but the story of 2008 is the youth vote. Melissa Harris-Lacewell is a professor of politics and African American studies at Princeton University. She is leading a group of Princeton students in New Hampshire to volunteer with the presidential campaigns of their choice. She joins us now from New Hampshire. We’ll soon turn to the students. Welcome, Professor Harris-Lacewell.
MELISSA HARRIS-LACEWELL: Thanks for having me.
AMY GOODMAN: Describe the scene to us in New Hampshire.
Yesterday I was at a John Edwards, and it was a much more intimate venue. It was sort of a town hall meeting, both John and Elizabeth Edwards taking questions from the people in the audience. And I’ll say, you know, in that kind of intimate event, it was really nice. You got a chance to see Edwards and his wife interacting. They were telling jokes. They had campaign supporters there with them. And they were answering questions in a very serious way.
We went over to the Dennis Kucinich office a little bit later in the day and saw folks there, talked to them about how they were feeling about being shut out of one of the debates and what that meant for, you know, their possibilities of really getting a groundswell here that would push some of the front-running candidates to address some progressive political issues. So it really is—I mean, seriously, on every single corner, there is this kind of participatory democratic system going on.
Melody Chan, why Barack Obama? Explain what you’ve been doing in New Hampshire and how you got involved in presidential politics this year.
I mean, I absolutely believe so much in Barack Obama’s, I guess, core values and the ideas that he represents and also just the power he has to inspire people. I mean, I was at that same rally in Nashua, and, I mean, it was kind of like a rock concert, you know? Like he was just—he took over the crowd, and there was so much excitement. And it was like—it was really electrifying.
AMY GOODMAN: What most appeals to you about him? Are there positions he has taken that you deeply care about?
And then, for me, the why Hillary question? Every time I go to a door and knock on it and someone will give me two seconds to actually say something to them, that’s what I say to them. So my—sort of my pitch is that I truly believe in her experience and her strength as a person to bring about those policy issues, be it healthcare, energy, withdrawing from Iraq. And I think—I wish—and what I love to see is when people get into her presence, they feel that same inspiration that you hear talked about Barack Obama, and I believe he has it, too. But I just have become really fired up being at these rallies with her and Bill and Chelsea and just the rest of the supporters.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to play an excerpt from Saturday night’s Democratic presidential debate on ABC, where tensions ran high between the three frontrunners of the Iowa caucus: Senator Barack Obama, Senator Edwards and Senator Hillary Clinton. Richardson was also there. Congressmember Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel were excluded, so we will be talking to a student who is for Dennis Kucinich in a minute. The excerpt begins with John Edwards.
Now, what I would say is this: Any time you speak out powerfully for change, the forces of status quo attack. That’s exactly what happens. It’s fine to have a disagreement about healthcare. To say that Senator Obama is having a debate with himself from some Associated Press story, I think, is just not—that’s not the kind of discussion we should be having. I think that every time this happens, what will occur every time he speaks out for change, every time I fight for change, the forces of status quo are going to attack every single time. And what we have to remember—and this is the overarching issue here, because what we really need in New Hampshire and in future state primaries is we need an unfiltered debate between the agents of change, about how we bring about that change, because we have differences about that. But the one thing I do not argue with him about is he believes deeply in change, and I believe deeply in change. And anytime you’re fighting for that—I mean, I didn’t hear these kinds of attacks from Senator Clinton when she was ahead. Now that she’s not, we hear them. And anytime you speak out, anytime you speak out for change, this is what happens.
I want to make change, but I’ve already made change. I will continue to make change. I’m not just running on a promise of change, I’m running on thirty-five years of change. I’m running on having taken on the drug companies and the health insurance companies, taking on the oil companies.
So, you know, I think it is clear that what we need is somebody who can deliver change. And we don’t need to be raising the false hopes of our country about what can be delivered. The best way to know what change I will produce is to look at the changes that I’ve already made.
GOV. BILL RICHARDSON: Well, I’ve been in hostage negotiations that are a lot more civil than this.
AMY GOODMAN: The Democratic presidential debate Saturday night with ABC. We’re joined by a Princeton University student who is working for one of the candidates who was excluded from that debate, Dennis Kucinich. Michael Collins is volunteering for his campaign in New Hampshire. Welcome, Michael. Why Kucinich?
So Kucinich is someone who’s kind of an outsider. He’s often said as being ridiculous or crazy, but he’s pretty mainstream. He wants healthcare for everyone. And I think that’s something that a lot of people can agree with, and it’s something that I certainly believe in. So Kucinich, although he’s seen as an outsider or someone who’s a little bit radical, is a pretty reasonable guy. And he’s an outsider, and I think that helps get in—helps him—gives him a different vantage point that a lot of people simply can’t afford, because they’re being paid off by people, they’re getting a lot of funding from people who are, you know, perverting the democracy that we are trying to participate in up here in New Hampshire.
AMY GOODMAN: Michael Collins, I want to thank you for being with us, volunteering for Dennis Kucinich’s campaign; also Melody Chan and Regina Lee.
Posted by
Democracy By The People
at
8:19 AM
0
comments
Labels: 2008 Elections, Youth Vote
Monday, February 4, 2008
MILLENIALS START PARTICIPATING
The youth vote is going to be taken seriously by candidates in the upcoming election because the Millenials are interested in politics and will be showing up en masse to vote. The article below points out that "Generation Y" is concerned with various issues, but most importantly, the way that the government functions. Students and workers strive for more control of the government, not through representation but also through direct partcipation. Considering that representatives have thus far been unresponsive to nation-wide anti-war demonstrations, it is time that a new generation take the tools at hand and begin to make their voices heard. Regardless of political stance, Millenials will have to work together to change the status quo through use of projects like the National Initiative and others that are mentioned on this blog. While some candidates have been advocating "change" in their campaigns, only the people can really create a participatory democracy. -Editor
By Michelle Conlin (source: BusinessWeek.com)
Earlier than most of his rivals, Barack Obama sensed that a youthquake was rumbling deep inside the American electorate. For months, his campaign has put a premium on reaching out to YouTube (GOOG) disaffecteds. So far the strategy is paying off, helped along, no doubt, by the candidate's hip, un-boomer persona. The 46-year-old Illinois senator's surprise victory in the Iowa caucuses and close second-place finish to New York Senator Hillary Clinton in the New Hampshire Democratic primary were fueled largely by hordes of twentysomethings in hoodies—the oft-pierced-and-tattooed generation that has come to be known as the Millennials, or Gen Y.
No one can predict with certainty how much influence this cohort will have on the coming election. After all, youth-backed candidates have faltered before. (Ask Howard Dean.) But the so-called echo baby boom has size on its side: nearly 43 million people aged 18 to 29, according to the Census Bureau, or 20% of registered voters. That and this group's hyperconnectedness (all those Facebook friends and MySpace (NWS) pages) have convinced many pundits and economists that something seismic could be coming.
Across the political spectrum, they say, Millennials are mobilizing around the idea that the federal government's operating system is in dire need of a sweeping update. Iowa and New Hampshire proved that candidates ignore these voters at their peril. Youth turnout surged by 25 percentage points in the Granite State over 2004, according to the Student Public Interest Research Group, which is dedicated to getting young people to the polls.... (Click here to read full article)
Posted by
Democracy By The People
at
1:20 AM
0
comments
Labels: Millenials, Participatory Democracy, Youth Vote