Skip to main content

I tried posing this question on Markos's front page story, using comments, but I think that using tips as votes doesn't work because it inhibits voting in an unpopular way.  So I am creating a diary for the purpose of gathering answers to this poll.

NOTE: By "support" I mean activist support, not "rooting from my armchair" support or merely voting.  I mean the sorts of things that we did in the election: giving money, making calls, and -- for those in state -- canvassing.

Here's the question:

How, if at all, do you believe that the Senate Democratic Caucus's selection of Joe Lieberman to be Chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs and Homeland Security Committee of the 111th Congress will have affected the amount of activist support -- donations, calls, and canvassing -- you believe that you would have been likely to provide to the candidacy of Jim Martin in the Georgia U.S. Senate runoff had the vote gone against Lieberman?

To vastly oversimplify the positions that people have taken: some people are more excited because now we may reach 60 Senators in the Democratic Caucus, and others are demoralized by the vote and feel like they're just being used.

Please choose the answer that also indicates whether you supported or opposed the choice of Lieberman for Committee Chair, so that we might be able to get some interesting crosstabs.

*UPDATE:*  Not that this poll is likely to be freeped, but just in case, as of 2240 hrs EST:

Pro-Lieberman (most to least activated): 8, 0, 1, 18, 0, 1, 2.
Anti-Lieberman (ditto): 19, 9, 4, 67, 11, 7, 32.
Anti-Martin: 2

Originally posted to Doane Spills on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:38 PM PST.



4%8 votes
0%0 votes
0%1 votes
9%18 votes
0%0 votes
0%1 votes
1%2 votes
10%20 votes
4%9 votes
2%4 votes
37%71 votes
5%11 votes
4%8 votes
17%32 votes
1%3 votes

| 188 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  And, if it needs to be said, GO JIM MARTIN! (16+ / 0-)

    I believe that we are (mostly) all on the same page so far as the election is concerned.  The outstanding question is whether and to what extent the Senate's action boosted or undermined our willingness to do the activist work we do.

    I think that this is something worth their knowing and worth our knowing, so I appreciate your honest responses.  Please feel free to use the comment section of this diary to argue for the importance of activism -- but, I hope you won't use it to criticize the honest reactions of people posting here, whatever they may be.  Knowing how the Senate's actions affected activists is part of being reality-based.

    And for those who think this question should not even be asked, or who think I'm beating a dead horse, please be prepared to contend with the arguments in the above paragraph before making the comment.  Otherwise, perhaps try a different diary.

    The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

    by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:38:21 PM PST

    •  I'm confused by your question (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kafkananda, MooseHB

      And I feel like you left out another choice:

      No matter how the Democratic caucus acted, I would feel the same way about supporting the Martin campaign.

      •  Yes, as I stated in the body of the diary (0+ / 0-)

        I didn't have room for a "didn't care and would do the same" option.

        Let me unpack the question for you.  On a seven-point scale, from much more likely to much less likely, how do you believe the Senate vote will have affected your willingness to do more than root for (and vote for, if in Georgia) Jim Martin?

        Now, people who were happy with the result of the Lieberman vote put their responses in lines 1-7, and those who were unhappy with it respond in lines 8-14.

        Those who don't support Martin can check line 15.

        If you still don't understand it, I hope that you'll ask a more specific question.

        The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

        by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:50:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  My choice in the poll would be (0+ / 0-)

          Indifferent to the Lieberman vote, and MORE LIKELY to assist in the Martin runoff.

          Obama/Biden 2008
          "He will make Cheney look like Gandhi"—Pat Buchanan on John McCain

          by MooseHB on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 07:32:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  People who are less likely to support Martin (0+ / 0-)

          are idiots. It is precisely because of these sorts of immature fools that Dems manage to repeatedly snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. It's the same sort of immaturity of those who were talking about voting for McCain if their candidate didn't win the primary. It's important to the human race and the planet that we be able to overcome Senate filibusters and push through legislation. Those who would withdraw their support of Martin because they are displeased with the Senate Dems are incredibly short-sighted and selfish.

          •  So you are saying that because I gave a lot of (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            volunteer support to other candidates, I am somehow morally obligated not merely to root for Martin, but to put in volunteer support for him as well?  Ought my feelings -- including feelings of enthusiasm or discouragement -- play any role in that decision?

            It's nice to know that you think that those who would be less likely to participate actively in the campaign are "idiots."  Be that as it may, the problem that you -- and we -- face is that actions like the Senate's this week seem likely to place a whole lot more people in that category.  So, while you are expressing your contempt, you may take a moment to recognize that we're not your or the party's slaves and we are more likely to respond enthusiastically to "change we can believe in" than to insults.

            The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

            by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 10:54:24 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  good timing on this (5+ / 0-)

      I think progressives need to be reminded we have a RUNOFF ELECTION TO WIN now.

      louise 'hussein' to you! proud donor to "White Dudes for Obama" Endorsed 11/1/07 and never looked back!

      by louisev on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:53:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I certainly hope to remind them -- and yet (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        shpilk, MooseHB

        my vote was on the demotivated side of the "anti"-section.  I'm not proud of that, but it's how I honestly feel, and I'm interested in knowing how prevalent that feeling is.  I think that the answer matters.  I predict, in fact, that it will, while I hope that it won't.

