Category: Democratic State Parties

Florida Democratic Party Official: “We Failed to See, or Simply Refused to See, the Voters”

Check out this interesting quasi-postmortem by Florida Democratic Party executive director Scott Arceneaux. Some excerpts worth pointing out:

In any election, victory has a thousand fathers but defeat is the Party’s fault. Or so they say.

The Democratic Party has begun the time-honored tradition of self-examination and self-immolation that comes with electoral defeat. As well it should. While believing in the righteousness of our cause, and the wrongness of our opponent, we failed to see, or simply refused to see, the voters.

Voters lived in a different world and understandably, saw this country and the candidates differently than the national Democratic Party and its leadership. They lived in large swaths of the country where we never went. We missed the mark and we missed it badly.

Voters believe it is their constitutional right to be heard by their elected officials and not the other way around. Voters want to hear their concerns addressed rather than what we wished got them out to vote. The best political leaders have always acknowledged the voter’s fear and anger, recognized their daily struggle to provide their families with the best opportunity possible, and projected confidence in their ability to lead the entire nation.

Democrats, perhaps by the nature of our heterogeneous coalition, have been a classic all trees, no forest party when it has come to strategic vision. We seem always focused on the next election like it was the most important election of our lifetimes. Democrats have essentially depended on two political superstars, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, for the last 35 years to lead our Party. But depending on a Cam Newton to come along every other year is not a plan.

California Is the New Texas

There are two stories worth reading about the role California might play in the years ahead as an opposition foil to Donald Trump. Democrats control the state – the governor’s mansion, combined with supermajorities in both chambers of the state legislature. Essentially, California will – possibly in tandem with other states like New York, Massachusetts and Illinois – assume the role that states like Texas played during the Obama presidency.

First, this story from NPR:

There are several ways the state may challenge Trump and congressional Republicans. It may simply choose not to not enforce some federal laws it disagrees with and enact stronger state laws around environmental and consumer regulations. The state is also likely to aggressively file lawsuits against the federal government.

To that end, Brown’s pick to be California’s next attorney general, Congressman Xavier Becerra will play a high-profile role. Becerra said the state isn’t looking to pick fights but won’t be afraid to go to court either.

“My obligation is to protect my state, to promote the interests of my state,” said Becerra.

It may sound unusual for a liberal state like California to resort to an appeal to states’ rights. For the past eight years, conservative states have argued for their autonomy with respect to the federal government.

But states are opportunistic about their use of states’ rights arguments and tend to employ them when their party doesn’t control Washington, says Carlton Larson, a law professor at the University of California, Davis. Still, Larson says California may want to be careful about how much it uses that argument.

“If we were to push back very, very heavily against federal law, there’s a real danger,” that environmental and civil rights laws that depend on a broad reading of federal law could be endangered, said Larson.

Democrats have already introduced one bill to better train defense attorneys on immigration law and another to fund legal representation for people facing deportation. Both are “urgency measures” meaning they would take effect immediately if they muster a two-thirds vote. The programs are expected to cost millions of dollars.

Second, this Los Angeles Times story about a bill proposed by California legislators – hard to see this as anything other than a direct slap at Donald Trump after his refusal to release his tax returns – requiring presidential candidates to disclose their tax returns as a prerequisite to appear on California’s presidential ballot in 2020, based on a similar proposal circulating in the New York state legislature.

The precedent of presidential candidates releasing their tax returns to the public goes back to George Romney, who released a decade’s worth of returns in his unsuccessful run for the Republican nomination during the 1968 presidential campaign. This practice – not a legal requirement – was observed by candidates from both parties in every election since 1976. Mitt Romney only released two years’ worth of tax returns in the 2012 election, which he was harshly criticized for by Democrats and transparency advocates. Donald Trump didn’t release any of his tax returns, though pages from a 1995 state tax return were eventually leaked to the New York Times by an anonymous source.

These bills would make disclosure of tax returns a binding legal requirement for presidential candidates. Because election laws and ballot access issues are largely left up to the individual states, California and New York may be able to do this legally. The only potential downside is the fact that Donald Trump won the election without California or New York in his column, so hypothetically he might decide to disregard the law and try organizing a write-in campaign for his supporters in those states.

Donald Trump Picks a 2018 Senate Candidate to Join His Cabinet

The DSCC should send Donald Trump a thank-you card. From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — The courtship of Ryan Zinke began months before the end of the presidential race. A Republican congressman from Montana and a former Navy SEAL commander, Mr. Zinke was approached over the summer by Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, about running for the Senate in 2018.

