Robert Steele,

"On domestic policy Dean has to come out strong on the specific harm the rising deficit is going to cause every single generation for the next seven generations, and he has to focus on the basics, as Matt Miller does in 2% solution: universal education and universal public health are what *enable* productivity that will in turn provide for our retirees!!!!"

Very nice.

"Unless a candidate also has a strong base of support among ordinary, rank-and-file party voters, a huge war chest will not get a candidate very far."

Dean has both a strong base of support and a burgeoning war chest.

Dean Blog posted a very nice testimonial about New Hampshire Republican Hilary Cleveland changing registration from Republican to Dem on 10/30 blog. I believe this was a direct response to my discussion the other day about outreach and "The Margin of Victory". Perhaps the outreach is beginning-I took it as a good sign.
JM

"Dark horse time is over. Dean is facing the ultimate challenge in the next 90 days, and I fear that if people like Michael Cudahy, Paul Ray (cultural creatives), Matt Miller (2% Solution) and I are not fully integrated--with all of you--into the campaign, then it is lost."

Any ideas on how to make that happen? Someone want me to fly out to Burlington and go on a hunger strike until until Dean says yes?

My friends I have great faith that we can -- eventually -- find a way to talk and listen to one another. And, that civil discourse will win the day. Please remember, "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen."

From: Robert David Steele <bear@oss.net>
Subject: Posted comment to Greater Democracy
To: Michael Cudahy <strtfocus@earthlink.net>

Michael Cudahy represents the margin of victory, he does not just write about it. I also am a former Republican and continuing conservative and person of faith (I believe in a balanced budget, in making America strong through education and public health to plant seeds for the future, and in a strong *smart* national defense that is actually appropriate to the global threat, and in moral capitalism).

Dean is the best of the lot but he has a ninth draft staff and too small a staff a that. I am very concerned that Dean's staff has too many interns and not enough adults. I am very concerned that Dean's staff is too closely tied to those who served Clinton, and too eager to see in them the voice of experience. Clinton was a passive President on foreign policy and national security, the opposite extreme of Cheney-Bush, who are neo-Nazi aggressives that are doing very bad things in our name. Dean has to take the middle
course.

On domestic policy Dean has to come out strong on the specific harm the rising deficit is going to cause every single generation for the next seven generations, and he has to focus on the basics, as Matt Miller does in 2% solution: universal education and universal public health are what *enable* productivity that will in turn provide for our retirees!!!!

My bottom line: I think the Dean team desperately needs three things: a) a senior ombsbudsman to whom the Republicans and conservatives and cultural creatives (55 million strong) can turn to to get in front of Dean; 2) an immediate pumping of up an outreach staff with no fewer than 20 full-time people led by a full-time wizard with total access to the great authors and associational leaders across America; and 3) a 24/7 "watch team" organized by White House staff function, perhaps staffed by retired Marine officers and Staff Non-Commissioned Officers, and led by a Colonel that knows how to manage an administrative and operational staff.

Dark horse time is over. Dean is facing the ultimate challenge in the next 90 days, and I fear that if people like Michael Cudahy, Paul Ray (cultural creatives), Matt Miller (2% Solution) and I are not fully integrated--with all of you--into the campaign, then it is lost.

I spent several years as a Principal at a small management consulting boutique (NCRI) that was a leader in scenario planning. I quite agree that scenarios could be quite helpful. Over this past summer I started to sketch out some scenarios that addressed (at a very high level) the social, political and cultural consequences of different trajectories for the US economy over the next several years. I had thought to see if there was someone (agency, foundation, etc.) who might fund a real project to develop the scenarios and then sponsor a one or two day interactive workshop to explore a better version of the scenarios and their implications. The scenarios - notes, really - are in tabular form in a word/pdf doc. Happy to share if you send email to Weber@PescaderoGroup.com with some reference to scenarios in the subject field (so it doesn't get trashed with the spam).

Bob

>Robert Walikis [snip]
>Scenario planning could / should be another component of >social activism....

Roll Call requires a subscription so I'll only quote a little.

------------
GOP Pollsters Insist Dean Can Beat Bush
By Chris Cillizza

Roll Call
October 6, 2003

A memo being circulated by a prominent Republican polling firm argues that GOPers run a serious risk of underestimating former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (D) as a general election candidate against President Bush.

“Writing off a candidate like Dean by selectively sorting statistical gobble-de-gook [sic] and mixing it into a broth of ‘empirical’ sociological evidence ignores the political realities of our time,” the memo notes.

One Republican pollster agreed that the assumption that Dean’s ideological underpinnings would alienate swing voters could well be wrong-headed.

“Part of his appeal appears to be more stylistic than substantive,” the pollster said. “There is an element of plain-spoken, Ross Perot style about him.”

Moore and Kaiser also offer an electoral vote scenario under which Dean could defeat Bush in 2004. They give Dean victories in 23 states (270 electoral votes) and point out that Bush lost all but two — Nevada and West Virginia — in the 2000 presidential election. "
------------

Is this simply misinformation?

We have been looking at the "right" half of the coalition of the center. With the exceptions of parts of the south, I I think the right half of the coalition is OK with Dean. Personally, I think the greater danger is losing the "left" half.

Dean has said on multiple occasions that the way that he is going to win is by giving the 40% of the population that is apathetic a reason to vote. He has resisted mightly "running to left" by holding the line on fiscal responsibility and not promising the world. And in doing so, he may not be giving the 40% a reason to vote. He has energized the gay and lesbian community. He is working on students. He is finally starting to put more resources into SC and the paying more serious attention to Black voters. But I'm not sure that this is going to bring out enough of the "apathetic" voters (Perhaps Bush will do that for us - and those who are moving in the House to attach the privatization of Medicare to the perscription drug benefit.)

