Good luck, Mr. P.

I don't envy Mr. Parker the job he just landed as chair of the NCDP, but I do wish him well. And I hope he will prove to be the relentless bulldog needed to go after Republican incompetence and corruption. It's going to take more than personal commitment, though, it's going to take lawyers, guns and money.

Give 'em hell, David. And don't forget that a whole bunch of progressives helped bring you to this party. We'll be expecting a few dances.


Great idea!

That journey starts today with meetings in Raleigh. Love to have your help in formulating the $3 pledge campaign -- tags, themes and materials are already late but we have to start now.

David Parker


No, this isn't about flirting with progressives. This isn't about pleasing idealogues. This is about raising money.

I congratulate David Parker on his victory and hope he will be successful in fulfilling this KEY role.

Speaking as a flaming liberal progressive, I don't give a damn whether or not he makes anyone on this blog happy with speeches or gestures of support for progressive causes. What I care about is that he can raise the money we need to defeat the Republicans in the next election. THAT matters far more than the moronic rantings I see on this blog from people who think that chest-thumping and indignation further progressive policy. They don't (username, get a clue).

What furthers progressive policy is the election of a sufficient number of democrats to office that a given progressive leader (and we have them) can get a freakin' bill to the freakin' floor and has a damned majority. That doesn't happen if we don't elect Democrats.

Electing Democrats does not equal progressive policy

Thanks for the name-check, though I'm not sure why. Glad I get under your skin.

For an object lesson in why electing Democrats should NOT be the primary focus of progressive policy, let's look at what new law takes effect on Tuesday, February 1.

On the last day of the last legislative session in which they were in charge, NC's "progressive" leaders -- I'm talking about Joe Hackney, Deborah Ross, Rick Glazier, and others -- rammed through the lovely DNA upon arrest bill.

Even the "progressive" leaders who didn't vote for the bill, didn't have the spine to use procedural measures to kill it. Here I'm talking about Paul Luebke, Pricey Harrison, Jennifer Weiss, and others who let the conference report come up for immediate adoption without objection.

So, none of these progressive leaders we worked so hard for were any better than Thom Tillis. Again, see who signed the conference report (on page 2).

In summary, one can be well aware of legislature procedure and have a desire for progressive leadership, but also be aware that when the chips are down, some past so-called "progressive" leaders have engaged in their most bitter legislative fights for decidedly anti-progressive ends.

In celebration of the what NC's "progressive" leaders have wrought, and for the bloggers who criticize the bloggers who criticize them...I offer a toast


What you care about?

It appears that what you care about is getting money from people like me. My wife and I raised more than $500,000 for Democrats over the past ten years, and I have personally given half that amount again to candidates, PACs, and grassroots organizations. If Mr. Parker's fundraising strategy ignores the agenda of people who are intensely interested in environmental protection, social justice, and mass transportation, land-use planning, tax reform, etc., then he shouldn't come calling on me. That's a dance I won't join.

What do I care about?

James, I’ve been on this blog long enough and sounded off on social issues often enough that I don’t think I should have to reiterate my concern that this state move forward with a progressive agenda. I don't feel like dancing at the moment, so see if you can't remember my positions on the -isms and phobias. The point I am making here in behalf of my desire to fight people like Thom Tillis, Phil Berger, Skip Stam, etc . . . is that making perfect the enemy of the good is a lousy tactic.

Thanks to a Supreme Court that is composed in no small part because of Ralph Nader’s ego and the shortsightedness of his followers, we have Citizens United to ensure that money is very, very important. David Parker's job is not to please you with his dance steps. David Parker's job is to please as many deep pocket contributors as he can. If your tune is off-key enough for the larger body of those folks, he can't and shouldn't accommodate you. In any case, if you can’t see that leaders like Joe Hackney, Pricey Harrison, Rick Glazier, Paul Luebke, Jennifer Weiss and Deborah Ross are the best hope we have for genuine progress in this state, good luck with your musical arrangements.

And Userename, I don't actually know you, so I don't know what you are like when you aren't spouting off irrational recommendations. But people who think as you seem to think are indeed an irritation because they prefer self-righteous drama to strategy. I can't help you with what appears to be an essential ignorance about how legislation is made and why a given legislator might take steps you don't like. It is hard to avoid the suspicion that you aren't particularly interested. Nothing you've said on this board suggests you've given it thought. So yes, because I do care, very much, it does get under my skin when someone professes a progressive agenda and then argue against practical means of actually supporting it. People like you seem to think that the blood that flows when you cut off your nose to spite your face is far more admirable than actually prevailing in combat with the real enemy. On second thought, maybe you are your own real enemy. Hack away.

Brunette, you have been

Brunette, you have been indeed around here a long time, and I must say, I really do wonder why. Because the main thing I've learned about you over the years is that you mostly attack me and BlueNC as part of the problem.

More to the point, when I look at the "rational" behavior you seem to admire in mainstream Democrats, I see a train wreck on every progressive front. This is not about the perfect being the enemy of the good. This is about pathetic being the enemy of god-awful. That may be a compromise you're willing to make, but I'm not. And that's why I'm no longer a Democrat.

