Now that the election is over, there’s a few things to be said about the contest in the 1st congressional district that I held back out of respect to the campaigns. As a citizen who is diametrically opposed to nearly everything Rep. Paul Ryan stands for, I can now say I’m thoroughly embarrassed by the Democratic challenger’s campaign and her showing in this election.
From the get go, I knew the odds were overwhelming, that it would be a long hard slog for anybody running against the GOP’s corporate funded 'chosen one.’ But I held out some hope that the right candidate who can prepare for and compete with Ryan’s deceptive rhetoric, flawed policies and partisanship, would have a chance in a Democratic year. That was not to be, Ryan won handily.
Marge Krupp came out of the chutes early on running against Ryan with guns blazing and all the right talking points only to fall flat during the most critical time of the season. After attending several candidate forums and listening intently to all the candidates, I never could figure how anyone could repeatedly say they’re running a full-time campaign against Ryan, say “watch me” and not show up to some of the most critical candidate forums. There was a glaring public absence and a Ryan-like disconnect as well as a disengagement of the blogosphere. Perhaps her advisers and those closest to her suggested to do this, but it became evident many irreversible mistakes were being made throughout the campaign.
Yet, with Ryan's wrong-headed participation in the Bush Wall Street bail-out, he literally handed over a gift to the challenger. Instead of presenting a basic outline to an alternative solution, the Democrat came out in support of the bail-out! Only to reverse direction after learning Sen. Russ Feingold voted against it!! That sealed the deal.
Despite all this, Ryan knew if the people in his district were to ever pick up on his punishing economics, that if they connect their unemployment, home foreclosures, debt and spiraling down quality of life to his representation in Congress – that if they think America is headed in the wrong direction and notice he's one of the drivers - they just might throw him out the door. He knew - he wasn't willing to take that chance - he didn't spend over a million dollars for nothing.
But this is where it all begins – in the trenches on the front lines of local politics. As long as the locals keep splitting their votes and compromising their principles to achieve some imaginary balance, if we continue to send the wrong people to Congress and to the state legislature, we get what we deserve.
America is liberated, Obama will be President - while we continue to cling to the status quo in our little corner of Wisconsin.
31 comments:
Where was the male misogynist worshiping democratic party that is supposed to help new candidates? Out raising another million for the Chosen One? You'd think this district would be worth a major infusion of democratic support but I guess that is only done for celebrity males with no experience and no record.
This goes to show that even in districts that should be competitive, this is a slightly democratic seat, you still need a real candidate who can show that they are credible before others step in to help. Krupp, unfortunately, was no where near credible.
Did she actually do worse than Thomas?
Instead of going door to door and showing up at debates, she went to Washington to hobnob with the political elite. She did better than Thomas did in his first three attempts but not better than his last. It is disgraceful. Greenconsciousness is right, the democratic party wasn't there for her.
But Krupp was never really "in it."
She probably went looking for money. But here is the thing ---Obama won in Rock Co didn't he??? Did he lose in Rock Co? Because if he won, why didn't the Dems just vote for her when they voted for him?
How does a male Dem win and a female lose? Unless Dems voted for Ryan?
Green Consciousness, you make a great point about democratic voters. But I can't believe Krupp lost because of voter sexism. In fact, I felt her gender would have been worth 2% to 4% over the 35% base.
The cloaked GOP enabled media have been pushing a non-partisan voter doctrine for decades in Wisconsin, selling it as the right choice for smart voters. Some Wisconsinites pride themselves as superior and independent voters because they think they're doing the right thing splitting their vote on diametrically opposed partisans. The split-ticket doctrine is an extraction from the first Progressive movement after it collapsed into the modern movement.
But this is the ultimate contradiction, who could vote for both Obama and Ryan except your most politically ignorant or intellectually vacant person? The comedy here is that these are the voters first to complain about the partisan bickering and legislative gridlock in congress.
I have to study the numbers more, but at first glance, it appears a bunch of voters pulled the lever only for Obama and then walked away.
The Democratic Party has a large and strong base in South-central/eastern Wisconsin, but it's still playing against those old rules. They continue to bring a knife to a gunfight.
