Hello everyone. I appreciate your responses to my last diary, Dkos Action Plan: Finding Opposition Research on Republicans:
http://www.dailykos.com/...
In my last diary, I suggested that we Kossacks collaberate together to find opposition research on incumbent Republicans. After receiving many suggestions on who we should investigate, I came to the conclusion that there are way too many incumbents to just investigate one representative per week. So I propose that we investigate 4 representatives per week and still just one senator per month over the summer.
more below
The first issue that came up in the other diary was who should be our first targets. There were many suggestions, including Doc Hastings, Cathy McMorris, Frank LoBiondo, Ginny Brown-Waite, Musgrave, Charles Taylor, Cubin, Brian Bilbray, John Campbell of CA-42, Van Hilleary, Pombo, Denny Hastert, John Ensign, Wayne Allard, Randy Kuhl among others. Some people suggested that I should just choose the candidates because it would be too difficult for all of us to agree on a select slate of candidates to investigate.
Because there are so many representatives from which to choose, I'm going to make a suggestion that we divide the field into geographical areas. For instance, we could start in the Southwest and pick 4 representatives from California, Arizona, Colorado etc one week, 4 more in the Northeast the next week, 4 representatives from the Southeast the 3rd week and another 4 representatives from the Midwest and Northwest the last week of the month.
Here are the list of candidates from the Southwest that are either on CQ's list or ones that Kossacks recommended in the previous diary:
1) Hayworth - AR-05
2) Wilson - NM 01
3) Bilbray - CA
4) Pombo - CA 11
5) Campbell- CA-42
6) Hunter - CA-50
7) Musgrave - CO-04
8) Porter - NV-03
I suggest that we choose 5 candidates from this list. Since the Busby v Bilbray race is coming up so soon, I think we should make searching for any oppo research on Bilbray a high priority. Because the campaign is near its end, we don't have that much time to find out anything on Bilbray, so I propose that we limit how much time we devote to this race. Instead of having a whole week to find out info on Bilbrey, maybe Kossacks should have just 2-3 days to research him?
That leaves 4 candidates from which we Kossacks need to choose to investigate this week. I'll take suggestions. Whoever gets the most votes will be the candidates that I highlight each week. Also, I personally think we should choose Kyl as the senator to investigate this month. But it's really up to you who you think should be the first senator we investigate.
Here are the lists for the other geographic areas:
Northeast
1) Simmons - CT-02
2) Shays - CT-04
3) Johnson - CT-05
4) Bass - NH-02
5) Ferguson - NJ-07
6) Kelly - NY-19
7) Sweeney - NY-20
8) Walsh - NY-25
9) Kuhl - NY-29
10) Hart - PA-04
11) Weldon - PA-07
12) Fitzpatrick - PA-08
13) Sherwood - PA-10
14) Frank LoBiondo- NJ-?
There are a LOT of Northeast candidates as you can see here, so we might have to take 5 or 6 at a time instead of just 4 representatives.....
Southeast
1) Davis - KY-04
2) Taylor - NC-11
3) Keller - FL-08
4) Lewis - KY-02
5) Northup - KY-03
6) Boustany - LA-07
7) Hayes - NC-08
8) Drake - VA-02
9) Capito - WV-02
10) Brown-Waite - FL-?
11) Miller - FL-01
12) Blackburn - TN-07
Northwest/Midwest
1)Reichert - WA-08
2) Cubin - WY-AL
3) Doc Hastings - WA-04
4) Cathy McMorris - WA-05
5) Leach - Iowa-02
6) Kline - MN-02
7) Chocola - Ind.-02
8) Chabot - OH-01
9) Pryce - OH-15
10) Burghard - Missouri-09(?)
The next issue that the other diary raised was whether we Kossacks should concentrate on all the races or target a few specific races. I think you know where I stand. I would prefer to focus on just 4 or 5 House races and 1 Senate race. But again, I would appreciate your input. I could start opposition research open threads where anyone could dump whatever oppo research that they've gathered on any candidate in that thread. It wouldn't be very organized, but it would be doable.
Another issue that came up was where to store the data once we collected it. As I mentioned in the other diary, I'm not familiar with the wiki process, so I would need volunteers to help me transfer the research from this site to dkosopedia. I know some raised concerns that people could manipulate info that was transferred to the dkosopedia site. I'm not sure what to do about the problem. I suggested that we could possibly create a separate website to store the data. I would need volunteers if we decided to pursue that, since I know absolutely nothing about creating a website.
A BIG concern raised in the other diary is how far we wanted to take this research project. What should be its scope? Is it right to investigate a candidate's personal life? If so, how extensively should we investigate the incumbent's life? I thought bmaples made some good guidelines that we should abide by, but I would like everyone's input on this issue:
OK
Tracking and publishing votes by issue, especially ones that show a consistent trend
Digging out contribution sources, so we know who "True Americans for Freedom" really is
Finding and publishing statements of positions and principles, especially ones that show a consistent trend
Finding and publicizing legitimate questions of ethics and conflicts of interest
Finding and publicizing legitimate questions of vote-buying and influence-peddling
Not OK
Pulling a single vote out of context in an attempt to make a point. My issue here is that log-rolling is part of the legislative process, and we begin to look like naifs if we blindly highlight a single vote. Much more impressive to say "Rep X has voted 58 times to block assistance to homeless people." (Note, though, that I certainly believe some single votes are critical and worthy of attention. I just don't like playing "Gotcha!")
Making unsubstantiated claims about quid pro quo or scandal based solely on random timing or one-off contributions. Again, this feels like "Gotcha!" (See below for fuller explanation.)
Distorting positions, statements, or votes, even though we disagree with them, and especially distorting with "attack ad" language. We all know the "baby killer" rhetoric applied to persons who stand for abortion rights. I don't like it thrown the other way, either.
I guess the bottom line for me is that I don't like lies, distortions, half-truths, and "gotcha" games.
http://www.dailykos.com/...
Finally, Bushbite and others raised questions about how we would factcheck the research that we gathered. I thought that s/he made an interesting suggestion:
A good method might be for all Kossacks to do research, then the fruit of that research is sent to some kind of executive research committee to check accuracy and to package into talking points and statements/letters to media.
The committee should also select timing of the information dumps for maximum impact.
http://www.dailykos.com/...
I'm also thinking that we might want to turn over some leads to Josh Marshall's Muckrakers since they have experience in tracking the info along with media contacts to get the info out there. Again, just an idea. Tell me what you think.....
Just to recap, I need for you to give me feedback about the following:
1) What do you think of my geographic idea? Should we target specific geographic areas or should we just have a free for all and investigate everyone?
2) If you're ok with starting the project in the Southwest, which candidates do you think we should choose to investigate besides Bilbray?
3) Who should be the first senator we investigate?
4) Do we want to investigate an incumbent's private life or should we just stick with the public record?
5) Where should we transfer the info after we collect the oppo research?
6) What should the process for factfinding be?
Thanks again for participating in this project.