        The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

        by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:57:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hi, My Name Is Karen and I am a volunteer (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Seneca Doane, MooseHB, kathryn1812

          for the Democratic Party....I am reminding you that we have a very important run-off election for Senate on December 2nd.

          Would you be interested in helping us change the players in Washington D.C.?

          I am sorry that you cannot change all the Senators that are pissing you off right now, but I would like to ask for your help to get rid of one of the worst offenders we have. Take out your frustration on Saxby Shameless who can be kicked to the curb in less than 2 weeks if we GOTV.

          Send Money through O2B if you can afford it.
          Go to MartinforSenate if you are able to phonebank, canvass, help get people to the polls or to support those of us who are working at the local campaign offices.  WE NEED YOUR HELP, Please.

          Thank you for your time, and don't forget to Support Jim Martin for Senate.  

          Oh, sorry....brain dead from phonebanking.....

          •  God speed the plow, Karen (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MooseHB, kathryn1812

            I'm still mulling it over.  Obviously, I still have time to decide to make calls.  My prediction, though, is that I'm not going to feel motivated to do it.  I wish you better luck with others, especially those who are happy with this decision.

            The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

            by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:45:02 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're mulling over whether to save the human (0+ / 0-)

              race or not? Because you're personally miffed at Senate Dems?

              "especially those who are happy with this decision"

              What the fuck does the decision have to do with anything? We need to be able to defeat filibusters -- a huge thing for enacting policies to ease suffering. And Lieberman should have had his chairmanship stripped -- a considerably lesser thing. But in any case they have NOTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER. If you're pissed at the Senate Dems, why would you take it out on every child and other living thing?

              •  Why should I care about our political potency (0+ / 0-)

                more than the Senate Democrats themselves appear to?  This is a hard election to win, and while it would be great to win it, the world does not hang in the balance.  When Lieberman is one of your 60 votes, you don't have 60 votes -- as if we could even count on the other 42 people who supported him.

                Your notion that deciding that I've had enough making phone calls for one year, especially given the de-energizing effect of the Senate's moves constituting "tak[ing] it out on every child and other living thing" is absolutely shameful.  You really believe this?  You must hate almost everyone you meet, then.

                The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

                by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 10:58:23 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  Got troll rated (3+ / 0-)

      yesterday when I said first that I wouldn't be giving shit to Martin because of Lieberfuck and then to ask Lieberfuck to "bankroll Martin" because I wasn't going to . Got troll rated because OMG not giving money to Martin has nothing to do with Lieberfuck and then some other twit troll rated me for being anti-semitic because of the "bankroll" term I used. I can count on one hand the number of times I've been troll rated on Kos and the number of times I've troll rated somebody else. Can you tell I'm still burned up  about this?  I called Chuck Schumer's office postLieberfuck's committee chair and the arrogant prick who answered the phone couldn't have cared 2 cents worth over what I thought. And this was before I even read the Senate aide comment of HuffPo about how the left was foiled. You know what - I ain't giving a dime more to the Dems until I see dramatic legislation. If it's more corporatist crap, then what exactly what is the point of having a Dem congress and a Dem president?  Bush did plenty for the right without having the majorities that Obama will have. And don't tell me about how the Repubs didn't maintain a permanent majority. I don't expect the Dems to have a permanent majority either. Americans are too ill informed to play a long game and they're easily turned by emotional crap.  If the Dems do good then we'll be facing more emotional jingoistic garbage and Americans will be too fat and happy to continue to vote for the Dems. If the Dems do bad then the Repubs get their turn at the bat.  The Dems have a 6-9 mo period to do dramatic stuff that will last into the future. After that it all depends on the economy but the Obama honeymoon will be over.

      •  I'll still support the Dems (0+ / 0-)

        but I'm only human, and it's hard to work as hard for people who are chortling about how they are working to stifle your influence on policy.

        Unfortunately, I suspect that Martin will be the one to suffer for others' sins.

        The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

        by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:15:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You SUSPECT that you're making Martin (0+ / 0-)

          suffer for others' sins? What a loon. But it isn't Martin you're making suffer, it's EVERYONE -- everyone who will be hurt if progressive policies are blocked by filibuster.

          •  *I* am not making Martin suffer (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            I and many weary others who are likely to sit this one out -- and the others will do so regardless of what I finally decide to do -- and simply doing the same thing that 99.9% of registered Obama-lovin' Democrats in this country are going to do.

            Martin will suffer for it, but that's not the intent.  We have no obligation to jump like organ grinder's monkeys every time the DSCC sends us an e-mail.  But they did not care enough about this election to worry about the feelings of the base.

            By the way -- great job encouraging people to work for Martin.  "Loon," indeed.

            The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

            by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:01:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  I want more & better Democrats. What does (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    John Campanelli

    Lieberman have to do with that?

