About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
susanthe
William Tucker

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Time for Leadership Change at NHDP?

by: Kriseroberts

Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 21:08:19 PM EST


All successful organizations; professional sport teams, businesses, non-profits, political, military, etc are constantly conducting detailed self-evaluations as a means not just to prevent failure but to insure continuous success. On the rare occasions when they fail to meet organizational expectations, they have no problem whatsoever, enlisting unbiased outside evaluators. Successful organizations don't accept mediocre results and they never accept excuses. They always hold the current leadership responsible and accountable. More important they have proactive leadership that hold itself responsible and accountable.

If we are serious about the future of the Democratic Party in New Hampshire, if we have any hope of regaining our competitiveness we have to do some very deep self-reflection.  Some people will quickly revert to excuse making; it was the Tea Party, it was the millions of dollars from unnamed donors, it was the lies, it was, it was, and it was. Even if every single excuse was correct, I have to ask how in the world; could we have been so blinded sided. Why didn't we fight? I have serious concerns if leadership never saw it coming, but I find it even worst if they saw it coming and they were paralyzed into inactivity or even worst reverted to self-interest and self-survival.

This has nothing to do with personality, it is cold and simple, did the current party leadership perform at a level that met or exceeded our expectations. If the answer is yes, then why do we have such low expectations? If we willing to maintain the current party leadership then we must accept the fact that we are just going to be a voiceless minority, just hoping that we can retain the corner officer going forward. Failing that; we would be no different that the Massachusetts Republican Party, a party in name only.

The current state party leadership took over in 2007 and looking back at their accomplishments; one has to look pretty hard for any of note. The current leadership can't or shouldn't be taking any credit for the 2006 results. Nor should they accept responsible for the governor's high poll numbers, that credit should go to the Republicans for poor candidates.

When one looks at the 2008 Obama fired-up Electoral College landslide election, New Hampshire's results; 15 seat loss in the House, no pick-ups in the Senate. When one reviews the 2010 election results, 123 seat loss in the House (138 seat loss in two years), 9 seat loss in the Senate, wipe-out on the Governor's Counsel, even with a two-term congressman lost US Senate seat, lost a NH House seat with a very good candidate in a heavy Democratic leaning district, lost a NH House seat held by a two-term member to a very poor and flawed Republican candidate.  

The party leadership proudly boasts about how we passed Marriage Equity, how safe our state is, how wealthy we are, how low our school drop-out rate is etc. None of these were accomplished by the state party leadership, they were accomplished as the result of actions of the Governor, Senate, and House; by people who put their name on the dotted line, people who risked the public embarrassment of election defeat.

The only two factors that should determine whether the New Hampshire Democratic Party Leadership is successful are very simple does it find the most competitive candidates possible to complete for every single county, state, and federal level seat.  

The second, but truly only determination of success, what was our win and loss record, did we lose any seats that we should have won.

Based on our win and loss record over the pass two elections, especially the pass election where the Democratic Party was eviscerated at the county, House, Senate and Counsel levels, there is no doubt in my mind that we need a leadership change at the state party headquarters. With the current leadership that we have in place, I see little hope for anything more than a minor recover here and there. I think the current leadership has spent far too much time on regional and national committees while neglecting their responsibilities to their fellow Democrats here in New Hampshire.

If we have any hope of overcoming our collective failure in the 2010 election cycle someone has to accept responsibility and so far I have not seen one single person in the New Hampshire's Democratic Party Headquarters man up, and say I accept complete responsibility and I should be held accountable.  

Kriseroberts :: Time for Leadership Change at NHDP?
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Either say it or don't. (0.00 / 0)
You won't convince me with a wink and a nudge.

--
@DougLindner


Man up? (4.00 / 1)
So, the "man up" thing is to quit when the going gets tough?  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    


I support Ray Buckley 110% (4.00 / 2)
The current state party leadership took over in 2007 and looking back at their accomplishments; one has to look pretty hard for any of note.

I dunno, sparky. I seem to recall a pretty decisive across-the-board sweep in all major races in 2008. And the NHDP had a decisive advantage in funds and organizers in 2010, a far more accurate reflection of the party leadership's role than, say, the ability to single-handedly stop a national tide that wiped out our party across the country.

