Obama calls on his Internet campaign army to march again

McClatchy Washington Bureau ^ | Nov. 20, 2008 | Frank Greve

[Hetty_Fauxvert]

President-elect Barack Obama's 3 million campaign volunteers got re-enlistment notices this week.

Campaign manager David Plouffe, in a mass e-mail sent Wednesday to former workers, asked how much time they can spare for four missions integral to Obama's effort to transform his victory into a broader political movement.

The volunteers' options are, Plouffe wrote:

-Campaign for progressive state and local candidates

-Undertake grassroots local efforts to advance Obama's agenda

-Train others in Obama's organizing techniques

-Focus on local political issues.

"Obama's building a political machine," said Stephen Hess, a presidential scholar at the Brookings Institution, a center-left Washington research group.

[nathanbedford]

It’s the Democrats’ version of Scientology!

That and a giant cyber-age multilevel marketing organization leveraging the power of twos. These Ponzi schemes start with two people who talk to four people who talk to 16 people. Except now this is done at the speed of light.

Scientology and Herbalife all have mind control in common. Saul Alinsky makes no bones about thought manipulation and control.

Michelle explicitly warned us that this was going to happen.

[ari-freedom]

Michael Steele is definitely not the man to wage this kind of guerrilla war.

no, he’s just a nice guy you see on tv. that’s not what RNC chair is about

[Darkwolf377]

What are we doing to counteract this?

We have to stop whining and beat 'em at their own game.

The RNC has to stop wasting their money on whatever they wasted it on in the process of NOT winning this election cycle.

Obama won because he had tons more money and better organization.

We have to have an RNC that isn't interested in all this "moving to the middle" crap but is fired up about actual conservative values. They have to chose a new version of the Contract With America--come up with 5-10 bullet points of what the Republican Party wants to achieve.

Then they have to organize voters and call on them the way Obama is.

We can complain that this is fascism or whatever, and keep losing to it, or we can admit "OK, they beat us, now let's learn from what they did" and bring the fight to them.

I suspect this will not happen. The RNC is a country club group more interested in having Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and the liberal press LIKE them. They don't want to appear "scary" to E. J. Dionne. They're more interested in that than in defining legitimate differences and offering actual conservative governing ideas.

[nathanbedford]

I fear you might be right in that bleak assessment. The disciples of Saul Alinsky do not covet power only to see it forfeited because they play by the rules.

Worse, I see no evidence whatsoever that anyone anywhere in the Republican establishment has a clue. The Bush administration would not close the border and would not prosecute vote fraud while they held the executive branch. We are holding nothing now but our own asses. The first thing we have to do is get rid of Bush's establishment crowd and get some guerrilla fighters.

I fear in the next election we are going to see, as I posted before, the political version of shock and awe.

[Shery]

After this election, we can see that things are decidedly stacked against us. However, we must counter-attack with a grassroots movement that stays off the radar, and also we must pray like there is no tomorrow.

I believe that there is a spiritual element of judgement in all this that is happening, as America is not just a little off-course, but a lot. We Christians don’t walk our talk much and we have pretty much allowed the left to take the culture from us. So, we must be salt and light again in this dark world and live godly lives. We do have a God who hears prayer, but He is not there as a personal Santa Claus. He has a purpose in this world, too, and that is to bring His kingdom to earth. We need to be going about that business and let God frustrate the efforts of the Evil one. Our prayer should be that His will be done in Earth as it is in Heaven.

[Prole]

[nathanbedford]

I think the conventional grassroots mobilization methods, even upgraded and intensified as they were by Karl Rove in 2004, have become as outmoded as a cavalry charge in 1939. They did not work in 2006 or in 2008. I do not think that we even know how the new Blitzkrieg version of electoral warfare actually will be conducted. I think were moving into a new method of conducting elections as radical as Blitzkrieg in 1939 and the Gulf war. I am convinced that no one in the Republican party establishment has read Rommel's book.

That is not to say that just because conventional grassroots organizations are outclassed by the new cyber/Alinsky methods they should be abandoned. To the contrary, we have got to go with what we have if only to mitigate the disparity. But in doing so must not deceive ourselves that we are accomplishing very much. Those of us who predicted the electoral disasters 2006 and 2008 have become extremely wary of mindless optimism which is so often seen, for example, on these threads which has the fatal effect of masking mortal peril.

[Fred]

The One's top fundraiser

[Chet 99]

The Republicans need to step back from fighting (for now), and even encourage and support Obama’s picks and legislation. This will place a further wedge between Obama and the netrooters who supported him. The goal is to discourage them from the entire process and sit out in 2010. If they stay home, we have another 1994.

[unspun]

That is not to say that just because conventional grassroots organizations are outclassed by the new cyber/Alinsky methods they should be abandoned. To the contrary, we have got to go with what we have if only to mitigate the disparity. But in doing so must not deceive ourselves that we are accomplishing very much.

As far as organizing on the ground is concerned (which is the the foundation of politics) the sad truth and yet the opportunity that still lays before us is this: we have never come close to approaching the kind of organizing we can and probably must do.

