Around two months ago I started getting calls from a person who works for the state Democratic Party. He told me they think my state representative has the potential to be vulnerable, because of some hazy rumors of scandal or general bad behavior or corruption that (apparently, allegedly) surround him. Pick one: scandal, general bad behavior or corruption. I’m not sure what the caller was alluding to. It’s an overwhelmingly conservative district, so the idea is to have a Democratic candidate on the ballot ready to exploit the possible implosion of the incumbent.
Today’s update:
Well, I gave up on finding a candidate, but another guy didn’t give up, and he found a candidate. I just called the candidate, and he told me why he’s a Democrat and why he’s running.
He’s a Steelworker. He’s been married 32 years and has 4 children. He spent 2 years in the military. He worked 2nd shift his whole life, and only became politically active with the Steelworkers in 2002 when he left the Republican Party because “trickle down wasn’t working”. That’s a direct quote. He’s running now because he thinks this is the “best time” for a Democrat to try, because he acted as a grass roots organizer during the Issue Two campaign and he wants to run on issues important to working people.
I think this is a going to be a lot of fun. Not for him, maybe, for him it’s going to be a lot of work, but certainly for local Democrats.
Because this turn of events is a nice lead-in, and because I was ranting incoherently about it in the comments to mistermix’s post yesterday and have now had some time to think about it, I wanted to address why I get so impatient with broad national theories or studies on politics. I find them reductive and ultimately, narrowing. Me. I do. Understand, I’m not speaking for some larger group here. I have no earthly idea whether this view is shared by anyone else. I suspect it is, but this is not a sweeping statement or a broad indictment.
When I look at “politics”, now or at any other time, I’m looking at what seems to me to a very complex, layered, shifting picture. Maybe I’m wrong about that, and it all can be reduced to a formula, but that isn’t how I see it or approach it. Honestly, if I did see it like that I don’t know that I would bother with it, because if I did see it like that I would eventually decide I probably can’t have any effect on it.
An example of the way I think or look at politics today, December 4, runs something like this: we’ll have President Obama at the top of the ticket, and Sherrod Brown, who ran in ’06 as Middle Class Man, and those two campaigns are going to coordinate, and we’ll have a credible challenger against Latta for the House race, all against the background of the just-completed Issue Two effort, and we’ll have this statehouse race, which could be a really great upset. Oh, and there’s been a steady drumbeat of good news about and around the auto industry coming out of Toledo, so I’m wondering if that helps Democrats running in Ohio. That’s what I think. Today. That’s how I look at it. Sort of a stream of consciousness, and it changes all the time. That’s what’s interesting to me. That’s what keeps me engaged.
So if I read or hear something reductive and final and national, like: “Kay? it’s ALL TRIBALISM”. Or, “Kay, no President since FDR has won the White House with 8.9% unemployment” how that comes across to me is “why bother?”. It sounds like shutting a door. How it sounds to me is that there’s no room to move, there’s no room for the unexpected or intervening events or the influence of a particular candidate or state or local political climate, and those things, the potential for changes at the margins, are the part of “politics” that interest me. The finality (or what I maybe mistakenly perceive as the finality) of sweeping theories or predictions drains all the juice and localness and (appealing!) flat-out weirdness and chaos and unpredictability out of this thing, which is why I find myself yelling “it’s more complicated than that!” in the comments. I want room to move.
Villago Delenda Est
Kay, it’s all tribalism. Furthermore, no President since FDR has won the White House with 8.9% unemployment.
Now that that is out of the way, good for this guy! He’s precisely the sort of candidate we need. Just need to give him all the financial and moral support to get that new job as a legislator, where he can apply first person experience to the issues of the day.
OzoneR
how many incumbents have run with 8.9% unemployment?
kay
@Villago Delenda Est:
Very funny. I’m glad top see you’re taking my heart-felt plea about as seriously as it should be taken, because I’ll be off on some other tangent tomorrow :)
He’s sort of a frazzled wreck right now, the poor thing. He does have his signatures though, so that’s done.
kay
@OzoneR:
I don’t know. In the cosmic, global sense, does it matter? Answer THAT:)
BruceFromOhio
This is how change occurs, long, slow climbs that have to start somewhere, memes and history be damned.
Please? After the filing and the deadlines and other paraphenalia has been addressed, inquire with the candidate about getting an Actblue page out there so mokes like me with no time, no energy and no good sense can at least chip in a couple of bucks.
Nutella
This issue of local vs global comes up a lot. Historians argue about the contingent view of history vs the grand, sweeping global trend view. Did the South lose the Civil War because of the economic differences between the two sides, or because of a long series of individual actions?
It drives me crazy because obviously it’s BOTH. The national issues will definitely affect Kay’s local statehouse race but it’s just as true that her local statehouse race will affect the national picture: If her guy wins, the Ohio statehouse will be a different place and will pass different laws.