The only logical, broad issue with the potential to excite the apathetic is health care. The best health care solution (and the only one that's sustainable IMO) is Kucinich's. Gephardt and Clark are promising the world in combination with a tax plan that underfunds the country (IMO). Dean is offering something less in terms of health care with a tax plan that is more sound. Which is more palatable to the "right of center"?

The health care issue can win not only the Presidency but Senate and House races. You tell me - from the "right of center" perspective - which is more palatable?

If I were Dean - And were asked in the next debate about a health care plan - I would say:

"There is only health plan that the Democrats have to offer that is both affordable and sustainable and that plan is the Kucinich, Braun, Sharpton Health Plan. As a party, we need to make our job to see that every parent, that every worker entering the workforce, that every retiree, that every small business owner, that every corporate CEO ask their Senator and their Congressman or women if they support the Kucinich, Braun, Sharpton health plan."

It seems to me that that would bring together a winning coalition.

Tony -- You're right it does leave out most of the candidates from where I sit as well. For the last 25 years I have worked primarily with pro-choice Republican women and a coalition of moderate, and traditional Republicans to try and fight off the right wing of the Republican Party.

One of my greatest allies was an organization called Log Cabin Republicans -- a nationwide group of gay and lesbian Republicans who were fighting the same fight I was.

I count them amongst my best friends and many were threatened in the same ways I was. They have and will always have my repect and friendship.

Perhaps the thing I have not made clear is that my strongest motivation is to defeat George W. Bush and the indefensible policies he represents. And, I am prepared to work harder and longer than you can possibly imagine to see that goal accomplished.

I have been threatened and had my family threatened -- on multiple occasions -- and I guess I think I understand the lengths some Republicans will go to to hold on to power.

We must not allow them to succeed.

I understand - but it still leaves out most of the candidates. The same tactic can be used against all of them except for Edwards and Lieberman.

Kerry is as "culturally liberal" as Dean (They're practically neighbors). He stood up against Santorium's gay bashing (to his great credit).

I know that I'm preaching to choir but I have had the great good fortune to have been taught by some wonderful people who happened to be gay; I have some very compassionate and loving friends who are gay; I am working side by side with with some very smart, committed volunteers who are gay - and if this country isn't big enough to include them has first class citizens - it is not big enough for me either. I am not going to put up with any more intimidation or bigotry without pushing back - these people are Americans and they deserve to be treated as Americans.

There are "cultural" issues but I think they apply more to being percieved as a "wimp" or as lacking leadership.

Tony -- the point I was trying to make is that Republicans will spend tens of millions of dollars in broadcast media defining "cultural issues" in terms of civil unions. A tactic that I feel is wrong and despicable. They have learned, however, that perception IS reality in politics -- and that the reality of certain issues is very different in the South. And the South is a major upcoming battleground.

"Support for civil unions of gay couples is 20 points lower in Iowa, at 56 percent to 35 percent. In South Carolina, prospective Democratic primary voters oppose civil unions, 52 percent to 36 percent.

In short, it is cultural forces -- far more than anything else -- that explains Dean's appeal in New Hampshire, forces that may tug the other way when the race moves to more typical battleground states."

Well if civil unions is the litmus test for "cultural forces" then that leaves out everyone if one looks strictly at their positions and not on any perception. (One could make a case between carving Lieberman and Edwards out from the pack).

Edwards does not strike me as someone with "gravitas" and it's a stretch for Lieberman. Lieberman will lose most of the Green vote whereas Dean has a chance to pick up quite a bit (in fact there are a number of Greens active as volunteers).

According to this reasoning - the best man has dropped out.

A case in point is Senator John McCain in 2000. "If you're interested in figuring out why John McCain who went from 15 percent to 34 percent in the national polls within five days of his New Hampshire victory, momentum clearly provides the best explanation," Mayer says. "But if your main interest is in who finally wins the nomination, momentum is really of very little use."

Well, I think there's something of a difference between having a 5-day surge from 15 to 34 and a 5-month surge from nowhere to frontrunner. There's also the fact that McCain had no significant organization on the ground outside NH (and his home state, I suppose) and was unable to capitalize in any way on his bump.

For what it's worth, I still think you're being coy. It's clear that for whatever reason you've lost your shine for Howard Dean. Still no specifics on that other than the somewhat murky attack against "negative campaigning." Sure he's critical of the others on the war vote, but doesn't that fall under the domain of legitimate critique? They are running against one another here, and it's not like he's posting attack websited (e.g. http://www.deanfacts.com).

Oh, and I saw you use the adjective "Gravitas." Leaning Kerry? =)

I love the movie "Three Days of the Condor"...
 
It seems to me that the more of these stories the blogosphere can tell, the more likely that such "surprises" can be anticipated and pre-defused....
 
Scenario planning could / should be another component of social activism....

Fun to think about, but I'm not sure it would make any difference in the radical right-wing and anti-democractic policies being purused by the present regime.

This is called the "Roosevelt option," because it's basically what McKinley did in 1900 with Teddy Roosevelt.

But this is not 1900. We don't just have the background of the Spanish-American War to deal with. We also have something much like the Filipino-American War going on in Iraq (and I think that's kind). We also have a different world political background. We're not the new imperialists on the block, we're the only ones.

And then there's the deficit.

What would Giuliani say about all this? And would Americans salute?

I don't know. And if the "war" continues on its present path, not even Giuliani will be able to save the GOP. Unless, that is, they got rid of Bush....