By your standard, what Democratic leaders outside of California should remain in office? President Obama? Should he turn tail and head home to Illinois because the same fate befell his party that afflicted nearly every one that controlled the White House since WWII -- getting clobbered in a mid-term election?

If we "have any hope of overcoming our collective failure in the 2010 election cycle," we had better not resort to scapegoating as a pathetic substitute for hard work.


I think this diary is a trial balloon. (4.00 / 1)
NHDP is only one factor and this was a national wave year.  I think the coordinated campaign did a great job.  Some have suggested it could have used a stronger presence outside the Manchester area and I can't speak to that, but I'm listening, and in my experience, our current Chair is listening too.

What I do know is that if somebody else wants my vote for Chair, they should 1. come up with a good reason and 2. actually say so out loud.  I don't see either of those things happening, especially the first.

I look forward to re-electing Ray.

--
@DougLindner


[ Parent ]
It would be useful to get a numerical handle (4.00 / 1)
on how New Hampshire Democrats performed, in a national Red tide, compared to Democrats in other states.

I kvetched about Tuck's PVI model before the election. It assumes that differences in local race margins follow differences in national margins proportionally (fractal politics! - h/t Prof. Mandelbrot). There are lots of reasons why that might NOT be true, and might NOT hold up, but it seemed to hold up in NH in 2010.

But did it hold up in our neighboring states?

If not, what made the difference?


Thanks to Ballotpedia... (4.00 / 1)
Maine
(pre-election)
House: 94D, 55R; Senate: 20D, 15R
(post-election)
House: 73D, 77R; Senate: 14D, 20R

Vermont
(pre-election)
House: 94D, 48R; Senate: 23D, 7R
(post-election)
House: 93D, 48R; 22D, 8R

Massachusetts
(pre-election)
House: 142D, 15R; Senate: 35D, 5R
(post-election)
House: 130D, 30R; 36D, 4R

http://www.ballotpedia.org/wik...


[ Parent ]
New Hampshire = National Trends on Steroids (4.00 / 2)
Any model would need to consider New Hampshire's history in midterm elections -- one in which national trends are deeply intensified. In '94, '02, and '06, we had complete one-party domination. Total wipeouts. (Could probably have added '98 to this list had we not had George Condodematraky running for Senate. But Jeanne wiped the floor with her opponent, and Dems took back the Senate.)

Many speculated that this intensification was due to straight-ticket voting. That made sense. Clearly, however, other factors were at play. A good model would provide us insight into these factors -- and compare '10 performance not just against neighboring states, but against our historical patterns.

Come to think of it, it's a good thing that we didn't get rid of Kathy Sullivan in '02, huh?  


[ Parent ]
One factor is having every office up (4.00 / 9)
every two years. The national model, and model in many other states, is to have some bodies change on different cycles, limited the effect of any given election to (for example) one-third of the Senate.

The clearest effect of our short terms of office is probably empowerment of bureaucrats versus elected officials.


[ Parent ]
Maine and Vermont (4.00 / 2)
have the same two year election cycle as New Hampshire for their legislature. The Maine governorship is 4 years while Vermont is 2 years.  One difference is that Maine has term limits.  While this might seem good, there is a loss of institutional memory.

I do agree about the power of the bureaucrats. With little or no staff for research,  the other group that is empowered if the lobbyists who become the source for information in N.H.

Having attended hearings in both New Hampshire and Vermont, I'll take NH any day.  Every bill has a hearing and is voted on. The public has the ability to testify at hearings not just the hand-picked 'chosen ones.' Hopefully, this won't change now that the control freaks are in power.


[ Parent ]
One difference between the nestled states (0.00 / 0)
I keep quoting Dartmouth's Dick  Winters on this. (Hopefully not misquoting. The brilliant insight is his, the detritus mine.)

Vermont has lots of elected statewide offices that constitute a ladder of advancement for politicians elected public servants. Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, Treasurer...

New Hampshire does not. The only elected statewide offices are  Governor and US Senator. There is no career path to follow. If you want to run for Governor or Senator, run a local area networking company, or a garage door company, or a lawbook publisher. This isn't a slam at either party: we both elect people from out of left (or right) field.

