It's like a childrens' crusade. We need a leader who is really swell.
It's not so much a reflection on "netroots," IMO. You can't really apply a narrow, capsule summary for a dynamic social phenomenon. It's relatively young, relatively well-off people, otherwise diverse people who don't like republicans, as far as I can see.
-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of info at pulpculture.org Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:31 PM To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Dailykos need support from a member of the Women's Studies set? HA ha ha!
At 01:18 PM 5/9/2006, Doug Henwood wrote:
>info at pulpculture.org wrote:
>
>>and please, do read the Netroots page. You will bustagut laughing. I did.
>>http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/5/7/185636/6139
>
>>The candidate has a strong record as a Democrat.
>
>What the fuck does that mean?
>
>Doug
Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Nothing. This is the Partisan Litmus test, which was touted in that email as if, because she passed it, I should be just nipply and gushing to support her. Support someone who brags about he accomplishments demolishing welfare? Fuckmedead with a football bat already. The litmust test:
Does candidate 'distance himself' from the party and/or its leaders, or is he proud to be a Democrat?
Does he talk like a bureaucrat or like a regular person?
Does she make it clear that she opposes Bush and the Republicans?
Does she back down when the corporate press/media or Republican pundits attack him, or does she stand by her words?
Does he sleepwalk through the campaign, or does he act like he wants to win?
------------
This are the qualifications which are just plain embarrassing. It's an admission of how freakin' weak netroots is and what a shell game it all is.
The candidate must be running against a Republican incumbent or running for a GOP-held open seat.
Primaries: There must be no Dem primary; an already-concluded Dem primary; or only token primary opposition. (It's too late in the cycle to get involved in primary races. We'll focus on that more in 2007-8.)
It can't be a top-tier race. We can have a bigger impact in races which, so far, have received less attention and institutional backing. Simply put, the netroots isn't capable of raising millions of dollars, so the less money a campaign has raised so far, the further our dollars will go. And what's more, we can help bring attention to worthy races and inspire the big-dollar players to follow our lead. In any event, there's no hard-and-fast definition for this, but one rule of thumb is that if a challenger has raised over $1 million, it's probably already a top-tier race.
---------------------
Positives (things which are pluses but not requirements, listed in no particular order):
The candidate has a strong record as a Democrat.
The Republican opponent is an easy target. (Think Tom DeLay or Curt Weldon.)
The candidate is running in a blue-leaning district or state.
There's a strong netroots presence in the area. (Example: BlueJersey in NJ.) Our ability to make a difference is strongly impacted by the quality of our information flow.
The campaign itself has shown an interest in grassroots & netroots outreach.
The race fits into a larger strategy or theme (eg, Northeast Strategy, Culture of Corruption, etc.), or can in some way be "nationalized."
The candidate passes the "partisanship litmus test."
House races are strongly preferred. Non-federal races (such as state legislature seats) will also be considered. Again, as per the above, we can have a bigger impact in smaller races.
Bitch | Lab http://blog.pulpculture.org
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk