New Progressive Politics

What Becomes of the Broken Maverick

A few hours ago, I got off the phone with my Dad who was driving by Franklin and Marshall College in Lancaster, PA. Seeing the large crowds and commotion, he asked if I had heard whether "anyone big" was visiting. He said he thought U.S. Sen. John McCain and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin were making a stop there, so I looked it up and confirmed to him that he was right, prompting him to react with what seems to be the prevailing assessment surrounding the GOP ticket: everyone was there to see Palin.

McCain, who was quick to label U.S. Sen. Barack Obama as a celebrity, now embraces, perhaps even encourages, the glamorous reception with which his running mate is met. It seems like he was right to do so in the short-term, as the focus of the election, as Simon has mentioned, has shifted to Palin. Though that's not really surprising, given that the timing of her introduction left us either amazed by her acceptance speech or wondering who she is and what she believes.

Yet while the scramble for information over Palin was especially hurried after she was chosen as McCain's running mate, the dust has since settled from her speech in St. Paul. And with the clearing comes more information - from her understanding of institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to her conduct as Governor. What little we are learning about Palin comes from her interactions with regular citizens since she has been absent from the talk shows, as well as through close friends who speak well of her personally but seem mixed when the subject turns to politics.

All of this unravels before our eyes, gets us caught up in Alaska drama, and deflects attention away from McCain towards Palin. Recognizing this, and maybe trusting the media and the American people to do its due diligence on Palin, the Obama campaign is bringing the focus back to the GOP nominee and his Party's record. Its latest ads, "No Maverick" and "Naked Lies", as well as his speech on education are good examples of this strategy.

Meanwhile, McCain continues to tout Palin - whose speech is the only one from the GOP Convention that is highlighted on McCain's YouTube channel - and that maverick nature of theirs. As mentioned above, plenty of people have and will sift through Sarah Palin's past and credentials, which frees us up to focus on the notion of the maverick.

One definition from Princeton shows that, as a noun, "maverick" has two meanings: First, a rebel; and second, an unbranded rage animal that belongs to the first person who puts a brand on it. An adjective for the term: irregular.

While the bit about the "rage animal" seems to align itself with one of McCain's purported problems, I must acknowledge that the term maverick does connote a positive image in the "independent in behavior or thought" sense. We're familiar with that image. It's what defined the John McCain of yesteryear and won him public admiration from all sides. Yet things changed for him when he was branded the GOP nominee and started marching to the beat of a different drum, avoiding or outright fleeing from his once admirable stance on a whole slew of issues. Instead of sticking to his guns, he gave into the brush-clearing tactics of his predecessors.

It's almost tragic, really. The glorified way in which he painted his maverick image is now broken, and in its place we are left with an all-too-familiar ideal that begs for real change we can believe in. 

Update: The Huffington Post is chronicling the news sources that are speaking out about the McCain campaign's recent tactics, which seem to evoke the irregular nature of the maverick. 

Update II: Reuters shows how McCain finds the campaign trail to be more hostile when Palin's deference-deserving persona isn't with him on the trail. 

Update III: Brave New PAC weighs in on the maverick's campaign in the video below: 

(Note: You are now free from my random musings and long and tedious '08 Updates, as I have left NDN. Unless a new Kanye West video comes out and I can relate it to the work of the NDNBlog champions, it's safe to say that I will be appearing much less in the months ahead. I do look forward to returning occasionally, and hope to see you all soon! Thanks for putting up with me for so long...)

What World Does The Republican Party Live In?

I have watched the coverage of the Republican Convention for three days now and I have two main observations: 1) they have not presented a single proposal, just snide remarks (clever ones, but merely snide remarks all the same) and 2) the crowd is older and all white. Such a homogenous crowd is simply not reflective of the reality of the United States of America - watching and listening to the Convention makes one thing abundantly clear: the Republican Party is so very, very out of touch with the country they claim to put first.

The Washington Post's Eli Saslow and Robert Barnes note in a piece published today:

Only 36 of the 2,380 delegates seated on the convention floor are black [which is 1.5 percent of those present, while blacks make up over 12% of the U.S. population], the lowest number since the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies began tracking diversity at political conventions 40 years ago. Each night, the overwhelmingly white audience watches a series of white politicians step to the lectern -- a visual reminder that no black Republican has served as a governor, U.S. senator or U.S. House member in the past six years.