Compare to VT.



[ Parent ]
I'm torn (4.00 / 1)
on whether or not the gubernatorial election should be every two or four years.  The same is true of state Senate elections.  I don't see a huge issue with biennial elections, but with the increasingly long election season, it's becoming the case that every legislative session is broken essentially into a year of work and a year of defending/attacking the previous year's work.  (Not to discount the work of our legislators in the second, election year).  Frankly, when the state Senate is treated electorally the same way the House is, I don't see much of a need for a bicameral legislature.  If the purpose of the Senate, as some contend, is to provide a more thorough, less politicized review of legislation, then I think Senate terms should be longer--maybe four terms with half up every other biennium or something.

[ Parent ]
Yes (0.00 / 0)
Here here!
then I think Senate terms should be longer--maybe four terms with half up every other biennium or something.

I would also think it would allow both parties time to develop their candidates.

I think the tough thing/complicating factor might be finding folks willing to make a 4 year commitment at 100/yr.

I would like to see gov at 4 years/ two term max.

Hope > Fear




Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.


[ Parent ]
point was made by America Votes presentation @ Roots Camp n/t (4.00 / 1)


Annie 2012!

[ Parent ]
Absolutely true, elwood. (0.00 / 0)
The appointments are often for five years, or two and a half election cycles.

[ Parent ]
I didn't "man up"? (4.00 / 3)
I guess I "womaned up" by helping with a rebuilding effort, as opposed to crawling into a corner to engage in a pity party, which I guess according to the diarist would have been the manly thing to do.

[As you can guess, the use of the term "man up" as connoting superior moral character really frosts me.]

thanks for the compliment, DD!  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    


[ Parent ]
Leadership is, like ownership, (4.00 / 3)
not a ship that's designed to take you anywhere. A hobbyhorse would be more fun.

Leaders do make handy sacrificial lambs for people desperately in need of someone else to blame.


I'm recommending in hopes of (4.00 / 6)
having a useful discussion of what went wrong, how much New Hampshire was different than other states and why, and how to change things.

I'm not recommending because I think blame is clear, or think that "firing the coach" is the default action after a big loss. I don't think that; and I don't think changing people while maintaining strategic assumptions is effective.

And among the institutions that must ask, "What responsibility do we carry for the red tide?" is Blue Hampshire itself...


its a nice thought (0.00 / 0)
elwood, but it's not possible to have a useful discussion of what went wrong - at least not here. Too many jerking knees in a very public venue.

It is worth pointing out that our neighbor to the south didn't have the kind of losses NH did. Neither did VT. Turning NH into a solidly blue state is going to require a long term commitment, and serious examination of the way things have always been done.



member of the professional left  


[ Parent ]
Scott Brown (0.00 / 0)
I think one thing at play in MA was that people saw what happened when they didn' turn out in a prior election.  Perhaps it will help us next time.  No disagreement on the long term commitment...  and I am happy with the leadership.


[ Parent ]
Don't curse the darkness . . . (4.00 / 5)
. . . light a candle.  If you think NHDP leadership should be changed, who should replace us?  I'm the NHDP Treasurer; do you find fault in my work that led to the election results?  (I'm pretty low on the NHDP leadership totem pole, so I doubt anyone could identify anything).  But if you do, that's fine, let's get it out there.  What, specifically, should I have done differently?

What -- specifically -- should Ray or Mike or any of the other leaders and staff (who worked 20-hour days for months on our behalf) have done differently?

That's how you make a plan going forward.  That's how you show leadership.  Identify what went wrong and have a vision of what to do differently in the future to avoid the same results.  But don't just curse the darkness.  Light the candle, man up and offer an alternative.


Mike Brunelle (0.00 / 0)
in my estimation worked very hard and worked smart.One issue that keeps coming back to me is that we did not have the resource$ that we have had in the past...the money, the bodies, the canvassers from Massachusetts.

The good people at the party, and at the campaigns worked their asses off. Like the Republicans experienced the last two cycles at a minimum...it just wasn't their year. We need a strategic plan to 'clean the vermin out'. Only then can we decide if the plan we want to enact can be best implemented by the current team, or if changes are necessary.