It does look like anywhere from 8,400 voters crossed over from Obama/Biden and voted for either Theron or Ryan in Rock County. And 1,500 voted only Obama/Biden without voting for any other office.
http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/
This is the link to the reclusive leftist website - someone who was a life long Democrat as I am. At her site, on your right half way down, there is a column called RECENT POSTS; look for titles "why you should not vote BO No 1,2,3,4,...." -- There she has documented all BO's and the Democrat party's sexism against white women and women globally in this last primary.
It is not credible that you can hear rap, watch TV, watch the reaction to Hillary and Palin, see the loss of equal pay for equal work in a Dem majority congress and dare to say this woman did not lose because of Dem sexism.
If you honestly believe after this campaign that a white democrat women did not get the same number of votes as AA BO because of some split vote theory you are like the southern racists who had a thousand reasons why blacks were poor most dealing with they did not do right or were not as good.
I'm not saying sexism doesn't exist. Sexists and racists can't die away quickly enough for me. And I agree that women on the left are treated very differently than women on the right from the center-right male AND female majority. Yet if people in the 1st CD voted their political principles from the top of the ticket on down - Krupp would have won.
Obama won the 1st CD, but he did not carry the ticket. This is a weakness of the local democratic party. Jeffrey Thomas lost several times against Ryan with identical numbers - and he's not a female.
The split vote doctrine is more than a theory, it's backed up by numbers. People in America have the right to disregard their principles and vote for a candidate for any reason of their choosing - and that includes misogyny.
Basing a vote on whether the candidate is male, female, black, white, hispanic, rich, poor or their education or religion is discrimination. It exists - practicing it feeds the split vote doctrine, but again, it can't die away fast enough for me.
I'm a democrat first when it come to my politics and my vote - and I'd rather be a partisan than a phony or a bigot any time of the day.
The video of Palin being tackled by a black football player was designed to raise racist and women's passions against Obama. You seriously can't believe Obama would try to win votes with that - It was a slick piece of GOP-propagandist garbage.
The posts on the reclusive leftist are actually titled "If you vote for Obama, this is what you are voting for...."
The Palin porn tape made and applauded on the Huffington Post and Kos is only the last post -- there are 20 others.
I once again voted for the Dem empty suit but I admire the women who wrote in Hillary and despise myself for supporting what I know is coming.
I ignored the misogyny in the hope BO would regulate the utilities and predatory lenders, make green energy prevalent and provide health care.
Already he is saying not until his second term (read hold out the same crumb and the starving will jump again)
The story of Marge Krupp has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with attitude.
What does the story of Hillary got to do with?
Oh it is attitude all right but not Krupp's. It is about mass culture's misogyny and how it is sold by MSM.
Wait till you're all under a bridge watching the newly legalized foreign workers take the jobs bought from citizen taxpayer bailouts and lost pensions. That is the "thank you" your sexism has bought you. Because the men who can do no wrong care only about their voting block and making it as large as possible. Their power not this country and it's citizens will be all that matters.
Green Consciousness, I agree with all of your points, except how you arrive at some of them. By re-electing Ryan again by the same margins, the people in the 1st CD declared a mandate. They've said we like the Bush economy, we want higher local taxes, we want unequal pay for equal work, we want illegals working here on a guest-worker program, we want to give our Treasury and SS over to Wall Street fat cats, we want polluted air, water and soil, we want to outsource more jobs, we don't want federal help for economic development, we want our rights taken away from us and on and on. By a 2 to 1 margin the people here have spoken, and I will keep reminding them of their wants since they re-elected a politician like Ryan - over and over again.
Good for You L.K.!
Why don't you try to interview Marge Krupp and ask HER the questions raised here? Maybe for the Gazette or Madison magazine? Otherwise this just looks like the same post campaign sexist quarterbacking that Palin and Hillary went through. True, Krupp can't expose the Dem's Party if she wants to run again but she can explain some things by saying she wants to explain the hurdles any new candidate will face and talk about the ways WI Dems could win in hot districts. What new candidates need from the party and why women should be supported (no one represents our issues but those similarly situated and not many of them so not ANY woman). Maybe you could find out if Krupp identifies with women and got the same help from Robinson as Sheridan did.
It's a little late for that now. It's over.