    The only thing we have to fear is fear itself - FDR. Obama Nation. -6.13 -6.15

    by ecostar on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:49:55 PM PST

    •  We'll find out, I hope (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fnb, frostbite

      "Wanting," frankly, does little of its own accord.  Acting -- calls, canvassing, donations -- is what transforms desire into result.

      There has been a debate on this site about, among other things, whether the Lieberman vote was OK (or even good, for those who believe it kept him in the caucus and that 60 votes is an important threshold) for promoting progressive activism in elections such as this, and those who believe that it has demotivated activists because they feel disrespected and used by Washington Democrats.

      You can say that no one has the right to the latter response if you wish, but expect pushback.  The question is whether those of us who are among the most activated 1% or so of the Democrats in this country -- I think that the DKos participants who donated time and money probably fall there -- are simply more likely to act more like the other 99%.

      The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

      by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:54:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hard to quantify the dampening effect. (4+ / 0-)

        But ignoring it does no good.  It is there, it is real, and it needs to be overcome if there is any chance for Martin.
        It is hard for many, including myself, to get over the shock and awe level of stupid that passes for Harry Reids stategery. Martin would have had an primed well of enthusiasm for his runoff without the chair fiasco.
        More and better Democrats is the name of the game, and Lieberman will just be a footnote in our progress.

        •  Hey, quantifying it is what this diary is about! (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fnb, frostbite, Nailbanger

          With any luck, maybe Kos or another CE will do a FP version of it that would give a much larger and more representative sample.

          I expect I would be calling for Martin.  Now, every time I think about it, I feel like a chump.  Again, I'm not proud of it and I hope that others feel differently.  But the feeling the there and it is the assbites who don't care about the netroots as a source of activism that imparted it.  It's a lousy feeling.  I assume they're happy about it.

          The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

          by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:23:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That may have been the intent. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            frostbite, Seneca Doane

            I have been thinking that the whole L thing was about Senate dems ridding themselves of a big thorn in their sides, us.  They got what they want, know an incumbent is hard to get rid of, and would like to go on their merry deal making way.
            But this is a marathon, not a sprint.  More and better (read progressive) Dems will over time will improve our country and real change will take a lot longer than we had hoped.

            •  IMO it was a result (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fnb, frostbite, Seneca Doane

              of a bunch of spin and lies frankly.  The same DC games.

              I doubt that time was taken to rationally examine Lieberman's real vote history as well as his facilitation of some of the Bush administration's worst excesses, the Iraq War in particular.

              "If you don't have a record to run on...You make a big election about small things." - Barack Obama

              by GN1927 on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:40:35 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  All you're doing is validating this silly meme (0+ / 0-)

            about being "demoralized" by the Lieberman vote, thereby increasing the number of people who withdraw from something totally unrelated. And indeed our foes would be happy about that.

            •  Validating the meme (0+ / 0-)

              Seriously, this is stupid.  People don't need my encouragement not to send money or to embargo calling -- and if that's my goal, I'm going about it a funny way because I've said that I hope that others do want to donate, call, and canvass.

              Rather, I'm calling attention to a phenomenon that already exists -- apparently not in your mind, but in those of many others -- and that in those people's minds is not "completely unrelated."  You can run around saying "no, no, you do not and must not feel that way" all you want -- it won't change a thing.

              Nothing that happens in Georgia will please our foes as much as the Lieberman vote.

              The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

              by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:04:24 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  It's up to you how you act. (0+ / 0-)

        If you want to act like a selfish pissy child because you didn't get "respect", that's up to you. But most of us aren't in it for "respect", we're in it because we care about what's happening to our world.

        You seem to have this bizarre idea that one works on a campaign for the candidate, as if it were some sort of personal gift. But I don't support candidates who see public office as a personal benefit, I support those who are public servants. I didn't send money to Obama's campaign to enrich Obama, I did it to make the world a better place. And working for the Martin campaign is not for the benefit of "Washington Democrats", it's for the benefit of my planet and its inhabitants. So Washington Democrats disrespecting or using me has nothing to do with it, because I was never doing it for them.

        •  My God, what an ambassador you are for the Dems! (0+ / 0-)

          Maybe you should think through your goals here.  You think that if you cow me, all of the other people who are feeling the same way -- and who would probably be a lot less patient with your brand of bullshit than I'm being -- will suddenly make calls?

          I would be very happy to set the amount of volunteer work I did this cycle, for Obama and others, against yours -- just set it out and we can compare, if that means so much to you.  My concern, if you could read the diary, is not whether I have been disrespected as whether we -- the activists in general -- have been.  That is, this diary is not my gripe, it is my perception of what is happening all around nowadays after the extremely demotivating and insulting Lieberman vote.

          Would you like to tell me that if I don't dig deep again, despite being told by the Senate that I am valued for my wallet and dialing fingers and nothing more, that I don't wish to benefit the planet and its inhabitants?  Are you that far off your nut?