Ask yourself this, had you been in charge what would you have done differently? I keep thinking that our message of 'it's really not so bad' was poor, but we were forced there by the messaging of our opponents outside ad machine.

All organizations are a reflection of leadership. I think Obama failed to act as a strong leader and disappointed voters who needed his promise of hope to turn into reality. Instead we got Washington worse than ever. In the words of my friend Adam Green, Obama should fight for the 98% not bend to the will of the 2%.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...


Annie 2012!

It's pretty clear that this was (4.00 / 1)
a wave election in a series of wave elections that are occurring with greater frequency.  In my opinion, this was a national referendum on politics as usual, and the electorate punished those in charge.  The Republicans did it through outrage politics and turning out their base.  The Democrats, in the face of historical problems with mid-term turnout, made matters worse by compromising on policy and principle (at the national level) further antagonizing progressives and independents.  As many as 45 million Dems nationally may have sat this one out.

It seems obvious to me that big-money interests dominate both political parties and that appears to be filtering down to our little state.  Contrary to popular (Democratic) opinion, I do not believe that the electorate is an ignorant, know-nothing mass of stupidity voting against their self-interest.  The public rightly perceived that the wealthy were protected through bank bailouts, corporate bailouts, and toothless financial regulation reform while the economy continued to turn sour on average Americans who are being told we need to accept "shared sacrifice."  The American public is rejecting the policies that the governing elite are establishing.

These policies include politicians of both parties offering solutions to the problems of the day that represent the interests of the elite.  From Social Security to Medicare to economics, our policy options are framed so that heads they win, tails we lose.  Social Security is a fantastic microcosm of this circumstance, where the options being discussed by the "centrists" include reforms that are overwhelmingly rejected by the public.  For which these untenable positions and "centrist" officials are then portrayed in the media as courageous and smart.  

It's all about the money.

 

"Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world." A. Einstein


[ Parent ]
I agree with elwood (0.00 / 0)
It's debatable whether this debate should be public, but if it is to be public, then this is the place for it.

And in that spirit, I have to just mention that I used the phrase "The coach gets fired" the other day in the context of Nancy Pelosi. But I was describing a dynamic, not advocating either way (I like Pelosi and, as I said, would have voted for her if I had a vote and didn't like the alterative). So I hope no one thought it was a veiled reference to New Hampshire. It was not.

In the choice of who leads New Hampshire Democrats, I truly have no opinion. I'm not close enough and can't judge from what I read here. Of course I have opinions on whether the election was a wave ... but (for once) I'll keep them to myself. Best wishes to all involved.



Only one way to avert this one (0.00 / 0)
And that would have been to institute mandatory voting, Australia-style. This election was all about who showed up, as evinced by the enormous 'registered voter' versus 'likely voter' gap and then (at least in NH) the even larger gap that actually manifested. If NH had 90%+ turnout like Australia routinely gets, Democrats would win handily.

Mandatory voting isn't a popular idea, though, not least because any sort of government-enforced mandatory activity is frequently viewed with enormous amounts of suspicion. It would also probably be a 1st Amendment violation, since not-voting would very much be a form of political speech. You'd have to include 'deliberately refused' as a penalty-free excuse, and then you don't have much of a 'mandatory' element.

In other words: NH Dems just didn't show at the polls, and I don't think that anybody in the state could have changed that, and the only way to change that wouldn't have been feasible and would have been a state-level change, not party-level. The flipside is that I very much suspect we'll be seeing another 100+ seat swing in 2012 as Republicans wildly overreach and as the presidential election brings out a more normal cross-section of the electorate.

Only the left protects anyone's rights.


A gentler "variant" of mandatory voting (4.00 / 1)
1.Make elections on Veterans Day (and constantly remind people that it is their sacrifice that makes democratic elections possible).

2. Make it a mandatory federal holiday ... for everyone who goes to a polling place. You dont have to vote for anyone but you have to stand in line and take a ballot. If you dont go, you dont get paid for the holiday.