I have been

around a long time but I haven't been a frequent poster for quite a while. In any case, I didn't think I was "attacking" you, but should have anticipated you would see it that way. It was not my intention to suggest and I certainly haven't said that BlueNC is "part of the problem." I guess it never occurred to me that you considered your opinions were to be imputed to every "progressive" contributor to this blog. You have a number of people here who contribute regularly and thoughtfully, and sometimes even *you* make a valid point.

But you think the "train wreck" in 2010 was because Hackney etc . . . were not progressive enough for you? You really think the electoral results are attributable to their failure to vote on every issue just as you would wish? Really? And their performances in office were "pathetic?" God help you.

And instead of an answer to the point, which is that YES, money is very important, there’s this squeal from one of the more regular flakes about how the game has changed? Echoing Perdue’s pep rally? (Did she shake that adorable jar of pennies this time?) Ya think she's going to stand up anywhere and say money isn't important? She may not be my favorite Democrat but she certainly isn't stupid. The game has changed all right, but it's not one we can unless we recognize the rules.

Two things are happening these days – one in slow motion and the other very fast: In slow motion, we are seeing the end of the old Democratic Party machine. Thank heavens for that, but it isn’t going to happen quickly. In fact, I’d bet that it just slowed waaaaaay down. But on a much faster track the Citizens United decision is making the political game much, much more difficult for anyone who isn’t already wealthy to participate meaningfully. Like it or not, we absolutely must raise money to be heard. Whether you get that or not, I think David Parker does, and I hope he will be successful.

To echo the Governor's pep rally plea: "Ditto that, James"

Anyone who thinks it is just about keeping up the same old system and raising money to spend in the same old ways deserves the kind of results we got at the polls in November, and they will get the same results in November 2012.

The old game is over anyway, and I raised that point with Rep. Faison in the Progressive Dems caucus meeting in the Q and A. He lost my support (not my vote, as I did not have one) right there, as he did not even comprehend the question.

Martha Brock

Off to a good start

One of the first things David Parker did was to create a County Chair Association with their own dedicated staff person and had them meet right then and there in a break-out session. The chairs I spoke with were very enthusiastic about this development. Giving County Democratic Parties a key role in rebuilding the Party from the ground up will go a long way towards rekindling the enthusiasm and commitment we need to have a vibrant Democratic Party in NC. This also allows well-organized County Parties to help those who are struggling to make sure all counties are ready for 2012. NC Democrats cannot rely on personality cult politics to win. We have to have a thriving organization and a compelling message of our own.

It was these kinds of proposals that persuaded the leadership of the Progressive Democrats of NC to endorse David Parker. And we are greatly encouraged to see that Mr. Parker wasted no time in implementing one very important initiative right away. This bodes well, especially after such a long stretch of inactivity.

Way to go, David! And keep the momentum going.

Resistance is Fertile

Another great idea.

Let's do this. Please contact me today or tomorrow. Will be int he office in Raleigh after lunch.

David Parker

NCDP and Fundraising

Hey everybody, we have been focusing on "deep pocket" contributors for so long that we have forgotten where the real support is.

As of January 2011, SBOE reported the following voter registration numbers for NC:


Now math was never my best subject, but do you think if the party could get just $5 from every registered democrat we could handle the problem. I would think that somewhere between $13-15,000,000 would take care of things.

To me, part of the problem has been the attitude at the Goodwin House for the past several years. Rather than hiring experienced people (like the GOP) who have actually had to live in the real world, we have brought in folks that didn't have a clue and were more focused on putting a title on their resume. I know that David has a commitment to put together a staff that will be field oriented and out working on the C.D. and county level. So if you're worried about raising money, join with me and send in your $5 contribution today! Then ask your fellow Ds to do the same.

Michael J. Gould, MS, FIOPL
Member, SEANC Board of Governors
Member, NDP SEC

Please remember that

Please remember that Democratic registration numbers do not translate equally to Democratic support. Many people in North Carolina remain registered as a Democrat for a variety of reasons, none of which have anything to do with how they vote.

I'm a moderate Democrat.

Hiya Huh

Sadly, this is true. But we did get that turnout in 2008 and we should be able to do it again in 2012.

Hate this mindset

It is not the little donors versus the big donors.

It is about trying to get both.

Want to know why a $4000 contributor matters? The average small dollar donation to Obama was around 50 dollars if I remember right. So if there are similar numbers at the legislative level, you need 800 contributors to equal one 4000 contributor.

I bring up Obama because he set what is considered to be the gold standard for small dollar contributions and for getting small dollar donors activated and involved in the campaign.

According to OpenSecrets, 319706 people donated to Obama. There were 132 million registered voters, 213 million of voting age. So Obama got something around .24% of registered voters to donate to his campaign.

Should we go after more small dollar donors? Yes. Absolutely. Should we plan to get a donation from even 10% of registered dems? Of course not.

"Keep the Faith"

Takes both

to make the difference we need.

David Parker

And that means compromise

Good luck, Mr. Parker.