          The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

          by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:10:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  I've gotten 3 emails for money (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and everyone I sent back with a nasty message saying get that friggin Joe LIEberman to give some money.
    I told John kerry that after that big asskissing he gave to LIEberman ask that AIPAC troll for the money.

    NO MORE MONEY FROM ME...I am pissed

    I also refused to send money for the Obama transition when Plouffe sent an email.

    Again ask LIEberman.

    Barack Obama 44th President of the United States

    by BlueFranco on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:54:10 PM PST

    •  I will assume that you answered the poll here (0+ / 0-)

      as well as answering it in real life.

      The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

      by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:55:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  yep (6+ / 0-)

        I worked hour after hour here in Florida to convince people that LIEbermans comments to Jewish orgs, saying Obama was a terroist sympathizer were LIES.
        After what the sineless Dems did, I refuse to do anything right now, and not give money ....I hope Martin wins, but as far as I am concerened, I will ONLY give to progressive candidates, not just Dems with a D next to their name. I want better Dems not just more Dems, and John Kerry et al are asskissing LOSERS as far as I am concerned , I will prob. get over it, but as of now I am beyond pissed, after what went on with LIEberman here in Florida.

        Barack Obama 44th President of the United States

        by BlueFranco on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:07:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  And this is why that whole (6+ / 0-)

          "revenge" and "forgiveness" framing was a bunch of bullshit.

          I worked hour after hour here in Florida to convince people that LIEbermans comments to Jewish orgs, saying Obama was a terroist sympathizer were LIES.

          You and millions of others.  

          I couldn't think of a politician less suited to head Homeland Security & Oversight in a Democratic senate.  What a huge fuckup.

          "If you don't have a record to run on...You make a big election about small things." - Barack Obama

          by GN1927 on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:42:35 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  I was against the Lieberman decision at first (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    but as I've thought about it more, I've decided that in the long run it may not have been the worst move in the world, if it makes it easier to get him, along with his buddy McCain, on board for future legislation we may need them for.

    So I'm currently neither pro- nor anti- the Lieberman decision. I still hate him, of course, but I think the decision to keep him came from Obama, and I think Obama has his reasons for doing it and he's a lot smarter than me, so I'm not hung up on being mad about it anymore.

    As for supporting Martin, I'm an armchair supporter (I have no more money to donate to politics this year, and I live in AZ) but my feelings of wanting him to win are unchanged. Not only because Saxby Shameless is such a slimeball, but also because that race isn't related to the Lieberman situation. Martin is not even in the senate and he didn't vote on Lieberman one way or the other, so really I don't understand why anyone would hold it against him.

    •  I don't think that anyone sensible would (6+ / 0-)

      hold the Lieberman vote against Martin personally; he would, by all accounts, be an excellent addition to the Senate.  But we're not being asked to cheer, or even vote; we are being asked to donate time and effort and money, as I and many others did over the past year.  We're being asked to be unusual, to go beyond rooting.  "Not holding it against him" is not the problem; it's whether one feels that one's activism pays off in general.  But, again, let's see how the poll turns out.

      The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

      by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:00:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Exactly...but with a much worse attitude (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fnb, GN1927, Seneca Doane

        and more swear words.

        Republicans need people to be stupid

        by strengthof10kmen on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:50:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  What the hell does your idiotic poll (0+ / 0-)

        -- which is highly selective, as most sensible people won't give a hoot about this nonsense -- have to do with whether activism "pays off in general"? It will obviously take activism, and plenty of it, to rid us of the despicable Saxby Chambliss and to get a filibuster-proof Senate.

        Honestly, I haven't see so much rank stupidity since the PUMAs who wanted to punish the DNC by voting for McCain.

        •  You don't like the poll results (0+ / 0-)

          and so the poll is idiotic.  It is axiomatic to you that there can be no link -- that people must feel no link! -- between being royally pissed off and disappointed at the Lieberman vote and deciding that they've done enough political work this year, therefore even to dare to ask the question is to be an idiot.  Right?

          Let me tell you something.  I didn't come here to cut Martin's hamstrings.  I came here to find out whether other people are feeling what I find myself feeling.  Yes, this poll is not a representative sample of any given population, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't shed some light on what's going on in activists' hearts.

          As for the PUMA comparison, let's see: PUMAs wanted to destroy Barack Obama.  I want Jim Martin to win, I'm just not inclined to get involved in the race at this point.  Yes, that's the exact same thing.  "Rank stupidity," indeed.

          The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

          by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:15:25 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  the Lieberman crap definitely (5+ / 0-)

    took some of the afterglow off the elections for me.
    I donated to Martin and sent some help to the volunteers.  But, in so many ways, it's back to normal with bitchy, dirty tricks republicans and cowardly, deaf democrats.

    If only Americans had agonized over every detail of the candidate's history when deciding to vote for GWB as they did with Barack Obama.

    by lisastar on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:57:51 PM PST

  •  Awesome, another lieberman diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Can't have enough of those.