This would make it easier to vote, provide incentive to do so and would emphasize the real purpose and value of the sacrifice of our veterans.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  


[ Parent ]
Argh. (0.00 / 0)
So my employer - whether that's McDonald's, Google, or Tom's Auto Repair - checks with the government to find out how I spent my day off, and docks me if the government says I didn't vote.

No thank you. As I understand the term "fascism" means big corporation and the state ganging up. We're close enough to that already.


[ Parent ]
No you just bring a slip from the election site. If you dont want to fine dont get paid for not working. (0.00 / 0)
Again, no one has to vote (which is what the phrase "you don't have to vote" means as used above.) just go to the polls and get the day off. voting or not voting is your choice. You can even choose to work. I dont think it is asking a lot for an extra day off.

And please, fascism? If you dont like the idea fine, but calling it fascist is a bit over the top.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  


[ Parent ]
Not over the top.. (0.00 / 0)
That's how we slide into things like fascism, by saying "Hey little froggie, the water isn't too hot."

This constructs a brand-new intercept right between the employer-employee relationship and the government. The local government, filled with yahoos like that school board chairman, at that!


[ Parent ]
all legal vacation days are created at the age old "intercept between employer-employee relationships and the government." (0.00 / 0)
establishing a civic quid(attendance at polling) for the civic quo received (day off with pay)has nothing to do with fascism, no more than allowing the government to regulate minimum wage, child labor, workplace safety etc do.  

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

[ Parent ]
I'm a fairly old guy, Paul, with a bunch of jobs in my life (0.00 / 0)
and I have never brought in a permission slip from the government to get paid for a day off.

This would be new, this would be very bad.


[ Parent ]
Jury Duty (4.00 / 2)
When you serve, they give you proof to provide to your employer.

So there is a precedent. But, I'm with you on this.

I'd love to see a holiday for an election, but we have more than one election a year. How could we appropriate a set aside for a general and not a primary or a special?

Unless we go to Saturday.


Whack-a-mole, anyone?


[ Parent ]
Please no (0.00 / 0)
My town has Saturday elections, one of them in June. It's awful.



[ Parent ]
What's awful? (0.00 / 0)
Does voting conflict with soccer practice or a trip to the Cape? What a shame, if folks with planned leisure agendas have to skip their cushy relaxation program.

Or are we all working two jobs and we need the pay we earn on Saturday?

Whack-a-mole, anyone?


[ Parent ]
Yes. Both. And more (0.00 / 0)
Stay away from my weekend, politician!

Next you'll have grocery stores open on Thanksgiving, you liberal elitist. :-!


[ Parent ]
The government also has laws that protect soldiers who get called to active duty. (0.00 / 0)
and doesn't protect soldiers not called up. Fascism?

I don't have a problem with people who think pay for going to the polls is a bad idea-- I didn't even say that I was in favor of it, but rather posted it as an interesting alternative to a call for mandatory voting (which didn't elicit any other response, although one might think it a it more intrusive than the offer of a day off contingent on appearing at polls but not necessarily voting.).

Personally, I do like the idea of linking Veterans Day to voting because it would both make voting easier for working people and thus more likely to occur and would at the same time perhaps cause more people to think about ow they benefit from the service of veterans.

As for paid day off contingent on going to the polls, I think it  1) is interesting 2)is far better than mandatory voting (which I think violates the First Amendment), 3) is never going to happen and 4)has nothing to do with fascism.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  


[ Parent ]
1. Two day election, Saturday and Sunday (0.00 / 0)
2. Two weeks of early voting
3. No-excuse-needed absentee ballots
4. Free coffee for people holding signs both days

--
@DougLindner


[ Parent ]
Umm... (4.00 / 1)
I'd rather make it a little less employer-centric. Federal holiday for all, absolutely, with no restrictions based on 'must vote,' sure. I would love for Voting Day to be a federal holiday. You can't at all pretend to not know it's election day if you get the day off for Voting Day. Rather than making it an employer-employee connection, though, just provide a $20 voucher for each registered voter who shows up at the polls. Or, heck, an entry in a national lottery - one person every two years wins, one dollar per vote cast.

Only the left protects anyone's rights.