Seriously, I was elated that two women (Garin and Krupp) were talking the talk and willing to challenge Ryan. Right-wingers like Ryan or Huebsch in the state assembly are thrown off their game facing a woman. Not all men are like that. They had just as difficult of a time with Robson - so they pushed her out. Not to downplay the sexism, but that aspect is at play, albeit a minor role in my view.
I would have been more than happy to meet with Krupp and discuss my views and a game plan, same with Garin or Hebert if they won the primary, but Krupp never reached out and instead hired big name advisors. That was her prerogative. That's why I also rarely mentioned her campaign or positions during that time - I assumed they knew what they're doing and I'm not going to be stepping on their toes while they battle against Ryan.
On the other hand, I did not see Robson, Feingold, Kind, Kohl, Doyle, Sheridan, Baldwin or other popular Wisconsin Dems campaign for Krupp. In that sense, they let her hang out to dry. But they never really came out to support Thomas either. Principles over personality? Attitude over party loyality?
Yes, I think you were wise not to intrude while it was going on, but now?
I think we need some post election analysis and evaluation in WI. We need a spotlight on the Dem Club because they LOSE too much. They function like a clique and an old boys club. The policies are determined by the unseen hand.
I wish I could read things that would lead to reform and equal access rules. I wish someone could follow the money and expose the distribution process. We need reform to level the playing field. A candidate should be able to know if they do this and that to show they are viable, then they are entitled to this and that from the party. But before we can get to that stage the public needs to hear from the losers about what really happened.
WHY wasn't EVERYTHING done to defeat Ryan by the Dem party? I think it is because he gets along very well with the Baldwins and such -- when you are all working for agribusiness and the chamber of commerce, why rock the boat?
What better time to let it air out than now?
As a democrat, I'm explaining what I saw without reservation, yet, many saw it the same way but won't say a thing. At the same time, I get 'thank you' e-mails frequently. Many (readers) also felt burned by the bail-out, that they did not know where their senator or representative stood until it was over. Several weeks ago I googled "ryan challengers bail out position" and I got my own page!! Now if I'm the last word on the bail-out, I'm flattered, but I was looking for other viewpoints. There were none.
It's fine that Ryan is recognized as a rising star in his party, I think he exemplifies everything what the GOP always stood for. Palin is right there too. But, does that mean democrats should tolerate them at re-election time for political tokens in Congress? I should think not - but they do.
But you're absolutely right about the "old boys club." Politicians become entrenched and circle the wagons when they feel threatened by "not one of them," or an outsider who is not looking for a hand-out. Between incumbents from both sides, elections might really come down to a personality contest. Principles and values be damned.
That's why we need term limits and a retirement age in Congress to let in new ideas and a fresh perspective. 14 - 16 years for the House and 18 years for a senator. And 75 sounds like a good ripe age to me to throw a retirement party.
As a citizen blogger I'm not beholden to a party or a person, my self-described partisanship is in defense of democratic principles and values only, until something better comes along if ever.
Let me just say as an insider that when Marge was offered help by numerous people, she simply told us to "write a check" so that she could buy consultants.
Not much of a way to build coalitions.
Anonymous, that's the way I saw it too.
Could you both talk about what she should have done? Obviously she was told by those already elected to hire consultants AND told WHO to hire. I imagine that is the "help" offered to most potential politicians by the Baldwins, Kohls and Feingolds as well as Wineke and the poor as churchmouse party. Yet they did more for Baldwin and others.
The real democrat party failure is at the state level where republicans spend most of the year fighting over how they can shoot more birds (even now swans). Meanwhile my mother and I are losing our home over taxes that are about $4,000.00 a year here in Janesville on a 50 year old home. Most of which tax goes to schools. Schools filled with children whose parents rent instead of own houses, therefore parents who pay NO property taxes and reproduce endlessly because they think it is moral to do so. Then at Easter their churches who also pay NO property taxes and do not allow their employees to reproduce bring my mother baskets filled with sugar crucifixes. Where is the democrat PARTY during and before elections in the state of WI. The unions are working for the illegals in lawsuits to prevent ID checks and those are the only visible arms of the Dem party. No citizen worker trusts the AFL-CIO. The UAW still has some credibility but is broken because it never fought the bosses for retooling instead of profit grabbing by the executives. The Dem party is an empty shell -- the same people talking to one another. It does no issue organizing because it wants to be a club not a mass based democratic organization. Those that have power want to keep it. Ryan is a club member so he stays. All those women with issues - don't get involved - too controversial. And where does all that money GO if not to community organizing?