The lack of diversity is out of sync with the demographic changes in the United States. Twenty-four state delegations at the Xcel Energy Center have no black members at all. A few weeks ago Simon wrote about the Census Bureau reporting that racial and ethnic minorities will make up a majority of the country's population by 2042 -- almost a decade earlier than what the bureau predicted just four years ago. Two-thirds of Americans are non-Hispanic whites, 12.4 percent are black and 14.8 percent are Hispanic,according to 2006 census numbers. Not only is the party out of sync - it appears Republicans are making a concerted effort to ignore the multiplicity of nationalities and races in the United States, as they propose to eliminate all non-citizens from being counted in the next Census.

Only a few years ago, Republicans talked publicly about the party's aspirations to diversify -- So what happened? As in so many other areas, the Republican Party has no record and no proposals to offer any particular demographic. The party made a concerted effort to court Hispanics in 2004, but NDN has tracked how the GOP's electoral gains under George W. Bush have been diminished by the hard-line stance many Republicans have taken on immigration.

A black Republican delegate from Texas, Tony Leatherman agreed, "You see what Obama has done, and it's a reminder of what's possible." But the Republicans have proven that they are too cynical to consider what's possible, they're too busy trying to glorify the past in order to avoid dealing with the reality of today and the very real challenges of tomorrow. They demonstrate this by focusing on putting down their opponent - a product of the bi-racial, multi-cultural society in which most of America lives - instead of developing solutions that can appeal to the wide array of Americans. As Sally Quinn wrote, describing how the two parties are worlds apart: some people might want to live in McCain's or Sarah Palin's world, "but I believe that we live in Obama's world."

Txt Check

Here on the blog, we've frequently written about how text messages are playing a more important role in politics. From informing people how to get involved to announcing Vice Presidential picks, these quick and easy messages have evolved from a neat idea into a critical means of communicating to key groups. So it's not really a surprise that their use is being further explored, the latest example coming from the DCCC. Check out their text message below:

During McCain's speech, we'll text u facts to counter Republican lies. It's time 4 change, not more of the same old spin. Tell others to text 'rnc' to 30644. 

To learn more about text messaging in politics, check out Go Mobile Now and Mobile Media in 21st Century Politics, two great papers from our New Politics Institute.

Day 2 at the DNCC: Two Million Strong

We wrapped up our second day at the DNCC with another great event, Two Million Strong, and Growing, where we heard from Joe Trippi, Peter Greenberger of Google, and Macon Phillips, Deputy Director of New Media for Obama for America. Check out video from the event below. (We compressed it a bit, but when we're back to DC I'll re-upload it with higher quality.):

Obama's New Voter Reg Tool

The Obama campaign just launched a new website, VoteforChange.com, aimed at simplifying the voter registration process. From the campaign press release:

Today, the Obama campaign launched a new website aimed at simplifying the election process for voters as we gear up for a historic general election. VoteforChange.com is a new voter registration tool where voters across the country can verify their registration status, register to vote for the first time, or get the relevant absentee voting information for their state - all online.

"The number one reason that people don't vote is because they don't understand how easy it is to register to vote", said Jason Green, Director of Voter Registration. "VoteforChange.com, simplifies the process. It allows voters to register, check registration status, or find a polling location - all at the click of a button. By simplifying and explaining the process we believe that new voters will register, become involved in our movement for change and elect Senator Obama president in November."

Maybe this will be one of the tools given to all who attend Obama's Thursday acceptance speech at Invesco Field, fulfilling the goal of Deputy Campaign Manager Steve Hildebrand to make sure everyone leaves a volunteer.

Obama's Website for the General?

The Obama campaign has made some tweaks for the second time to its campaign website. The latest iteration is much more subtle than the first revamp during the primary process, which included an entirely redesigned site, but seems to be their site of choice to take them through the general election. Below are the new things I noticed about the site on first appearance. If I've missed or incorrectly pointed something out, please let me know!