To Mr. McConnell, Mr. Zinke (pronounced ZIN-kee) was an ideal candidate to defeat Senator Jon Tester, a two-term Democrat, and bolster the Republicans’ slender majority.

Then President-elect Donald J. Trump intervened.

Mr. McConnell learned early this week that Mr. Trump had grown interested in Mr. Zinke to be secretary of the interior. Mr. McConnell quickly contacted both Vice President-elect Mike Pence and Reince Priebus, the incoming White House chief of staff, in an effort to head off the appointment, according to multiple Republican officials familiar with the calls.

Mr. Trump’s defiant selection of Mr. Zinke, 55, dismayed Republicans in the capital and raised suspicions about how reliable an ally he will be for the party. Even as Mr. Trump has installed party stalwarts in a few cabinet departments, he has repeatedly shrugged off the requests of Republicans who have asked for help reinforcing their power in Congress.

And having flouted the party establishment throughout the 2016 campaign, Mr. Trump now appears determined to go his own way in office, guided by personal chemistry and the opinions of his family members.

Based on these political dynamics, Zinke will probably sail through his confirmation hearing without breaking a sweat. If he is confirmed, that means that Montana governor Steve Bullock will have to call a special election to fill the seat, which represents the entire state in the House of Representatives.

Zinke was just re-elected to his seat 56-40, in a state that Donald Trump won by 21 points but also re-elected Democrat Steve Bullock by 4. Democrats have won in state and federal races in Montana, so this House race should be seen as winnable by the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and the Montana Democratic Party.  This race gives Democrats an opportunity to test message and strategy ahead of Jon Tester’s re-election run in 2018, and will likely be their first attempt at winning a congressional race since the November election.

The Montana Democratic Party flagged a story about Whitefish resident and white nationalist leader Richard Spencer saying he was “very seriously” considering running for the Republican nomination. In a separate story by The Missoulian, Montana Democratic Party executive director Nancy Keenan issued a statement saying, “To be clear, Richard Spencer’s views are not Montanans’ views. We’ve called on the Montana GOP to denounce this kind of racism in their party this year and we will continue to hold Republicans accountable for this fear-mongering behavior as we move toward a special election to fill this U.S. House seat.” Montana Republican Party chairman Jeff Essmann is quoted in the same story saying, “In most corners of Montana, a Spencer candidacy would be viewed skeptically.”

The candidates who will run in the special election will be chosen by their respective state parties rather than through a normal primary process. Because of this, Republicans can probably breathe a sigh of relief in that this scenario virtually guarantees Spencer will not get the nomination.  After the experience of 2012 where Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock cost the Senate GOP two races it should have won because they said outrageous and controversial comments which torpedoed their campaigns, Republicans have learned their lesson. On the other hand, Donald Trump just got elected president in spite of the many outrageous and controversial comments he made before and during the campaign.  Perhaps some Republican candidates will try emulating that tactic to win an election in the future.

Obama Says He Will Help Democrats Rebuild After Leaving Office

This comment came up during President Obama’s press conference on Friday. From the White House transcript:

What I’ve said is, is that I can maybe give some counsel and advice to the Democratic Party.  And I think that that the thing we have to spend the most time on — because it’s the thing we have the most control over — is how do we make sure that we are showing up in places where I think Democratic policies are needed, where they are helping, where they are making a difference, but where people feel as if they’re not being heard and where Democrats are characterized as coastal, liberal, latte-sipping, politically-correct, out-of-touch folks.  We have to be in those communities.  And I’ve seen that when we are in those communities, it makes a difference.

That’s how I became President.  I became a U.S. senator not just because I had a strong base in Chicago, but because I was driving around downstate Illinois and going to fish frys and sitting in VFW halls and talking to farmers.  And I didn’t win every one of their votes, but they got a sense of what I was talking about, what I cared about, that I was for working people, that I was for the middle class, that the reason I was interested in strengthening unions, and raising the minimum wage, and rebuilding our infrastructure, and making sure that parents had decent childcare and family leave was because my own family’s history wasn’t that different from theirs, even if I looked a little bit different.  Same thing in Iowa.

And so the question is, how do we rebuild that party as a whole so that there’s not a county in any state — I don’t care how red — that we don’t have a presence and we’re not making the argument.  Because I think we have the better argument.  But that requires a lot of work.  It’s been something that I’ve been able to do successfully in my own campaigns.  It is not something I’ve been able to transfer to candidates in midterms and sort of build a sustaining organization around.  That’s something that I would have liked to have done more of, but it’s kind of hard to do when you’re also dealing with a whole bunch of issues here in the White House.