Villago Delenda Est
@OzoneR:
THAT right there is precisely the point. We’ve got one example from 65 years ago, and that’s driving the narrative?
It’s all seriously wishful thinking on the part of the dogshit of the right that they’ve got a chance with their klown kar kandidates to take this guy on. I think that the American people are pretty clear on who’s been blocking any attempt to attack the mess of the economy. McConnell came out and said it in no uncertain terms. The GOP is willing to shitcan the economy to get the usurper and near sheriff out of the White House.
kay
@BruceFromOhio:
I will. I’m a lawyer so I just told him (reflexively, without any hesitation or “looking things up”) that his treasurer shouldn’t be his wife. It’s a nice inclusive thought, and I’m sure he trusts her, but I just think that’s not a good idea.
Anyway, in Ohio, you need a treasurer before fundraising.
gelfling545
1. It can’t be all tribalism or Obama never would have been elected.
2. As for no president has ever been re-elected when whatever, Obama having been the first to do one thing could surely be the first to do another. And the the bottom line on that is whenever you say no one has done whatever since since whoever did it you are saying that someone did, ergo someone (obviously)can.
Benjamin Franklin
“flat-out weirdness and chaos and unpredictability out of this thing”
A good rule of thumb for political dynamics:
“When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro”
HST
kay
@Benjamin Franklin:
Right? Who among us could have predicted that Cain would have problems with relationships with women that would lead to his suspension?
All of us, after the first 9, so that’s maybe not a good example.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
I think your treasurer advice is excellent. And of course, having the state GOP players in a pissing match because Fox News Personality King John doesn’t like the state chair is gonna make things really interesting.Kasich’s antipathy toward DeWine is no secret — after defeating then-Gov. Ted Strickland in 2010, Kasich asked DeWine to step down as party chairman. Kasich again snubbed DeWine this summer by skipping the party’s annual state dinner in Cleveland. Hilarity might ensue.
Exurban Mom
Thanks for this. I hate the “just give up” kind of statistic-ifying as well.
Villago Delenda Est
I might add that the lickspittles of the MSM HAVE to imagine that this is going to be close, because the horse race narrative must be preserved at all costs in order for them to get the ratings they need to hold on to their phoney-baloney jobs.
Never mind that a horse race that isn’t a horse race can be far more thrilling that something neck and neck. The MSM clowns do not have the imagination or intelligence to figure this out. Too addled with appletinis and cocktail weenies.
SiubhanDuinne
@Benjamin Franklin:
Generational differences: I expect you’re quoting Hunter S. Thompson, but when I see those initials I always, only, ever and first think of Harry S. Truman.
Nellcote
Kay, I’ve been meaning to tell you for a while now how much I enjoy and appreciate your view from the grass roots. Too often your posts are the only ones that highlight what’s working. We are all well aware of what’s wrong and sucky but we need to know what positive steps we can take to make changes in the real world. So thanks!
ETA: Good Luck to your guy!
kay
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
I saw it. I wrote in a post that I could detect all sorts of unrest among the local Republicans, so I was looking for “proof”, and there it was.
Republicans in disarray, Bella. Our favorite thing. Kasich is a disaster for them.
SteveinSC
How do we send the Steelworker-Candidate some resources?
kay
@Villago Delenda Est:
I thought about it, and I actually agree with the “keep it a horse race” theme.
I think they have to. If they didn’t, it really would drive down turn out, and that would sort of suck. I’m enough of a small “d” democrat to think it has value. It shouldn’t be over until everyone votes.
Benjamin Franklin
@SiubhanDuinne:
Sorry. When I invoked the full name on the other thread, MikeJ nearly
got toxic-shock from his stale Depends. I just assume the quote is
common knowledge, but that’s typical of assumptions.
Dave
Kay, I suspect if you took a look at all the people producing the clever dig, the savvy formula, the big-picture essence… they’d all be dudes.
kay
@SteveinSC:
I have to go but I promise I’ll follow it and let you know. I like him. He has a great story about getting his (grown) child back on his health insurance right in the nick of time for her, so that should be an interesting question for the incumbent to answer. Does he oppose that provision of the ACA?
Tom Q
Obviously there is a national narrative to nearly every national election — whether close, or heavily tilting one direction or another. But just as obviously there are exceptions that defy the national wind. Kay, I’m sure you know from OH history that, in the Watergate election of ’74, where Republicans got slaughtered all over the country, thought-presidential-timber OH Gov. John Gilligan was unexpectedly upset by former Gov. Rhodes. And, hell, two years earlier, while Nixon was running up 60% of the national vote, a youngster named Joe Biden slipped through in DE, which worked out pretty well for him and his party.
Always play the game out. You never know.