  • Banner header: The top image of the website has changed slightly. You now see an American flag in the shape of the Obama logo weaved in and two of the campaign's critical action items, donate and find an event, are situated on top of one another. Also, the quote and image of Obama changes (hit refresh a few times) between his first quote about bringing change to Washington and a new quote about his agenda. I imagine this will rotate to reflect the policies Obama is focusing on.
  • Log-in bar: Atop the banner header is a new log-in feature where users can log into their MyBarackObama.com account (or MyBO as they call it). This makes the online community an even more prominent feature on the site, so I'm sure they expect it to continue to play a large role in the campaign.
  • Featured content box: The featured content box now cycles through horizontally, allowing the image in the box to be much bigger and more prominent. Also, I'm wondering if there will be synchronization between the featured policy and the quote in the banner. For example, I wonder if, when the Obama campaign wants to highlight its immigration policy, it will coincide with a quote at the top on the same issue. Just a thought.
  • The Obama brand: A general observation is that pictures of Obama are starting to change at key places. Where before he was superimposed in front of a graphic of crowds, emphasizing his movement, the pictures now are beginning to be superimposed on top of more traditional symbols like American flags.

More Evidence of a Sustained Progressive Revival

At the recent Netroots Nation conference in Austin, Texas, the Obama campaign put on a panel about its on and off line organizing. Moderated by New Media Director Joe Rospars, it was a compelling presentation, and I, for one, am still thinking about it a great deal all these weeks later. What was most striking to me was the persistent use of the term "community organizing," and how the campaign, had from the beginning, set out not just to win an election, but to create a lasting progressive movement capable of bringing real change to the country. While these are words spoken by many over many years, you got the sense that the Obama people meant it, and actually have the money, the organization, the candidate, the moment and the determination to do it.

I've been working in politics for two decades now, and for the past five years, I've been involved in various efforts to "build progressive infrastructure" to combat the conservative ascendancy by competing with the right's think tanks, leadership schools, candidate training centers and other organizations. I was an early advocate of the blogs and netroots, which have involved millions of people in politics as never before, and helped bring much-needed vibrancy and debate to left-of-center politics. I was instrumental in launching the Democracy Alliance, a consortium of funders who have channeled hundreds of millions of dollars into progressive organizations. I've also helped provide direct support to several of these groups, including Media Matters, Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, Democracia USA and what we now call Netroots Nation.

I strongly believe we will look back at this decade and see it as one of extraordinary progressive revival. It has been a time of tremendous institutional entrepreneurship on the center-left, but has also been a time when millions of Americans awakened politically. Dozens of new organizations have been started. Hundreds of new candidates have been elected to office, and once there, they have hired thousands of new staff. Thousands of blogs and bloggers have sprung up, creating a whole new class of thinkers, writers, analysts and powerful voices. The Internet has allowed millions of people to become engaged in a much more meaningful way in the life of their nation. All of this is creating a much larger, more dynamic ecosystem of progressive politics, with millions more activists, making the movement much bigger but also creating a much larger pool of future elected officials, writers and leaders of all kinds. All of this is very exciting to watch.

And into all this comes Barack Obama and his inspirational campaign. Unprecedented crowds, money, volunteers, viral activity, votes and enthusiasm - a sense all along in this campaign that he was summoning something deep inside himself to help inspire us to - as they say - have the "courage to change." He has told us all along that we are the change that we seek, that this campaign is not about him, but about us and our desire to bring about a better America. But is all of this just talk, tactics to get elected?

After listening to the Obama team in Austin, I was convinced that this historic campaign is trying to do much more than win an election. They are going to do everything in their power to unleash the passion of Democrats, progressives, indepenendents, Republicans - Americans - across the country and wage a truly national campaign, hiring staff in all 50 states, unveiling a national voter activist tool, opening up an unprecedented number of field offices, working to expand and redraw the Electoral College map and elect Democrats up and down the ballot in every state and prepare for redistricting in 2010. It is a bold and audacious vision, and one that I now know they intend to work to pull off.

But what made this presentation so powerful was their argument that this vision could only work if they could identify, train and develop a whole new generation of community leaders - in every community - who would become bottom-up advocates for a better nation long after past this election itself. They told a story of one of their community leaders from the South Carolina primary who used the network he built in the primary to run for office for the first time - and amazingly, he unseated a 13-year incumbent by a single vote. They talked as if they understood that this election, and the Obama campaign, was just one piece of a much larger battle to bring change to America itself. They have invested in training thousands of these new leaders in every community across the country - firemen, nurses, teachers, veterans, college kids, moms - who are the foundations of their communities and have become highly trained community and political activists. They will be working this cycle for Senator Obama, but many will continue on to help pass the Obama agenda, elect future Democrats, get involved in local politics and even run for office themselves.