    John McCain
    wants to put more meat into the meatgrinder.

    by SouthSideDem on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 02:58:42 PM PST

  •  Why would anyone's support of Jim Martin (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    be dependent on Lieberman's fate? I don't get it.

    •  Not "support" -- *activist* support (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I want Martin to win, absolutely.  Will I -- or others like me, donate money or pick up the phone to make calls?  That's the issue.  If you don't understand why people would be less likely to do so, I have a long list of diaries for you to read.

      The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

      by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:02:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Actively support? No. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Seneca Doane

        But then again, I hadn't planned to anyway.  I'm burned out and tapped out at this point.  Jim Martin's going to have to do this without me.

      •  Can you summarize? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Feanor, Seneca Doane

        I don't understand it either... why would someone who is inclined to activism to elect someone suddenly lose that drive to elect him because of something that he wasn't involved in?

        To be honest, I avoided reading almsot all of the Lieberman rants, and I don't have time to read through a bunch of them now... so could you perhaps explain the reason(s) in a nutshell?

        I'm assuming it's along the lines of feeling a "what's the point" disillusionment, which is causing some people to think they are going to give up on political activism in general, rather than about Martin in particular. Is that right?

        •  I think you miss much of the richness of them (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          CS in AZ

          with your summary, but you have the gist.

          Some Senate staffer was crowing about how this is a richly deserved blow the the netroots; that's my favorite piece.  Am I going to pick up the phone after that?  Well, in 2010 I will, I'm sure.  But right now?  Sorry, but it's an affront to dignity and pretending like there's no affont taken is a reward for bad behavior.  I just wish it was a less good candidate being hurt.  But maybe the pro-Lieberman people will take up the slack.  Logically, they should ... right?  (If not, therein lies a lesson.)

          The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

          by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:18:57 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  hummmmm (0+ / 0-)

            Well, thanks, but I'm afraid I still don't get it. It seems to me that you are allowing yourself to take personally something stupid that some senate staffer said, and then taking out your hurt or anger on an innocent by-stander (Martin). This also strikes me as, essentially, letting them win another one by keeping Saxby Shameless in the senate and defeating a good Dem candidate. I would think that the best revenge would be to go all out to win this one, and send Saxby packing. Rolling over and letting them win this seat doesn't seem to send much of a message to anyone, other than "we are easily defeated" -- if all it takes is some snarky comment from some senate staff person, or other politicking, to cause you to abandon a candidate who had nothing whatsoever to do with the situation.

            •  I am acting towards Martin the precise way (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              strengthof10kmen, CS in AZ

              that 99.9% or more of Democrats are acting towards him.  I don't think the fact that, if I did not feel like a chump, I would probably do more should count against me morally, especially feeling in some way that it does send the message that my support can be taken for granted.  (The sense of dignity evolved in humans for a reason.)

              If I thought that it was just some assbite Senate Staffer, your criticism would be better taken.  It is my sense that this is quite a representative view within the Senate Caucus and that they are idiots for thinking that way.  I'll spare you additional evidence.

              Here's the problem: what I do or don't do is inconsequential.  You, as one who wants to motivate people politically, have to get over the collective action problem that it almost always makes no sense for people in my position to act.  You motivate them, among other things, by instilling a sense that one's contribution is important and that it is not being taken for granted, that the one donating time that is vanishingly unlikely to be decisive is not being a chump, laughed at by the people who really stand to gain.  They don't get that.  It's incredibly stupid of them.

              I don't want Martin to lose.  I want him to win.  And yet picking up the phone right now feels to me like being punked -- and evidently many people feel likewise.  You may not like it, but if it's how human behavior works, you had better accept its existence.

              The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

              by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:40:02 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I do accept it, (0+ / 0-)

                and I certainly don't think it's a moral issue. It's also not about me liking it or not. I just don't understand it, because doesn't make logical sense to me, that's all. To me it's like kicking the dog because your boss yelled at you, in other words, punishing an innocent by-stander because you cannot get to the real objects of your anger. Human... yes. Logical? no.

                But I absolutely respect your right to decide what you feel like doing or not doing, and if picking up the phone to help Martin win makes you feel like you are being punked, feel like a chump, or that this candidate, Martin, who is trying to win a senate seat in Georgia, somehow takes your support for granted, then by all means, don't pick up that phone for him. Don't donate, don't do anything. I'm not doing anything either (though not for the same reasons) so don't misunderstand Seneca, I am not judging you. I was really just trying to understand this mindset of pulling support from someone who had no involvement in the process. My feeling is, in politics you win some and you lose some, and people are going to be mean and nasty and try to be hurtful. Demotivating the opposition is an old tactic. But OTOH, being active and deeply involved is demanding and draining, and everyone has their limits and lines they draw in the sand and say no more. If this is yours then so be it.

                •  It's not like kicking the dog at all (0+ / 0-)

                  Wanting Martin to lose would be like kicking a dog.  This is more like deciding that it is not worth one's effort to rescue a stray -- especially when the last time one rescued a stray, it ended up not being appreciated.  There comes a point where one simply says "that's enough for me, let someone else do it."  Most people never get beyond that.

