The people pictured work for Al Franken. They don’t have anything to do with the question and answer period with the WH communications director, but they’re optimistic, great people and really fit Minnesota (and Al Franken) so I thought I’d take their picture.
I took notes on the conversation between Kaili Joy Gray (aka Angry Mouse) and the WH communications director, but, honestly, everyone here knows the factual policy information and/or plans they discussed.
We’ve known for 6 months that Congressional Democrats and the WH hoped to get a series of jobs provisions passed rather than a larger jobs bill. We’ve known for two years that the approach is to “focus on things that can actually get done”, and that hasn’t changed. Obama’s position on marriage equality is well-documented, and nothing has really changed on either WH rhetoric or (ostensible) plans on Iraq and Afghanistan. Even on Libya, we know the response: the President said it wouldn’t become a wider war when he launched it, so that’s the “guarantee” it won’t become a wider or larger war. We can argue if any of these statements are TRUE, or SINCERE, but they aren’t new, nor did I expect the WH spokesperson to say anything new.
So what it comes down to, again, is a question of tactics and tone. Is the President going to be more aggressive and less compromising with Republicans?
It’s funny, because this is exactly what happens at the local level at these things, in my experience. We’ll invite a state or national Ohio politician to meet with the most engaged locals, for “policy discussions” and we find that anyone who attends already knows all about, say, Sherrod Brown’s position on trade, and instead we end up talking about tone and tactics.
There’s nothing wrong with that, tone and tactics are as good and worthwhile a subject as anything else, but what I saw happen at this event always happens here when we do Q and A sessions like this. It was very familiar to me.
cleek
are Republicans going to respond any differently if he does ?
MikeJ
cleek@1: And will the manic progressives respond any differently? It will still be he sold us out worse than bush threw us under the bus.
Kay
are Republicans going to respond any differently if he does ?
Roger Moore
@cleek:
It’s not about how the Republicans react; it’s about how the voters react. A change in the way Obama deals with the Republicans isn’t likely to change their obnoxious, obstructive ways, unless it makes them even worse. But being confrontational rather than accommodating lets the Democrats sharpen their differences with the Republicans for the voters. It’s about switching from policy mode to election mode.
Paul in KY
I donate to Al’s campaigns & he’s the ONLY politician who when he sends me a thank you note on the donation, does not have another ‘give me money’ form in the envelope.
I think it speaks to his classiness.
cleek
@Roger Moore:
i get what you’re sayign (and agree), but i understood the post to be talking about the ‘getting stuff done’ side of things, not the ‘posturing for votes’ side.
posturing isn’t going to get any jobs bills passed.
chopper
I think the president pretty much guaranteed that our involvement in Libya will not expand, given his recent findings on the inapplicability of the WPR. as i mentioned in another thread, he’s pissed off congress over the issue. no way he gets anything more than what we’re doing now. whether or not that was by design depends on whether or not you believe in 11D chess.
John Cole
I watched that shitshow and it made me want to tear up my voter registration and just quit following politics. Pfeiffer lists the accomplishments, points out that things are very tough with the current REPUBLICAN House, and was responded to with catcalls, sighs from Angrymouse, and people basically making farty sounds with their armpits. “We’re tired of hearing about Lily Ledbetter! What have you done for me lately!”
Yeah. These are the activists who are going to lead us to a progressive promised land.
elisabeth
TPM headline tells me president’s spox got grilled re: gay rights.
Edited to add that apparently the session to organize in WI was sparsely attended while Chou’s session was SRO. Priorities.
Dee Loralei
Kay, if you meet Driftglass, give him a hug from me. He is absolutely one of the best writers anywhere, and I luvs him so.( And BlueGal, too, also!) Heck, I wish I could buy you all a drink, but from the other reports I’m reading, I’m actually glad I’m not there. I’d have been arrested for kicking too many people in the shins.
kay
Im curious about that, so I’m going to go try to find one of the Wisconsin on the ground people and see if they’ll talk to me.
I did a little of the work in Ohio, and it was my opinion Obama would have hurt us, had he jumped in. That was the AFL-CIO’s opinion, too, as expressed by the national rep who was in my county. They didn’t want a partisan label on it, because it polls poorly as Dems versus GOP. They wanted to promote it as “fairness for workers”.
I’m sensing a reality versus fantasy thing here :)
Roger Moore
@cleek:
But the underlying truth is that the 2010 elections guaranteed that nothing is going to get done legislatively until 2012 at the earliest, unless the Democrats fold completely and let the Republicans set the agenda. The best we can hope for is that Obama plays politics effectively, and maybe does some unilateral executive stuff.
Poopyman
@cole #8: She was pretty unimpressive as an interviewer. The crowd didn’t have to act like a mob, either.
Some of these people come across as real dicks, 24/7, but they’re a reeealy tiny minority. Too bad they seem to get all the attention.
Fwiw, a list and description of all the sessions is at the NN website. Most of THOSE sessions are moderated and attended by activists more committed to getting shit done and contacts made than with getting themselves on the TV machine.
elisabeth
It was a retweet of a tpm newswire tweet, iirc. Choi (I hate the spell-check on this phone) is or was a hero so I get why folks would want to hear him but we need to be on the ground not as Dem’s but as union supporters.
slag
I have no problem with this except for the fact that we act as if we’re discussing policy differences when we’re not. Consequently, the divisions often appear to be much deeper than they really are. The whole thing smacks of micromanagement: “You’re not doing this job like I would”. As if that’s a useful way to measure someone’s performance.
gwangung
Yeah, happens to everyone. Reality trumps ideology….
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
@john cole one of the best ways to take the shitshow out of such folks is give them something to do, a little bit of responsibility, a little bit of a chance to actually lead on their issues, and ownership of the results.
not everyone can or will step up, but these people are begging to be engaged, i say give them something to actually do. we have permanent campaign underlying actual policy making politics, there has to be something.
Steve
I think the voters need to hear “these are the things Obama wants to do to fix the economy, that the Republicans won’t let him do.” Whether that message is conveyed by being aggressively partisan or whatever is sort of beside the point. If you can’t actually fix the economy, the next best thing politically is to have people believe you’re trying.
I don’t think they’ve communicated this message particularly well and I think Obama sort of steps on the message when he talks about tightening the belt and such. One of the problems is that his “art of the possible” political style sort of precludes him from spending lots of time advocating for things that he knows aren’t going to happen. One way or another, though, people need to have a sense that there are concrete plans being obstructed by the Republicans.
slag
Holy shit this is one of my biggest complaints about the national (and even local) Democratic committees! And OFA, for that matter. Anytime the Dems email me, it’s for money. It’s never to actually do something in support of national policy initiatives.
Early on, OFA asked me to get in touch with my representatives in favor of HCR. So, I did. I walked down to all of my reps offices, gave them my written statement on the subject (sporting the OFA logo), chatted with the front desk staff members, and left. That was it. Nothing since then. Makes me friggin crazy.
I’m a know-nothing lackey in this arena. Give me a simple task so that I can feel involved but not make a day job out of it. Why is this so hard?
Mike Kay (True Grit)
This reminds me of when the student body has a Q&A with the Department Chair. Never any questions about curriculum or even pedagogy, it’s always about tone and tactics. At least they have an excuse, they’re 18 to 20 years old.
askew
And that is mild compared to the reaction Valerie Jarrett got last year at NN. There’s a reason the WH only sent the deputy communications director. Next year, they’ll send an intern. These bloggers sure have an overinflated sense of who they are and what they represent. The WH would be better off doing netroots outreach with more reasonable sites (B-J, Booman Tribune, etc.) and skip the melodrama at NN.
Linnaeus
@Steve, #19:
I’d say this is pretty accurate. I think most of the people who are voicing frustration with the administration are reacting to this. I think they know that the president is not unlimited in his powers (on the whole, a good thing) and that Republican obstructionism is a huge problem. But the Democrats don’t help themselves much when they’re having trouble articulating a grand narrative that creates a context for activism, voting, and eventually, policy changes. In fact, it looks like the Democrats are even willing to embrace parts of the Republican narrative – maybe gentler forms of it, but they’re embracing it nonetheless.
There is a place for saying, “Hey, look, this is what we can do right now.” But there also needs to be some work on how to say “Hey, this is what we want to be doing.” I don’t see where the Democratic Party is going with the latter, and I suspect that’s due to internal divisions in the party that have been growing since the 1970s.
gwangung
Ah. Now THAT’S a critique I can get behind. If it’s a simple, grunt work type of thing, that’s still useful–because it has to be done anyway. Why can’t we direct the negative energy into something can work for something positive?
Duckest Fuckingway: Ask not for whom the Duck Fucks. . .
So I guess the difference between those assholes and these assholes is that Juicebaggers don’t have an inflated sense of their own importance?
Now, let’s everyone sing a rousing chorus of “The Best of All Possible Worlds!”
gbear
And that picture SO depicts the diversity that we have here in MN. ;)
Mike Kay (True Grit)
How fuckin rude and self indulgent.
Can you imagine how they would be freaking out with angry if the WH communications director had responded to Angrymouse’s questions with sighs.
Frankensteinbeck
To those who question the way the administration sets the tone:
The president gave a speech this week about the need for a jobs package. How many people even know it happened?
The administration can scream themselves blue in the face. The guys who control the TV channels want to talk about weiners.
kay
Poopyman is right. I went to the education forum and the manufacturing forum and they were both great.
The manufacturing forum was sparsely attended, sadly. You can’t say you care about jobs as issue number one and then not show up at the jobs forum.
Lol
The Professional Left likes to reinforce the media narratives that they’re complaining about.
Mike Kay (True Grit)
@kay: Did McJoan attend the manufacturing forum? Surely DKos’ lead writer on the need for a jobs plan attended?
boss bitch
I think the Left needs to worry about their own tone and tactics before critiquing the WH. I see a lot of demands for respect from the party but they’re going about it the wrong way.
ChrisNYC
Angry Mouse was terrible. Smug. Condescending. Just silly at times (Libya=Vietnam?).
But I think Pfeiffer would have done better to have responded with less of an “I’m sorry” mushy response. I would have liked to see him say, “You know what, here’s the deal, these are the political calculations we’re making.” I want them to make their actual case rather than do this soft pedal, conciliatory thing. Strangely, it reminded me of when pols go before AIPAC — that feeling of constituents thinking, “You know what you have to say, now say it.” And the pols obliging. Yick.
Mike Kay (True Grit)
@ChrisNYC: I pretty sure Pfeiffer has seen polling showing the blogopshere in no way shape or form is the base, so he just wanted to get out of there and keep his words to a minimum. It’s like being stuck next to a chatty drunk in subway, you just say the bare minimum of words until your stop arrives.
amk
@ 21. askew
Yup. These nutters don’t deserve anything more. Talk about marginalizing yourselves. Nutroots are the flipside of teabaggers.