Just to keep it short, she needed to reach out and ORGANIZE groups of supporters who will blanket all the democratic area's (door-to-door) with a talking points bulletin and sign-up requests for more volunteers - FIRST. With success, she would have built a Krupp coalition strong enough to approach the Feingolds, Baldwins and Doyles for support from their coalitions and expand into phonebanks and a blogging team. If you build a coalition - they will come. Money comes FROM community organizing - not into it.
Instead she apparently took the reverse approach, hire consultants first and expect the party to just surrender. That's not how it works. Most people aren't impressed and voters don't want to hear about that - they want to know what she would do differently than Ryan and how it will benefit them.
But an electable candidate MUST possess a solid philosophical template to draw upon to make the right decision. The bail-out tested Ryan and Krupp - did they pass? Not in my book.
Now that'll cost you a $100 consultant fee.
and I would guess that HAVING that initial group of supporters or being able to hire them as Obama did in WI is what makes you a viable candidate.
I expect more from the PARTY. Not just the hope that maybe the Dems will allow you to use their coalitions. BTW Kohl uses volunteers? I don't think so.
What would you say to the Dem Party hiring, as Obama did, 50-75 paid canvassers in every HOT race with a viable democrat candidate? Doubling that employed base as the canvassers take in donations and recruit volunteers.
Your plan demands NOTHING of the Dem Party which does collect dues and donations---is that money just buying CEO jobs? Is the Dem Party acting just like the corrupt corporations?
Doyle's administration has been hell on consumers. Not just property taxes and a wasteful DNR, but the public service commission is STILL working for the utilities -the cable co and AT&T are STILL preying on consumers. The utilities are not green retooling despite their much publicized "energy star" programs nor is weatherization installing solar. The Great Lakes Compact is mired in indecision.
Nothing ever changes for the working class except to get worse regardless of which party holds office. That is because the Party MONEY is not going to hire the unemployed but it disappears while the streets get meaner.
BTW, need I say how right you are about the bail-out???? They sell it with the wealthy MSM and we don't buy it but when our politicians make it clear they are working for wall st and the Dem party money disappears, where can the working class turn?
You have to start somewhere and you have to work hard to get that initial team started up. If you have a strong message that resonates, you should be able to gather 20 supporters including some family help at the start. Ryan boasts that he has 75 cousins.
When you're running against an entrenched incumbent, you're not going to receive money and help from the party or others just for the asking. In fact, the most you'll hear are nay-sayers.
Krupp began two years ago with a full-time campaign, by August of this year, she should have had at least 200 volunteers working the streets on evenings and weekends. Nothing is demanded from the party or Democratic politicians. If you're in it for that, you've lost. When you get the coalition built, good things will happen naturally. After winning the primary, I do believe that should have meant something to the party, but without an impressive ground team and message, the campaign is unconvincing. You really have to sell yourself and they have to buy.
If you want to run against someone like Ryan and think the party or voters will throw thousands of dollars your way just because.....its not going to happen.
In my view, Krupp began with strong words for Ryan and created a media splash. Great start. Afterwards, she (not anyone else) needed to go door-to-door for several months every day and night throughout the district gathering anyone she could. Did she do that?
Now if you happen to have a million dollars laying around, of course that helps. But I'm assuming a grassroots campaign here. She still might not have won even with this, but the margin would have been plenty closer. 55/45 would have sent a chill up Ryan for the next time.
Of course, the Dem party would do things very differently if Ryan vacated the seat and ran for something else.
Your last post captures the heart of our disagreement. I am with you about the initial effort through the primaries. The candidates must prove they are viable on their own.
After that I think Dem Party money should be invested in defeating fed and state Repubs in hot districts.
What are they doing with WI donations?
I do believe in term limits much shorter than yours 10 - 12 years.