                  Part of the key here is that we're not being demotivated by the opposition.  We're being motivated, to go with the analogy, by team management.  It's rather like being asked to pay higher admissions and concession charges by your team just after they had a fire sale of the team's best players.  Why should the fan care more than the owners and management about the team?

                  The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

                  by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 06:01:17 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yes, that helps (0+ / 0-)

                    But I think you might be missing that the opposition IS in fact using this to demotivate. It was PAT BUCHANAN that I heard on TV the other day talking about how this Lieberman vote was a "kick in the teeth" (or was it a "slap in the face"?) to the "Daily Kos types" who wanted Lieberman booted. What do you think he was trying to do there? Obviously, to make you feel exactly that way.

                    It's really all a matter of interpretation or perception. I don't see the vote that way. It was a strange decision that I don't fully understand, but I do not believe that it was in any way intended as any sort of message to activists. It was Obama that made the call to keep Lieberman, and I think he did it because he knows he will need him on board, along with McCain, and maybe some other republicans, to get his agenda passed. He's trying to walk the walk that he campaigned on about bringing people together, to work together.

                    Taking it as being about the wishes of the activists or "Daily Kos types" does seem to me like it's buying into the spin from the opposition. But then again, like I said, I'm not really emotionally identified as a Democrat (I guess I'm an "Obama Democrat") so I don't take it that way. Anyway, just something to think about. I certainly do understand burnout, and if this is the time to step back for you then of course you need to do that and you really don't have to justify it even.

                    •  Sometimes Buchanan spins (0+ / 0-)

                      and sometimes he just reports.  I see that as accurate reporting.  I didn't need his input to feel that way.

                      Obama hasn't taken credit for this one; I hang the responsibility on the Senate.

                      Tell you what -- why don't you make some phone calls?  We'll call it even.

                      The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

                      by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 07:13:24 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

          •  Fuck dignity. And an affront from whom? (0+ / 0-)

            You might as well cut off your own dick to show how upset you are at the insult -- it would make as much sense.

            •  "Fuck dignity"? (0+ / 0-)

              What's this, are you trying out new Democratic Party mottos?  I prefer "yes we can."

              I'd love to know if you have a position with the party, as you do seem to evidence the same sort of attitude that activists are there to give and give and then shut up.

              The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

              by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:17:36 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  You probably will never undestand (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fnb, Seneca Doane

          ...But some of us get emotionally involved with candidates and with the Democratice party. When our new Democratic party selected a "traitor" and a warmonger to represent me, it completely wiped out my enthusiasm.

          And, I have  worked thousands of hours for progressive, and given over a thousand bucks. I  plan to be on the sideline until I see that loyal, progressive Dems are given a top position at the table.


          •  They selected Lieberman to represent you? (0+ / 0-)

            Unless you live in CT, Lieberman doesn't represent you. And if you do live in CT, well, it was the voters of CT who "selected him" to represent them, and I sincerely hope they vote him out at their next opportunity. But no one in the senate selected Lieberman to represent you.

            I think it sounds like you are just very tired, having given so much, and you need to rest now, until and unless you feel moved to get involved again. Thank you for all the hard work you did, and rest assured it was not all for nothing. Having Lieberman on a committee in the senate is really not the end of the world, and it may actually help in the long run to get at least some of Obama's agenda passed. Take care.

            •  I live in CT (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Seneca Doane

              And we, the Democtatice voters in CT have twice rejected Joe at the ballot box--the last two opportunities we had.

              Also the chair of all Democratic commmitees in Congress does represent me (or should), as they represent all Democratic voters. That's the whole idea of the two party system. If we lived in a country with a single party, than the politicians could represent everyone. In America we pick a party based on our political beleif, and there should be a difference between parties.


              •  I don't feel represented by any politician (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                and I never have. The truth is, any person who actually represented me or my views would have zero chance of getting elected to any office.

                I've always had to settle for the candidate that comes closest or is the least offensive, but I certainly don't ever get one who fully represents my views or interests. I actually don't like the 2-party system and I registered to vote as an 'undeclared' voter when we move to AZ a few years ago. Some Democrats represent my views fairly well, on some issues at least, while others don't come close. Many fewer republicans even come close, but it's not impossible that some republicans might earn my vote for some offices -- or at least have in the past. I certainly identify more with the Dems now, but it was Obama that got me back into even caring about politics and it was him, not the Democratic party, that interested me. I even donated and worked some for him, which I've never done for any candidate before ever.

                So maybe that is why I'm over Lieberman already. I hate the man, but I do think Obama has his reasons for wanting this to happen this way and I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt for now. I do not feel that who the Democrats choose to put on a committee is about me or represents me in any kind of symbolic way. But as a sort-of newly converted Democrat again, I'm okay with identifying with a party that does not seek to destroy its political enemies, and that walks the walk regarding peace, reconciliation, and moving forward. Even though emotionally I wanted revenge against Lieberman, just like many others feel. I think he is truly awful and vile, and I feel like he should be gone. But I've been thinking about it and have decided that it may well be better that cooler heads prevailed. We'll see.  