[ Parent ]
I like the lottery idea-- and you could somehow add a portion of enhanced funding for veterans services. (0.00 / 0)


"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

[ Parent ]
Fighting against a tide here (0.00 / 0)
I am not sure I agree 100% with the diarist but I do think the focus of the NHDP leadership was bad. For far too long the leadership carried on a personal fight against the GOP leadership rather than projecting a simple strong positive position. NHDP lacked vision, the emphasis is on a simple message. The co-ordinated campaign I met and worked with lacked professionalism, even though they had degrees and credentials. If asked for a simple bullet point list for phone-banking etc. they had no clue, and I mean no clue at all. I am sure not everyone was like this. The organizers from the Kuster campaign were on point, could answer position questions and they hardly ever went home at the end of their shift or spent half the morning worrying about lunch. Let's get more of them and let's have leadership that doesn't have personal agendas to distract them from the task at hand. Simple clear messaging, repeat, repeat, repeat.

what would be the simple, clear message (0.00 / 0)
that you would propose for us to use as the banner for the next two years?

[ Parent ]
good question (4.00 / 1)
It is one that needs some discussion to get right and perhaps a fresh insight. I don't necessarily think this is the right venue for coming up with the idea but do think that "good stewards" which was a good concept lacked voter connectivity. Most people no longer have a clear role model to associate with the concept. "Keep _____ moving forward" lacked definition as well. Even the "party of No" was flawed because it has a positive value. I know I will be criticized for mixing state and federal messaging but I am using what comes to mind first and if it's not coming to mind I probably didn't hear it enough. On the other side "budget, budget, budget" hit voters where they were living, in tight financial circumstances. It's not easy to get right but if it was done right it could have saved many seats. Let's not forget how much money was thrown in to defeat Jerry Brown in California and he still won. We are building a future for everyone, why not do it together?

[ Parent ]
As we try and puzzle this out (0.00 / 0)
One very big factor is the difference between media cultures in California and here.  

[ Parent ]
Demographics! and political culture. Also. n/t (4.00 / 1)


"Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world." A. Einstein

[ Parent ]
"Try and puzzle this out" ???? (4.00 / 1)
Try TO puzzle this out. What happened to my inner proper language thug??

[ Parent ]
Let me see if read you correctly... (4.00 / 3)
There was a wave of Republican wins that literally swept the entire nation and the NHDP leadership is to blame for that.
Wow, those folks are super powerful!

If you assume I didn't support a Dem in a national election because I didn't support them in the Primary, well, you are confusing me with someone who doesn't want to see Democrats elected.

NHDP leadership needs changing (0.00 / 0)
first, "man up" means show some backbone, not moral superiority.

I detect clique thinking in the opposing comments. Protecting the status quo because it is the status quo is a bad idea.

Who honestly thinks  there's only a handful of good Dems. in NH who can run the state party well? Replacing the current party leadership with other good Dems. is hardly "cut and run."

& I would like the NHDP to explain how the press release criticizing Bass for hiring a lobbyist as his chief of staff hurts Bass and helps Ann Kuster. You remember Ann Kuster, right? The very good Dem. grassroots candidate, who has worked as a lobbyist, & who received a call from Pres. Obama after her very close race? And who will probably run again in 2 years.

And, is there any reason the NHDP website can't be kept up to date? Is that a hardship? It is the public face of the state party.

From my perspective as a voter, the state Dems were all but invisible. Just what were they doing 20 hours a day?

Change is a good thing. That's what Obama was all about.



And your point is? (4.00 / 2)
Oh, "man up" means backbone - wait, that makes it okay? I don't think so. "Backbone" connotes strength, courage; using the term "man up" as another term for strength or courage means that those are considered "manly" traits.  What a bunch of hogwash. Tell it to the women getting shot in Iran and Iraq. Tell it to the women raising children as single mothers, or the women trying to keep their families together who are the sole breadwinner (for less pay). "Man up" - I don't think so.    



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    


[ Parent ]
I think "man up" is a stupid phrase. (4.00 / 3)
If you think of the out sized contributions of men to the evils in the world, I don't know what it has to do with backbone. Pointless aggression yes, obstinacy perhaps, backbone, not so much. (And yes, some of my best friends are men, but facts are facts).

