On Monday, Organizing for America emailed its list and asked each to watch a video of Mitch Stewart, the group's director. Those who clicked on the link could see the thirty-ish Stewart sitting in an office of seeming modest nature, in front of a map of the United States. "The movement that you built is just getting started," he says. He notes that "special interests" aim to block Obama on his key priorities: health care, energy, and education. "It's up to you to make sure they don't stand in our way," he adds.
On the video, Stewart announces the "Pledge Project." He describes it as an "ambitious effort to map out and identify support for President Obama's economic blueprint." He asks viewers to declare their support for Obama's economic plan. "Once you do," he says, "we will ask you to build support in your own communities by forwarding this pledge by email, by knocking on doors, and by making phone calls." He adds, "By pledging and building support, you will be taking the first steps toward establishing a nationwide grassroots network, neighborhood by neighborhood."
It's a rather low-key pitch, delivered in a flat, no-drama manner. It's not pegged to any specific fight under way or to come. Stewart makes no reference to recalcitrant Republicans. And on the web page next to the video is "The Pledge" he wants supporters to sign. It is simple and two sentences long:
I will support President Obama's bold approach for renewing America's economy.
I will ask friends, family, and neighbors to pledge their support for this plan.
What the fuck's "bold" about it?
That's it. Nothing about bothering your House member. Nothing about lobbying your senator. Nothing about giving money.
Well, the mindshare comes first. The rest will come later.
Anyhow, this is a relief. If you hear one of your friends, family, or neighbors call Obama's economic plan "bold," you'll know you're dealing with a gen-you-wine bought-and-paid-for talking point! Splendid. It's going to be just like the primaries, except slower and more painful.
NOTE I like the "pledge" aspect, too. Personal fealty is a proven technique! Smart.
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+
Front page
Comments
The Biden Police in action
We need our convincing!
Only tyrants rig elections.
Huh (again?)
I'm not getting the reference to "Biden police."
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
The reference
Here.
Only tyrants rig elections.
The bailout mascot
Not sure if folks have gotten that email* yet, but I suspect it will be more effective than the "bold" talking point.
*If you haven't gotten the email/image yet, it uses a condom as mascot because it "protects a lot of pricks", among other things.
Only tyrants rig elections.
actually it is a good thing
I wish Clinton had done something like this. Upon the whole it will serve us well. This time it will be directed against AHIP, US Chamber of Commerce, et al.
The Obama Fan Base vs The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, I am going to enjoy this one.
Depends on what comes out of it
I'm allergic to things like personal fealty and vague talking points.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Exactly.
Of course, this should differ from campaign talking points, since he's doing something. I don't like the way certain policy changes being enacted are being couched in "let's piss off as few people as we can," especially when it means republicans. Their policies, which now have a proven record of failure, differ from democrats' policies, supposedly. I don't care if they're pissed off or not.
He hasn't made any courageous decisions. What he's done so far are no-brainers. I'm waiting for the big stuff.
Courageous decisions
That's my hang up as well. I honestly see McCain agreeing with some of the executive orders in practice. And even see him signing a mediocre stimulus bill if the Dems were to pressure him enough--people are definitely panicked and failing to act would be political suicide.
Where I'd expect to see big differences between the two--health care, the economy and foreign affairs--I have yet to see bold decisive action. There have been some promising overtures, but in the end, not much meat. But maybe we just need another half Friedman.
Only tyrants rig elections.
Bold decisive action
Anyone who expects Bold Decisive Action from anyone presently in power is kidding themselves. A heck of a lot of other things have to change first before you see any revolutionary new policy. This is was true at the beginning of the primaries, and it's true now. For one thing, you would need to have a Congress that didn't have a large number of conservative Democrats supporting the majority, and that's just to start!
Bold and Change mean much more modest things, and the OFB
had relatively modest expectations to begin with. Modest from your and my perspective, radical from many of theirs.
Anyone who expects anything other
than "presidentin' is hard" from Obama supporters is kidding her/himself.
The dems have had this in the bag since 2005. Please, enough of the excuses.
Had they?
I didn't think so. I might have been wrong, but lots of people had reason to think that they didn't.
What reasons
besides tinfoil ones? The repubs couldn't even manage to find a decent candidate. Bush's approval ratings were in the gutter and the country's a mess.
Oh, the dems could have blown it; they're certainly capable.
But the people wanted change. For now, they're getting it in small doses.
One step forward, two steps back.