            •  Yes, they did (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              In matters of oversight and in all matters related to Homeland Security, Lieberman represents the Democratic Party.  If a whistleblower wants to release information on Bush Administration wrongdoing related to Iraq, to take one example, they may very well going to Lieberman -- the chief Democrat on the committee for "support."  I won't rehash the many diaries making that point, but you can find them.

              The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

              by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 06:03:51 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  I'm gonna let you in on some secrets. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            The world is corrupt. People are corrupt. Power corrupts. People of good will sometimes act from base motives. People acting from noble motives sometimes use them to justify evil acts. And sometimes people just make boneheaded mistakes.

            In short, lose your idealism. Or, at least, temper it. The Democratic Party is one of many organizing tools.  As one of the only two paths to political power in the US, it is an important tool, but it will never be what you seem to be hoping it will be.

            •  I completely agree (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fnb, Seneca Doane

              The Democratic party will never be what I would like it to be. But I have been a long time activist hoping to make it better. Leiberman is a chickenhawk and a liar and I do not like that kind of a creep in any party that I choose. When I see corruption in my country it's my patriotic duty to speak out. If you are a parent you will understand. When youu children go astray, if you love them, you try to redirect them unless you have no care for their future.

              I think, I would prefer remaining an idealist than whatever the alternative might be. Some of us are cursed with that character trait.


            •  That's the spirit! (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              Great way to motivate people to donate their money -- at the beginning of a deep recession at minimum -- and their time and effort to the Democrat!

              I think you've answered your question about why people are saying "enough."  Putting one's time into hands-on activism requires a suspension of disbelief -- but not hanging belief until it's dead.

              The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

              by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 06:06:27 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  I don't get it. Let me try again. (0+ / 0-)

        Whether you want to add the modifier 'activist' to the word support doesn't change anything about my question, and you haven't attempted to answer it. Let me try again:

        Why would anyone's activist support of Jim Martin be dependent on Lieberman's fate?

        •  I think that I've answered it throughout (0+ / 0-)

          this diary.  We are being asked to go beyond normal "fan"-style support of a candidate by a party that has recently, in significant part, shown contempt for us and an interest in limiting our influence as activists.  Going beyond the norm requires some sacrifice and is facilitated by the sense that one is not being played for a chump.  Why, some of us wonder, should we care more about the number and power of Democratic Party officials than the Democratic Party officials themselves seem to do?  It is entirely natural to be demotivated and depressed by such a situation.  If you truly don't understand it, you can list the activist contributions you've made this cycle and we can discuss why you haven't made more -- as almost anyone could have done, given sufficient motivation.

          The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

          by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 05:57:47 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Get over yourself. (0+ / 0-)

            This isn't about you, it's about Jim Martin and whether or not he would be a better Senator than Saxby Chambliss. If you don't want to work to get him elected - fine.  Work to get Saxby Chambliss elected instead, or sit it out. But the idea that anyone besides you should care whether or not you volunteer on Jim Martin's campaign is pure egoism.

            •  Absolutely right -- except (0+ / 0-)

              that there are, I have suspected, plenty of people like me, and far from an exercise in my wanting to rent my garments in public, this diary was an attempt to try to determine how predominant my sort of reaction might be.  If you don't care to know how many activists did have their motivation soured by this, you're a poor activist.

              Any time the party is asking activists to pony up more money, effort, and time to elect someone three points behind in a challenging race, the party makes it about "us" to that extent.  But, by all means, sell your property and quit your job so that you have more money and time to donate to make up for we discouraged few (or many.)

              The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

              by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 07:18:07 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Hey, I've had Max Baucus as my Democratic Senator (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Seneca Doane

                for a long, long time, so forgive me for being a little post-cynical.  It's just that to me, the betrayal you are feeling, feels like something I learned to live with a long time ago, and move forward anyway.

                •  I have Dianne Feinstein (0+ / 0-)

                  and I've had much worse than her in other states.  I get what you're talking about.

                  But: there hasn't been widespread popular electoral activation like this since RFK or longer.  That is why this feels different.  It doesn't matter so much if they try to piss on a parade if there is no parade -- but this year there has been a hell of a parade.

                  Peace -- thanks for the jousting.

                  The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

                  by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 07:45:04 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I doubt anyone is angrier about Lieberman than I. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Seneca Doane

                    it's just that I have given up on reasons to give up.  I don't care how compelling the reason - I'm not giving up.

                    I was a part time resident of SF when Dianne Feinstein was Mayor.. ugh.

    •  You have to be very stupid to get it. (0+ / 0-)

      The same sort of stupid the PUMAs had, who were going to punish the DNC by voting for McCain.

      •  Okay, I think that I've covered all of your posts (0+ / 0-)

        Now tell me: do you think you've helped make the world a better place here tonight?  For that matter, do you think you've helped Martin?  You certainly haven't pushed me in the direction of helping; if I still do, it will be despite your spewing contempt.