And that doesn’t mean, though, that it can’t be done.  And I think there are going to be a lot of talented folks out there, a lot of progressives who share my values who are going to be leading the charge in the years to come.

In recent history, the norm has been for the outgoing president to stay quiet (or at the very least, keep a low profile) after leaving office. In addition to the lingering effects of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Bill Clinton left office under a cloud after a controversial series of presidential pardons at the end of his presidency. George W. Bush’s poll numbers were in the low 30s by the time he left office due to a combination of the Iraq war, Hurricane Katrina, and the collapse of the housing market – all three of which happened during his second term. (Caveat: the Iraq war began in Bush’s first term, but the political and security situation on the ground started going south during his second term).

Obama is in a unique position in that he is in a much better situation than his predecessors. President Obama’s approval ratings are in the high 50s – he will leave office with Reagan-esque poll numbers. He is also popular and respected within the Democratic Party, somebody who can appeal to most of the factions vying for control and direction right now as he prepares to leave office four weeks from now. The fact that he was so successful in both his presidential runs means that he has created a model for others to follow – one that Hillary Clinton was not successful at replicating.

He will probably have some say in the form and shape the party take as the opposition for the next few years, though he will probably allow Democrats running for DNC chairman now and the primaries three years from now to let them sort things out for themselves.  He also has a vested interest in rebuilding the party, because Donald Trump and the congressional Republicans’ agenda will consist in large part on trying to undo or erase much of Obama’s legacy – Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, the Paris climate change agreement, etc. Republicans will complain that Obama should give Trump the same courtesy of silence that George W. Bush gave him, but that argument ignores the fact that Dick Cheney was one of his most blistering critics in the opposition.

Keep an eye out for Obama around sometime next spring, after he has presumably taken a long vacation and settled into life as a private citizen again.

DNC Chair Candidates Meet in Texas

The Texas Democratic Party held its quarterly meeting of the State Democratic Executive Committee in Austin yesterday, and invited the candidates for DNC chairman to address the organization.  I was traveling all day so I was not able to monitor it and live-blog or tweet it like the Ohio event a few days earlier, but TDP uploaded the video of the event to Facebook.  I should point out that this is Sally Boynton Brown’s first event since declaring her candidacy 24 hours earlier, so this is the first time Democrats are hearing from her directly. Here are a few real-time tweets from people who were there:

 

UPDATE: Texas State Democratic Executive Committee member Josh Greene sent the link to this edited video of the five candidates’ speeches that has been uploaded to YouTube.

Idaho Democratic Party Official Enters DNC Race

Idaho Democratic Party executive director Sally Boynton Brown has entered the DNC Chairman race, making her the first woman to enter the fray.  She told Politico she decided to get in the race following Tom Perez’s announcement a few days earlier:

“Ultimately, that’s exactly why I got into the race. The last thing that our party and especially our country really needs is for us to be having an ideological conversation between Bernie folks and Obama-Hillary folks about whether we’re going to be liberal or whether we’re going to be moderate.”

As it stands now, there is an interesting mix in the DNC chair race: two state party chairmen and a state party executive director, along with a former Obama official and a current member of Congress.  Each has different life experiences and skill sets to the debate happening within the Democratic Party right now. Boynton Brown’s disadvantages are lack of name recognition, as well as the fact that though she is president of the Association of State Democratic Executive Directors, party executive directors don’t get to vote for the next DNC chair.  Boynton Brown also claims to have the endorsements of all four of Idaho’s Democratic National Committee members.

Northam Leads Virginia Republican Candidates in New Poll

Eleven months out from the Virginia gubernatorial election, Democratic lieutenant governor Ralph Northam leads the four Republican candidates for the race in a new poll released by Quinnipiac University:

  • Northam 38
    Ed Gillespie 34
  • Northam 39
    Rob Wittman 30
  • Northam 39
    Frank Wagner 30
  • Northam 38
    Corey Stewart 29

Gillespie – the former chairman of the Republican National Committee – leads the Republican field in large part from name recognition after his narrow loss to Mark Warner in the 2014 Virginia Senate race:

  • Gillespie 24
  • Wittman 10
  • Wagner 4
  • Stewart 4

The majority of Republican voters – 57 percent – are undecided. It should also be noted that Wittman dropped out of the race last week.