I think people should not give money to the Dem Party until the party develops a team of paid community canvassers (not sit in the office big shot consultants) to take back the state. Obama did not do it with his cousins and neither will anyone else who is not a millionaire.
You can't fight incumbents going door to door yourself in Janesville. I honestly cannot believe you really have thought that through. Ryan will rule us forever unless the Dem Party gets off its' rear and helps organize a voting base here.
But I don't think they care about getting nobodies elected. I don't think they care about policy -- it is not life and death to them -- they can pay exorbitant property taxes, they and their spouses belong to the teacher's union and they like things just the way they are.
But what goes around, comes around. Soon their cushy financial security will be right where ours is now. Even the feds cannot save them all. Eventually the Dem well in WI will dry up and we will all be able to see what has been feeding at the bottom.
The money does burn through fast.
The hopeful candidate's door-to-door work is an absolute must for the first three months of a full-time two year citizen grassroots campaign. You have to be your own community organizer before you can be elected. A nobody is a nobody until they run through this gauntlet and become somebody in the eyes of the voter and eventually the party. It's fundamental, a ton of work and if it's done right, professional consultants won't be necessary.
BTW - This IS how Obama did it. Years ago, he ran against a Daley machine candidate in Chicago and won. He became a somebody by creating his own ground machine. The money started flowing. After the speech in 2004, more people gravitated his way. I think he overcame tremendous odds from the beginning. He convincingly characterized every decision of his opponent as a mistake and neutralized his opponents strengths. It'll work every time.
Alice Palmer was BO's first election. She had mentored him and brought him up from com organizer to political campaign strategist. She talked about him as being her "hope" for the black community. Alice was beloved by her district. She ran for a higher office and endorsed BO for her old seat with the agreement that if Alice lost BO would then work for her election to her old seat. Alice did lose and when she asked BO to honor his agreement and endorse her, he declined. BO ran against her for her old seat. Because he had worked with her for years he knew her vulnerabilities. One of those was her use of the poor to gather her nomination signatures. He challenged her signatures and accused her of fraud. Alice was investigated. It broke her heart. She retired and was never seen again until Hillary ran for president. Alice Palmer campaigned for Hillary.
"He was just 35 when in 1996 he won his first bid for
political office. Even many of his staunchest supporters, such as
Black, still resent the strong-arm tactics Obama employed to win his
seat in the Illinois Legislature.
Obama hired fellow Harvard Law alum and election law expert Thomas
Johnson to challenge the nominating petitions of four other candidates,
including the popular incumbent, Alice Palmer, a liberal activist who
had held the seat for several years, according to an April 2007 Chicago
Tribune report.
Obama found enough flaws in the petition sheets -- to appear on the
ballot, candidates needed 757 signatures from registered voters living
within the district -- to knock off all the other Democratic
contenders. He won the seat unopposed.
"A close examination of Obama's first campaign clouds the image he
has cultivated throughout his political career," wrote Tribune
political reporters David Jackson and Ray Long. "The man now running
for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first
entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by
clearing it."
http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/4
BO "created" his own machine by befriending an established woman and then betraying her and taking what she had built using the preference for young and male over older and woman.
But worse her district lost everything Alice had been building in terms of economic development. Alice was bringing in money, jobs and opportunity. BO did nothing but build contacts for his next election.
Mind you that Palmer hadn't declared in that race until the last moment AFTER stating that she wasn't going to run.
Stop thinking that everything is sexist against politicians such as Palmer or Krupp. Its simply not true as the local parties ALWAYS want to elect more of theirs.
However in a case like Krupp, she didn't build an infrastructure and the party didn't have the bullets to build one for her.
I'm aware of the controversy behind the Obama/Palmer incident. Politics is a blood sport. Yet, what does all of that mean?
My point is he was opposed by one of the most powerful politic machines in the world - and he did not lose.
What good is a party without bullets to the people? It is only good for those party bosses who do not see the people's needs. It is only the insiders who profit when people do not see sexism and economic exploitation. I have nothing but contempt for people who deny sexism. They will deny any exploitation to maintain their old boy privilege. That is why, despite electing a Dem governor, we have not received consumer protection, lower property tax or environmental protection - maybe you cannot have it all but we get nothing while the Dem party gets fat and stays disproportionately male at the top.
Post a Comment