The staff, including a very inspiring Steve Hildebrand, argued that this was Barack and Michelle's vision from the very first day of the campaign - that this was not a fight for him, but for us, for our country, and that if it went well, they needed to build a national movement for change that would long outlast the Senator and that would leave behinds millions of new activists and tens of thousand of new leaders capable of fighting future battles beyond 2008.

As someone who has worked to improve our nation for more than 20 years, I was, simply, blown away by this presentation. For reasons I still don't really understand, the campaign has not talked about all of this work very much, and I felt lucky to have been in the room. I hope that it will be up on the Netroots Nation Web site soon, and I would strongly recommend watching it online if you can.

The Obama effort, coming on top of the already incredible work being done through the progressive movement, makes one believe that a sustained period of progressive dominance, led by many new, emerging leaders across the country, is truly possible now. The ecosystem necessary to build a long and sustained movement for change is rapidly coming together, and it just may be that the Obama campaign's historic organizing effort - the marriage of the grassroots and the netroots -- will become seen as a critical "tipping point" for the long-term success of a new 21st century progressive politics.

NDN will be continuing this important conversation at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. On Tuesday, August 26, from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m., join us for Two Million Strong, and Growing. During this discussion, I, Internet pioneer Joe Trippi and Google's Peter Greenberger will lead a lively discussion of how a new set of media and technology tools are creating a much more decentralized, people-based model for campaigns and advocacy in the 21st century. Two Million Strong is at the Westin Tabor Center, 1672 Lawrence St., Tabor Auditorium, 3rd Floor Mezzanine Level.

On Thursday, August 28, at 11 a.m., I will take a closer, in-depth look at where American politics is heading in the 21st century in my presentation, The Dawn of a New Politics. The presentation, seen by many progressive leaders and groups across the country, focues on the big changes in media, technology, demography, race and governing agenda which are making the politics of the 21st century very different from the one just past.

So join us at the Hilton Garden Inn, 1400 Welton St., in the Titanium & Zirconium Rooms, 5th Floor on Thursday, August 28.  To learn more about these and other NDN events at the Convention, or to RSVP (recommended) go here

Txtual Seduction: Obama to SMS VP Choice

Plenty of people just received an interesting SMS from the Obama campaign. It reads:

Barack will announce his VP candidate choice through txt msg between now & the Conv. Tell everyone to txt VP to 62262 to be the first to know! Please forward.

To me, this decision is telling for two reasons. As we've long discussed, technology is changing the way we conduct and interact with politics. New tools like SMS - as well as many others - are making it easier for more people to become involved in the process, ultimately making our democracy more participatory. The Obama campaign clearly understands this and is hoping to continue to use the advent of these tools to further reinforce its campaign message of change.

Also, consider the constituencies that SMS reaches. From our reports:

From Mobile Media in 21st Century Politics, Sept. 2006:

Some constituencies are more savvy or dependent on mobile phones than others. Two key groups in are of special concern to progressives. Any majority political movement of the early 21st century will need to connect to the massive young generation of Millennials, and the booming population of Hispanics. Both groups are among the top users of mobile phone media.

And:

Studies from Telephia in 2005 showed that African American, Hispanic and mixed Asian groups make up the top three groups both in scope and in percentage of growth in using mobile.

Hispanic users had the 2nd highest use of mobile minutes, and the growth in use quarterly was rising at higher than any other ethnographic group.

All this reinforced in Go Mobile Now, Oct., 2007:

Mobile tools like text messaging and picture messaging are considerably more popular in black and Hispanic communities than in other demographics.

So what is clear is that the Obama campaign is announcing its VP choice via a method which is heavily used by Millennials, Hispanics, African Americans, and mixed Asian groups. To a lesser degree, I'm sure there will be members of older generations signing up to receive the text as well. As a result, the campaign will broaden its mobile database, making organizing and outreach to vital groups in the coming months all the more sophisticated. This surely will help cement the Obama campaign's mobile database as the go-to mobile database in progressive politics. And, more importantly, it adds another means through which the campaign hopes to build a lasting majority.

Now what would be impressive is if the campaign could figure out how to segment the Hispanic/Latino audiences from this effort and began delivering Spanish-language text messages. Imagine that foundation going into the fall.

Update: I just found out through Facebook that the campaign will also e-mail you Obama's VP choice. You just have to sign up to receive the notice. So not only will the Obama campaign hold the go-to mobile database, but perhaps the go-to e-mail database of progressive politics.