Virginia governors approve of the job Governor Terry McAuliffe is doing 52-30. McAuliffe can’t run for reelection because Virginia state law limits governors to one term. Broken down into political demographics:

  • Democrats approve 75-8.
  • Independents approve 52-32.
  • Republicans disapprove 57-27.

Virginia is a rare bright spot in the south for Democrats, and one of their big success stories over the past decade in state and presidential election cycles. Democrats currently hold all five statewide elected offices – governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and both U.S. Senate seats – in what had previously been a Republican-leaning state.

NYC Mayor Endorses Keith Ellison

Scoop by NBC’s Alex Seitz-Wald:

“The Democratic Party stands at a crossroads, and needs leadership that will expand our vision to more Americans — while also intensifying our commitment to our core values. Keith Ellison is that leader,” de Blasio said in a statement provided to NBC News.

The mayor of the country’s largest city has positioned himself as a national progressive leader and is the latest in a long list of liberals supporting Ellison. But de Blasio also has longstanding ties to Hillary Clinton, whose 2000 Senate campaign he managed and whom he backed in the Democratic presidential primary.

In his endorsement, de Blasio called Ellison “a unifier who worked tirelessly for both Bernie Sanders and then Hillary Clinton, he will bring the party and the grassroots together while broadening and deepening the Democratic Party’s connections to the American people.”

And the mayor praised Ellison as a “grassroots organizer,” who “has delivered real results like voter turnout in his native Minnesota,” while also being a “passionate fighter for economic fairness.”

The endorsement comes just before Tom Perez’s official entry into the race to be the next chairman of the DNC. According to a Politico survey of the voting members of the Democratic National Committee, Ellison is the frontrunner right now but he has not put this race away. De Blasio is up for re-election in 2017.

Former Clinton Staffer Running for DNC Vice Chair

Adam Parkhomenko – a Hillary Clinton 2008 staffer and co-founder of Ready for Hillary, who most recently served as the Democratic National Committee’s national field director for the 2016 election – announced that he is running for DNC Vice Chair.  He had previously been considering a run for Lieutenant Governor of Virginia.

According to Buzzfeed:

Parkhomenko, 31, said Tuesday that he hopes to succeed former Minneapolis mayor R.T. Rybak, one of the party’s current five vice chairs. Rybak, however, has already endorsed another Democrat to step into his own vice chair seat: Michael Blake, a New York assemblyman who worked on President Obama’s campaigns.

Parkhomenko said he has already secured support from a significant number of DNC members, who meet in late February to vote on the party’s leadership. He pointed to plans to invest heavily in grassroots organizing — his focus on the Clinton campaign — and help retool the DNC’s presence on the ground in the states.

According to his campaign website, he will be present at the four DNC regional forums and the winter meeting in Atlanta scheduled for January and February.

Democratic Governors Want Next DNC Chair to Commit to Investing in State Races

The Democratic Governors Association released an open letter to the candidates running for chairman of the Democratic National Committee listing the five criteria the DGA will use to evaluate candidates. From the letter:

1) Real, measurable commitment to investing resources in winning gubernatorial and state legislative races in 2018 and 2020, years that will decide the fate of redistricting;

2) A commitment to investing in organizing in states with competitive gubernatorial and legislative races — not just in states with competitive presidential or congressional elections;

3) A commitment from the candidate to serving full time as chair;

4) Commitment to provide resources to state parties for organizing and communications staff; to provide technical assistance for redistricting; provide training and support to recruit and support next generation of Democratic leaders;

5) A commitment to working with Democratic governors and other state policy leaders on advancing policies that grow our economy and strengthen the middle class.

The first two points are especially critical for the party’s short and long-term rebuilding plans. First, congressional redistricting is four years away, and in order to redraw more favorable maps, Democrats need to control governorships and state legislatures. (South Carolina Democratic Party chairman Jaime Harrison noted at the forum organized by the Ohio Democratic Party last week: “33 out of 50 governorships are controlled by Republicans, 69 out of 99 state houses are controlled by Republicans, but we only obsess about the White House.”) The fact that the Democrats’ 2017-2018 calendar is much better at the state level than at the congressional level gives this even greater urgency.
The second reason is that they need to rebuild their bench in a hurry so that a new post-Obama, post-Clinton generation of leaders can make their way up the ranks. Remember, Barack Obama was in the Illinois state senate for seven years before he was elected to the U.S. Senate, which became his springboard to the presidency four short years later.