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

[ Parent ]
what were YOU doing 20 hours a day? (4.00 / 1)
anger and finger pointing are not governing strategies; having a vision of a different way of doing things and showing the backbone to achieve that vision are

[ Parent ]
Same old story (4.00 / 1)

I've heard this before. A few years ago there was all sorts of noise attacking the NHDP leadership as if it were a right wing organization.

So who did all the noise makers put up to run? Answer Betty Hall. I served on a board with Betty and liked her personally, but it was a terrible Idea.

Betty ended up running as a third party candidate for senate. She left the party lock stock and barrel.

So if people want to change leadership start out with some viable
candidates instead of attacking the people who work their asses off for us.

( ps Re read what David Pearce had to say above)  


still change for leadership (0.00 / 1)
Kathy S. now links links to soldiers being shot?
What is wrong with you?????  You are so irrational, you insult soldiers.

I notice you don't address any other NHDP "new leaders" issues.

You are on very shaky grounds--but, naturally you will support the status quo. How may red years did you run the NHDP?

Despite your parsing, it still means "showing  backbone"


Anytime accusations of insufficient manhood (4.00 / 4)
are used to ascribe the character or fitness of a person for a position, it implies that "manliness" is a baseline requirement.  It reinforces the normalization of misogynistic tendencies in our society and hurts women, regardless of the gender employing it.

The use of this phrase, no matter how you slice it, supports an illegitimate and unsustainable paternalistic hierarchy in our society.  

One man's opinion, for what it's worth.


"Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world." A. Einstein


[ Parent ]
No. (4.00 / 5)
It is a sexist term used by little boys and baseballs players trying to get people who think like little boys to watch them.

Grow up.


[ Parent ]
I agree that "man up" is sexist (0.00 / 0)
But can we keep saying "get your man pants on" to mock Christine O'Donnell?

--
@DougLindner


[ Parent ]
it was Angle, Doug in ref. to Harry Reid n/t (0.00 / 0)


Annie 2012!

[ Parent ]
That's what I thought. (0.00 / 0)
And then I googled it.  Christine O'Donnell spent the primary hinting that Mike Castle is gay.

--
@DougLindner


[ Parent ]
only to the same kind of people (4.00 / 1)
who favor a similar term: "he's got balls." Those  people generally tend to suffer from sexism.

It also behooves us to remember that it's men that got us into all these big messes we're in.

member of the professional left  


[ Parent ]
I agree, although I did find myself chuckling in '08 (0.00 / 0)
at James Carville who said that if Hillary gave Obama one of her balls, they'd both have two.


"Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world." A. Einstein

[ Parent ]
Didn't address.... (0.00 / 0)
Because you lost me at trying to defend "man up".  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    


[ Parent ]
What I want to know, Cris, is (4.00 / 2)
where were you and some of the other Dems with reasonably safe seats?  Did you put in 20 hour days working to overcome the mid-term tide that washed the state?  Did you help another Democrat who was in danger of losing her or his seat?  Or did you sit back and wait for the Party to do it for you?

You wrote:

The party leadership proudly boasts about how we passed Marriage Equity, how safe our state is, how wealthy we are, how low our school drop-out rate is etc. None of these were accomplished by the state party leadership, they were accomplished as the result of actions of the Governor, Senate, and House; by people who put their name on the dotted line, people who risked the public embarrassment of election defeat.

The Governor and many in the Legislature wanted nothing to do with Marriage Equality.  It was people like Ray behind the scenes working to ensure that NH won't have another embarassment like MLK Day.  If you think it was your "it doesn't pass the kid test" speech that moved Senator Debbie Reynolds to change her mind and cast the deciding vote, I can assure you, you are sadly mistaken.  I was involved in speaking out for Marriage Equality and I saw what went into its passage, heroes like Mo Baxley, our own Jim Splaine and yes, Ray Buckley were on the front lines.  They will be there when the newbies try to tear it down.  How much are you willing to put on the line for it?   And while I'm on a tear, how is voting for a bill, risking the "public embarrassment of election defeat" EVEN come a tiny, eensy bit close to the risk - not of public embarrassment, of physical violence- Ray, Mo, Jim and other subjected themselves to by being out publicly so that all people could have the freedom to marry whomever they choose.