        The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

        by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:22:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  No effect (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane, ladywithafan

    I've already given Martin more than I can afford and more than I have ever given to anyone running for senate other than my own senator, Russel Feingold.

    I would do the same again had I not. I feel that for most folks, the Lieberman decision is irrelevant. I mean really, one action being the straw that breaks the camel's back. I don't expect much from these folks. I was not at all surprised and only moderately disappointed.

  •  Request for edit in the bold question (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    FROM: How, if at all, do you believe that the Senate Democrat Caucus's selection . . .

    TO:  How, if at all, do you believe that the Senate Democratic Caucus's selection . . .

    Thank you!



    Religion is like sodomy: both can be harmless when practiced between consenting adults but neither should be imposed upon children.

    by Caoimhin Laochdha on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:29:40 PM PST

  •  By the way, I hope that some of the people (0+ / 0-)

    who answered "Pro-Lieberman decision & am MUCH MORE likely to actively support Martin" will weigh in here explaining what they are doing now that they would not have done before.  This is not snark; I am legitimately curious.  Maybe it's important stuff.

    The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

    by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 03:42:50 PM PST

  •  I'm not sure I will ever support a Democratic (4+ / 0-)

    Senator again (and I consider myself a Yellow Dog Democrat). I am so pissed that I can't see straight. The "Joe the Traitor" vote was a slap in the face to all of us and then to watch (until the nausea overcame me) the club members praising and grovelling over the "7 count convicted felon" (even a standing ovation for gods sake) should be enough reason for anyone to have second thoughts. Screw the constituents and the supporters just take care of the members. Basically "We'll do what we want...just keep quiet until we need money again"
    Don't get me wrong, I love Obama and think he will make a fantastic president, but I will never understand his stand on "Joe the Traitor". I had already written off my former Senator (Landreu) because of her Republican votes and didn't support or vote for her (I didn't vote against her either BTW).

  •  I may despise Whiny Joe with white hot passion, (0+ / 0-)

    but Saxby Chambliss is totally beneath contempt.

    How is it possible for there to even be a question?

    You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you get what you need .. oh,Yeeeaaargh.

    Anti-Lieberman decision & am EXACTLY AS likely to actively support Martin .. because it's the only way to be.

    2008, the Year the Republican Party dissolved into a little pond of goo

    by shpilk on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 04:17:56 PM PST

    •  As a prescriptive matter, sure (0+ / 0-)

      Hell, not only should we be giving money to Martin, we should be selling our luxuries, canceling our broadband, to give him more money.  And the same for every other candidacy.  And we should have no hobbies other than making phone calls and canvassing, ideally.  We should live, breathe, and bleed progressive politics.

      And, you know, we were doing a pretty good job of getting people into that really activated state before the election.  Then our Senators decided that honoring the activist base was less important than being supportive of a treacherous friend.

      Here's a rational reason to withhold aid -- although it's not my reason -- at a time like this: because continued cooperation makes them think that they can get away with any degree of contempt for the base.  I just wish that they race following the Lieberman vote were one where the difference between candidates was not so stark.

      The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

      by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 06:26:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  If you think that not helping Martin will somehow (0+ / 0-)

        make "them" think that they can't get away with contempt, then your skull is effectively empty. "rational" indeed.

        •  I don't expect to be helping Martin because (0+ / 0-)

          like most of the rest of humanity I don't like feeling like a chump.  I'll put up with it, but I don't go out of my way to embrace it.  The only thing that makes me at all inclined to help is that he seems to be a good candidate.  If he announced that he would have voted against Lieberman, I would probably still help out.

          Sure, they can get away with contempt.  The question is whether I'm being complicit.

          The netroots is what the Letters to the Editor page wanted to be when it grew up.

          by Seneca Doane on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 11:20:11 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •   Interesting take by Glenn Greenwald (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Why do Democrats want bipartisanship if that is what they have been doing all the time with the Repugs? The Democratic Senate has worked very well in supporting Bush's agenda.

    "Where is the evidence of the supposed partisan wrangling that we hear so much about?  Just examine the question dispassionately.  Look at every major Bush initiative, every controversial signature Bush policy over the last eight years, and one finds virtually nothing but massive bipartisan support for them -- the Patriot Act (original enactment and its renewal); the invasion of Afghanistan; the attack on, and ongoing occupation of, Iraq; the Military Commissions Act (authorizing enhanced interrogation techniques, abolishing habeas corpus, and immunizing war criminals); expansions of warrantless eavesdropping and telecom immunity; declaring part of Iran's government to be "terrorists"; our one-sided policy toward Israel; the $700 billion bailout; The No Child Left Behind Act, "bankruptcy reform," and on and on."

    ""If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." JAMES MADISON

    by isabvella on Thu Nov 20, 2008 at 04:55:52 PM PST

  •  I donated as much as I could as soon as it was (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    announced that a run-off would be held. I can't afford to give any more. I really hope he wins. My wife and I split our political donations about 50/50 between Obama and the DSCC this year, so another Senate win would be very satisfying for us.

    Greg Shenaut

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site