Snowball
@OzoneR:
Great question. I found this article at
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/unemployment-and-presidential-elections/
There has literally been 0 incumbents who have had 8.9% unemployment or higher since FDR. So, it doesn’t seem like the most reliable measure since the sample size is so small.
Davis X. Machina
“…how that comes across to me is “why bother?”. It sounds like shutting a door.”
But a fashionable door. Because elective politics is all a shuck, the system is so corrupt the only thing to do is laugh at it, both sides are the same, and everybody does it.
Done properly you can have a fantastically successful show on The Comedy Channel, and become an icon.
Irony will kill a republic as dead as tyranny.
Libby
I’m so with you on this Kay. I’ve been watching this stuff long enough to think it’s so fluid, you can’t get boxed into statistical probabilities and fixed narratives. The tiniest unforeseen event can change everything at the last minute.
Also, too, change is incremental and you can’t necessarily see it happen. It’s like watching your kids grow. You see them every day so you don’t really notice the changes as much as someone who only sees them once a year.
Tom Q
@Snowball: When Reagan ran for re-election in ’84, there hadn’t been anyone who won with the rate as high as the then-current 7.5%. Reagan somehow managed to slip by despite this.
SiubhanDuinne
@Benjamin Franklin:
No apologies necessary, and I do know the quote. It’s just that the initials are so powerfully part of my early memories that not much will dislodge the simple equation “HST = Harry S Truman” from its allotted space in my brain.
kdaug
Devaluation of chaos and reduction to formula, while attractive, is not how the world works. If it were, we would have perfect prediction, no need for statistical analysis, and nobody would ever lose money in the stock market.
Baud
I second @Nellcote 150%.
Libby
@Davis X. Machina: This I also believe to be true.
At least an overdose, can…
Lysana
@Tom Q: Gosh, you’d think people voted based on more than raw numbers.
Amir Khalid
@SiubhanDuinne:
Wasn’t Harry S Truman the sheriff of Twin Peaks?
El Cid
No contingency exists without context, and no context manifests without contingency.
kdaug
@Snowball:
Worse. How far back do we have an “unemployment” metric?
Jerzy Russian
Also, too: no incumbent since John Quincy Adams has ever been reelected while receiving fewer votes than his/her opponents.
Corner Stone
Sounds like a prince among men.
Xecky Gilchrist
no President since FDR has won the White House with 8.9% unemployment. [and other defeatism]
Yay! I quite agree about the doomsaying (and am happy Snowball found out that there have been no incumbents running against that since FDR, that’s even better.)
Reminds me of how in ’08 there was all the sage droning about “Senators never win the presidency” until the two major parties both ran a senator and the narrative gave way to a bunch of confusion and constipated whining among the know-it-alls who kept saying it.
geg6
Let me know when he has an Act Blue page or somewhere to donate, Kay. I’d love to do it in my dad’s, another hard working steelworker, memory. Love to see what’s happening over the state line with my neighbors. I just hope against hope that it’s infectious and catches on here in PA. There’s something in the air, politically, that gives this old girl a feeling that change can come. But we only get it and keep it if there is a grassroots impetus. Dems have forgotten how to do that. I am hopeful that we’re starting to remember how be a bottom up organization. That is where our strength lies if we really want to implement economic policies that finally address the reality of the middle class and provide a strong safety net for our most needy.
We have to take the fight to every district, encourage local activism, and spread the word to all our friends and neighbors. People are looking for leadership and we can all show that simply by doing what you, Kay, and the OH Dems are doing. Bottom up, IMHO, is how we win.
OzoneR
I think it is all tribalism, but it’s worth it to do things like this just to either prove it to yourself, or debunk it.
I suspect a lot of union workers who voted no on Issue 2 will vote for Romney/Gingrich, Mandel or whoever runs against Brown, Latta, and perhaps even Kasich in 2014, on other issues.
Observer
Kay, I really like this post, it seems like a good summary of tactical politics.
Since we already know that the narratives at the national level *always* work against Dems, I only wish that more so-called professional politicians would more or less think this way. But a disturbing amount of them seem to internalize the negative national narrative instead.
Anyways, nice job on this post.
AA+ Bonds
GJ for the local involvement and providing a model for others to follow
AA+ Bonds
I will note however that “it’s more complicated than that” is a real long shot, tactically, as you well know. I don’t do that one anymore.
My general recommendation for Dem candidates is: sound-bite it up, make a Gingrich List of words for you and words for the other guy, get down there in the mud, because there was probably a time when Dems and independents might very well punish you for it but now is not that time – people want some fire now.
AA+ Bonds
Republican candidate says something?
Democrat: “Here’s why that’s wrong: . . . “
Willard
To borrow President Obama’s car analogy, do the American people want to hand the keys back to the people that crashed the economy into a ditch? Sure, in 2010 the American people were largely silent on how to get the economy out of the ditch, leading to a mandate from just 16% of registered voters to pull the wheels off.