With regards to the election results.  I googled you and haven't found your letter anywhere asking for Tim Kaine's head on a platter.  Is it in the mail?  On what blogsite will you post it?.  Or did you post here because you want Ray's job, not the national one?  

Sorry if I sound a little cranky.  You see, I have watched Raymond Buckley conduct himself with dignity when others have tried to drag him into the gutter.  He has been attacked by the opposition, the press and by some in his own party.  Yet he still retains his true belief in the rightness of the Democratic Party and its abilty to right wrongs, care for the weakest among us and show dignity and equality to everyone.  I know, down to my socks, how much he loves his state, his country and his party.  Nobody works as hard or inspires as much loyalty as Ray does.  

Think you can do better?  Go for it.  You won't have my vote.

Why do you say socialism like it's a bad thing?


"when the newbies try to tear it down" (4.00 / 1)
Your best line of defense is Governor Lynch.

I thought I'd interrupt your melee to offer a simple point of clarity.

Lynch, by his signature, bared his political jugular to the wolves of NOM, RGA, Cornerstone, ect. What was the spending differential?

I have this Buddhist friend. Maybe you know her? She mentions "gratitude" as be a key element in our journey towards elightenment.



Whack-a-mole, anyone?


[ Parent ]
I don't know how many hours a day Kris works, but... (4.00 / 1)
Rep. Kris Roberts works hard and more importantly he is an effective legislator.

And just for the record, Rep. Roberts was deeply involved in the marriage equality battle.

-----


Thanks for all the fish


-----


[ Parent ]
I realize I may have come across a tad, shall we say (4.00 / 1)
assertive? Strident? Manly?*  I've always admired Representative Roberts.  He may not remember, but I worked with Commissioner Brothers at NH Employment Security when he was pushing for veteran's issues at our local offices.  Kris was a part of that.  

My friend Katherine Rogers refers to me as a pitbull.  I tend to go into that mode when my friends are attacked.  Ray Buckley is my friend.

Jack, darlin, I am hella grateful to the Gov for signing the bill.  As a state worker who lives and dies according to who sits in the corner office, (and one who can count to 3, 13 and 201) I know that our team is galaxies better than theirs.  But make no mistake, Jim Splaine by coming out as a gay man to push for this issue, risked more than a $100 a year job.

* That one was for you KS!

Why do you say socialism like it's a bad thing?


[ Parent ]
Three points (0.00 / 0)
Mandatory voting: there was a void where there should have been a clear positive message, this message is what brings voters out or keeps them home.

Responsibility: the buck stops at the top and a leader worth re-electing admits it. Part of the void came from our leadership taking the bait from the opposition leadership. Long hours can't make up for wrong emphasis.

A lot of excuses are given above for the most devastating loss in the entire nation but not one of them actually measures up to the depth of the loss. Our leadership at least could have wrung more money out of the DNC or could tell us why all three federal races were dropped here. Given that the top of the ticket pulls the whole, we start to look like sacrificial lambs for Reid and company.


NHDP leadership (0.00 / 0)
from DiStaso's column:
TOUGH TRIP. Several state Democratic Party leaders are in warm San Juan, Puerto Rico, this week for private and public meetings of key components of the Democratic National Committee.
State Chair Ray Buckley, Vice Chair Martha Fuller Clark and DNC at-large member Joanne Dowdell, will attend a DNC Executive Committee meeting on Friday and an Association of State Democratic Chairs, chaired by Buckley, on Saturday.
Also on Saturday is a meeting of the DNC Rules and By-Laws Committee at which a discussion of the latest 2012 caucus and primary delegate selection plan may come up, Buckley said.
The New Hampshire primary's place in the plan has been controversial because the plan leaves only four days between the primary and the Nevada caucus in February 2012, despite a state law requiring a seven-day, post-primary window.
The full DNC approved the calendar in August and so, Buckley said he expects "nothing specific to New Hampshire" to come up this weekend.
"But as always, we will be vigilant protecting the primary," he said.

Good grief. (0.00 / 0)


"Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world." A. Einstein

[ Parent ]

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox