I am concerned that the “grassroots” are spoiling for a fight with the “State House”. For example questioning Sen. Dick Moore for offering a counter-point to the new administration or that you have to make it more “beneficial” for a legislator to be with you or “take them out”.
The legislature is an easy target but lets look at Romney’s record.
He went after “them” and got his ass kicked. Why?
In 02′ to 04′ while Mitt used the “State House” as his personal doormat with the media cheering him on, something strange happened.
The bad guys actually implemented some reasonable reforms that the general public liked and at the end of the day “they” picked up three republican seats.
Don’t let the “Conventional Wisdom” of the insider label blind you. In order to become relevant public policy players you will have to take a stand and let the politics play out, win or lose.
Remember once you get in the game you become part of the problem?
… “you have to make it more “beneficial” for a legislator to be with you or “take them out”.’
<
p>
What’s wrong with that, exactly? This is a democracy, right? Legislators correctly want to know what you as a constituent can do for them. Is it a campaign contribution? Good word of mouth? A thank you letter to the local paper? A blog post? Apathy, which is better than outright hostility? Most legislators are responsive to things like this that have real value, because they like keeping their jobs more than any particular agenda. And if they’re not responsive, we should put them to the electoral test. That’s how it should be.
<
p>
“The bad guys actually implemented some reasonable reforms that the general public liked and at the end of the day “they” picked up three republican seats.”
<
p>
Insofar as this narrative is true, it shows excellent work on the lege’s part, real responsiveness. That’s what we’re after. And it shows that Mitt didn’t really have his finger on the pulse of the electorate. (Go figure.)
<
p>
I am not “anti-legislature” in any blanket sense; I am against any sense of entitlement that allows them to feel that they can just do whatever they like. They don’t own the seats; the electorate puts them there.
There’s that word again, THEY do own the seats for 2, 4 or for whatever the term is. We have a representative democracy and we lease “them” the keys to the kingdom. The problem is that you sound like legislators come from Mars. Some are great and many are knuckleheads.
<
p>
Forget about making up an enemies list. ID who is with you first and let’s not be purists. Then work on winning more seats and gaining more votes. Just because you eliminated someone doesn’t mean you gained any more support.
<
p>
Could you please elaborate, and clarify if the final sentence is indeed a question what it means? Thanks.
Let’s face it after this election BMG and other sites have political juice. On-line political organizing has emerged as a powerful tool and politicans and organizers are working on how to use this tool.
<
p>
Now that this type of forum has entered the political mainstream it will have to be about something. Once that something is established it will have to be defended. Once you are defending your turf you are seen as a special interest. BMG was started in order to further a progressive agenda, that’s what the Blue means. If the Patrick Administration succeeds then this site will be a big part of that success but if it fails it will share in that too.
<
p>
There is nothing wrong with this, In fact I applaud BMG but I was getting the feeling after the election that an “us vs. then” attitude was emerging and I think that that would be a shame. It’s always easier to dismiss your opponent rather than argue the issue.
<
p>
I meant the ? rhetorically. At some point in the near future someone is going to be blaming this type of political organizing as a cause of our problems.
I’d like to offer what a woman who I consider to be a wise ally of progressive causes said to me recently:
<
p>
What matters, and what we’ve all got to watch for (in ourselves and others over time, I might add), is
<
p>
btw she works with MIRA http://www.miracoali…
I am new to participating in a blog. I have to admit,I don’t know anything about it. I know I come here to learn what other people are saying about issues that are impoortant to me and sometimes I participate in the dialogue. I don’t get how a blog influences politics or public opinion, as it only reflects the ideas of those that choose to sign on. I don’t think of this as media or jounalism. I think of it as more of an on-line salon.
<
p>
Perhaps as individuals some poeple who are active in this blog, have some influence in the new administration, but how does the Blog have influence?
<
p>
Given this post and all of the foolishness with Ms. Rooney and the discussion of the MyDD blog, I am clearly missing a significance of this activity. In any case, I enjoy it, and I love having the opportunity to learn and to share ideas with so many bright people. Thanks for the opportunity.
Concerned! You bet I’m concerned! I am concerned that the complacency of the Democratic party/incumbents in the late 90’s stays indelibly etched in my memory as the precursor to GWB, WMR and a host of horrific, vile conservative hypocrites.
It is laughable to read criticism of the ideology, you have to make it more “beneficial” for a legislator to be with you or “take them out”. Damn, Karl Rove must live to see Democrats post stuff like Concerned
My post had nothing to do with conservatives or republicans? It was about the online community holding itself above elected officials in an “us vs. them” manner.
Your post opens with what you reply as your point. Then you digress to discuss Willard, the bad guys and republicans.
<
p>
<
p>
That leaves plenty of room for my concerns to be relevant to your post. Thank you.