Consequently, the same people that crashed the economy and removed the wheels of recovery have enthusiastically proposed to fill the car with the reeking muck of expansionary austerity. These same people go even further to suggest the real problem with the economy is structural and that the economy will have to remain forevermore in the ditch.
Willard
@Kay: My response to this argument is: small n. Funny that the same people that deny climate change due to a lack of compelling evidence suggest that it is a virtual impossibility for Obama to be reelected based on a handful scattered data points.
kay
AA Bonds, I love how persistent you are.
We don’t agree, but you keep coming :)
For statehouse races, and local races, it really isn’t about sounbites or clever phrases. He’s going to be asked specific questions by people who care about one or two issues, because they’re the only people who show up at local-focus events.
It’s much more down to earth. He’s going to have a broad theme, but he’ll actually have to know something, or the ‘expert’ in the crowd will chew him up.
Anyway, short phrases, no nuance, got it :)
Mnemosyne
@Willard:
If the Republicans who were elected in 2010 had been able to restrain themselves and act like adults, the Democrats might be in real trouble in 2012. Fortunately for us, they immediately lashed out with their union-bashing agenda on the state level and ground pretty much all Congressional business to a halt on the national level, which is not the kind of thing that goes over well with the broad audience of a presidential election year.
Donut
Only two incumbents have lost since FDR. Three total incumbents total in the last 110 years have lost the office. I am soooooo sick of seeing this statistic thrown around. It carries so little meaning right now. It may be more important in about 10 months, but not now.
I agree overall with Kay’s post. Theory is good and useful for historians, not voters, candidates and activists.
Willard
@Mnemosyne: When in this century have Republicans behaved as adults?
artem1s
It sounds like you have found an excellent candidate, even better than expected given the circumstances.
I really hope the state party can keep its focus on developing some new talent rather than running a bunch of the old has bins that they routinely trot out to run in the state wide races. It just seems to kill all of the grass roots energy and momentum when they resort to name recognition just to raise some money.
Donut
Ah, corrections, corrections: Ford, Carter and H.W. Bush are the three post WWII presidents who lost re-election, though with Ford, I don’t know how relevant he is to the discussion about why incumbents win or lose. Then you have to go back to Hoover and Taft; again, don’t know how much of a case you can make that those two are relevant when it comes to comparing and contrasting to 2012.
kay
Hi Artemis:
DeWine said the ‘people around Kasich’ are ‘motivtated by “ego power and profit”
By that he means “Kasich”.
So it’s good news that they’re at each others throats.
I think Kasich has to deny the “profit” part.
OzoneR
@Willard:
THIS century or in the LAST century, cause the answer to that would be before 1968.
Brian R.
Well said, Kay.
Joe
@SiubhanDuinne: I read that acronym as “hydrostatic transmission” first, but I knew that wasn’t right.
Brava, Kay. You’re exactly right.
Bruce S
Wow – just on the face of it, a fantastic candidate for the district. Good luck with this.
fourmorewars
I dunno, I think any left-winger who’s hung around places where right-wingers talk amongst themselves these days is counting, like I am, on a factor that hasn’t been present in any election in our lifetimes. That the right is gonna be so maniacally crazy it’s going to scare the normally-blase MOTR voter to death. You guys heard about Orly Taitz and her New Hampshire Tea Party legislator buddies, acting like retarded assholes during the routine ballot-setting procedures in New Hampshire? Over the birth certificate? Just the start. The religious right has gone officially off the rails, and it’s gonna manifest itself in primary races. I mean, goddamn, you had that woman talk show host in Florida threatening to shoot everyone way back in ’08 or ’10, garbage like her is gonna be a dime a dozen next year.
kay
@OzoneR:
Right. Because that’s valid. We both know there’s no way to “prove” or “disprove” something like “tribalism”. The difference between us is I don’t pretend I can.
This county swung 20 points between 2004 and 2008, and the candidate in 2008 was a black Democrat. There. I’ve now disproved tribalism.
We can do this all day. Your turn. Give me the tribalism example.
One rule: you are not permitted to rely on What’s the Matter With Kansas, or any other broad frame. You have to do your own thinking.
IrishGirl
Kay,
Looking at politics from the 30,000 foot view is just easier and in a way it’s for the lazy, because you’re right. All politics IS local and we have a crazy patchwork quilt that is difficult for MSM reporters to follow and explain.
bemused senior
@kay: I think there are a lot of boomers who may not, themselves, be unemployed but who are heartsick about their kids who have no job, crappy jobs, and no health insurance. I and many of my friends and family have taken advantage of the “under 26” insurance coverage to help children in this situation. I think it will be a good point to raise in the campaign against the idiot Republicans who slam “Obamacare.”