Update II: Jose Antonio Vargas has more insight in the Washington Post.

Energy Prices Change the American Dream

An article entitled, "Gas Prices Apply Brakes To Suburban Migration," by Eric M. Weiss in yesterday’s Washington Post details some of the ways in which high energy prices are changing the way Americans are choosing to live. These prices have the potential to shift the fundamental development and land use paradigms that have shaped American society for the second half of the 20th Century. In other words, the American Dream of moving to the suburbs or, a more recent phenomenon, the exurbs, could be going by the wayside.

Cheap oil, which helped push the American Dream away from the city center, isn't so cheap anymore. As more and more families reconsider their dreams, land-use experts are beginning to ask whether $4-a-gallon gas is enough to change the way Americans have thought for half a century about where they live.

"We've passed that tipping point," U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said.

Since the end of World War II, government policy has funded and encouraged the suburban lifestyle, subsidizing highways while starving mass transit and keeping gas taxes much lower than in some other countries.

Americans couldn't wait to trade in the cramped city apartments of the Kramdens and Ricardos for the lush lawns of the Bradys. Local land-use policies kept housing densities low, pushing development to the periphery of metropolitan regions and forcing families who wanted their dream house to accept long commutes and a lack of any real transportation choices other than getting behind the wheel.

Even the way the government pays for roads and transit is dependent on gas taxes, which is effective only if Americans keep driving.

"There is a whole confluence of government policies -- tax, spending, regulatory and administrative -- that have subsidized sprawl," said Bruce Katz, director of the Metropolitan Policy Program at the Brookings Institution. A gallon of gasoline costs more than $8 in Britain, Germany, France and Belgium, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Much of the price difference is due to higher taxes.

But there's been a radical shift in recent months. Americans drove 9.6 billion fewer highway miles in May than a year earlier. In the Washington area and elsewhere, mass transit ridership is setting records. Last year, transit trips nationwide topped 10.3 billion, a 50-year high.

Home prices in the far suburbs, such as Prince William and Loudoun counties, have collapsed; those in the District and inner suburbs have stayed the same or increased. A recent survey of real estate agents by Coldwell Banker found an increased interest in urban living because of the high cost of commuting.

Brookings says transportation costs are now second only to housing as a percentage of the household budget, with food a distant third.

The people are leading the revolution, but land-use experts wonder whether a government policy so etched into the American fabric will follow.

"When people bought homes, they punched the numbers and said can we afford the mortgage payment and taxes," Katz said. "This new paradigm is going to have families being more deliberate about the cost of transportation spending and energy costs. That's a new phenomenon in the United States. That will be the change that will change development patterns."

On Friday, August 1, at a panel on Energy and the American Way of Life, NDN heard from Shyam Kannan and Greg Kats, both of whom discussed this very subject and touched on the policies, practices, and technologies that can bring about changes in buildings and land use that can reduce energy use – combating both high energy prices and climate change.

What this article doesn’t mention are the secondary effects these changes will have on society. If more people are moving into cities, urban policies will have to change, urban schools will have to improve, and infrastructure and services will be rethought.

These new living patterns also have the potential to fundamentally alter American politics. How and where one lives is a tremendously important factor in the formation of values and voting behavior. In other words, people who live in cities vote differently from people who live in rural and exurban America. If suburban and exurban migration truly becomes a thing of the past, so will the more than half century of politics that goes with it.

McCain Don't Know Much About Geography

As Simon has commented, U.S. Sen. John McCain's ads exceedingly reflect a new Rovian approach to this election, and he's not limiting himself to attacking in one language...this latest ad in Spanish, called "The World According to Barack Obama" intends to promote the notion among Hispanic voters that according to Barack Obama, Latin American countries somehow "don't count" in the world because he didn't discuss Latin America during his trip to EUROPE ("but entire nations were forgotten.."), by asking voters: "and where is Latin America?", "and what about Latinos?", "Did he forget about us?" The ad is flawed in that Barack Obama's trip through Europe, and his speech in Berlin, was intended to discuss issues related to joint U.S. and EU policy.  As Jake and I were discussing, there's this thing called the Monroe Doctrine that would make it unseemingly to say the least for the U.S. to invite European nations to strategize over Latin American policy. But since when have Rovian tactics had any regard for honesty and accuracy?  

Syndicate content