We do not need tricks. We have the basic resources we need. We have the plans that have worked* and will continue to work. We just need modest money, focus, determination, and the commitment to utter camaraderie and utterly no division.

I could go on and on (and have, including training materials and a fund raising prospectus).
____________________

*plans that very effectively recruit a big "sleeping giant" of very available people direcly into bottom-up electoral activities, not the top-down, crippled 501(c)4's of the 1980's and 90's.

[nathanbedford]

Sort of like the way we peeled away the Hillary supporters who voted for Palin instead of Obama and won us the election?

Organizing in the cyber world will hardly energize the wing nuts on the far left. They are not going to peel away from Obama anyway, he will throw them a bone in time and they will be merrily drinking the Kool-Aid

I think I will change my tag line from Bull Halsey's signal to the fleet, "attack, repeat, attack!" To Lord Nelson's order to the fleet at Trafalgar, "engage the enemy more closely."

[Chet 99]

The DUmmies and Kosacks are on edge right now over the seemingly moderate moves. Republicans could put them in a tizzy if they actually started praising Obama’s moves.

That isn’t to say this is a long term strategy, but certainly only the next few months of the honeymoon period.

I agree about Newt Gingrich... while House Republicans had become fat and happy living in the minority for 40 years (hey, nice perks but responsibilities is life in the minority party), he made a concrete plan to win the House. He said “WE WILL DO X”. In recent years, the GOP argument has more or less been “We’re not as bad as the Democrat”. People need something to SUPPORT.

[nathanbedford]

The same old same old failed in 2006 and 2008 what makes you think that more of the same will generate a better result now? Even if you are right that we do not need tricks but a return to fundamentals, we need above all a sense of urgency, a sense that we are in mortal peril.

I am unconvinced that we can safely ignore the threat posed by marrying Saul Alinsky to the Internet and continue on with 20th-century methods.

What we need is a ramrod who can energize an organization. someone who can exploit the Internet. Michael Steele is clearly not that man. Whom do you propose? We need a real turnaround artist, not a country club Republican.

[nathanbedford]

I continue to think that the real danger posed by Obama comes from his Manchurian Marxism. If he remains merely a centerleft candidate, the Republic will survive his administration. The real danger comes from his potentially radical associations, and Saul Alinsky like tendency to establish a cult of personality, a demonstrated propensity to squash free speech, and a proven ability to mesmerize a good chunk of the electorate.

If his Marxism becomes the dominant theme of his presidency, and if it is enabled through converting the Democratic Party into a giant community organizing machine along Saul Alinsky lines, conservatism may well be dead. Therefore, our strategy must be to peel the center away from him, not the left whose psychology is probably immune to our logic and certainly to our entreaties.

It may be okay in a very short term basis, as you suggest, to engage in a little two-step dance to try to separate Obama from some of his extreme left-wing base. But there are dangers in this course. The first is that it promotes an implicit endorsement of his centerleft policies which affirms his legitimacy and makes our ultimate job of seducing away the center only more difficult. Another problem with that strategy is that it tends to reassure the middle that Obama has no truck with the extreme leftists with which we conservatives have been trying to taint him.

I quite agree that mindless attacks on Obama are counterproductive. We must have the right timing, the right issue, and the right spokesman. Right now we have none of these. I think we have to start with finding the right spokesman who should emerge as someone who can energize the party and articulate the three legs of the conservative school, fiscal conservatism, strong defense, and social conservatism, which is acceptable to all flavors of conservatives. He who can unite the party will no doubt be possessed of the forensic skills necessary to carry the fight to the enemy. Rather than praise Obama, I think our job is to articulate our own principles and let the public see whether they are compatible with Obama's positions. As the public begins to learn they like our principles, and that Obama does not, the middle will begin to emerge from its national neurosis.

Meanwhile, we must get busy with a sense of urgency like the country experienced after Pearl Harbor to reorganize, rearm, and prepare ourselves to wage 21st-century cyber/election warfare.

[torqemada]

>>Then they have to organize voters and call on them the way Obama is<<

This is exactly what we intend to do. Conservative Republicans are beginning to organize and mobilize forces to focus out efforts on local, county and state races and issues. I believe this call to Obama’s campaign army is in response to the news that conservatives intend to carry the fight to the local level. Check out the site at http://skagitrepublican.typepad.com and read the very first article, “GOP Reform: From the Grassroots Up” here: http://www.typepad.com/t/app/weblog/post?__mode=edit_entry&id=58898940&blog_id=1775290

Pass the word, link to the site, and get involved in your own local grassroots movement. We need a whole lot more do and a little less talk.

[torqemada]

Oops, sorry, the proper links are:
http://skagitrepublican.typepad.com
and
http://skagitrepublican.typepad.com/skagit_republican_grassro/calls_to_action/

[Darkwolf377]

I fear in the next election we are going to see, as I posted before, the political version of shock and awe.

Please explain, if possible add to your previous postings--what do you see since this past election that tells you we're in for even bigger trouble next election?

I have my own ideas about this. I defended Bush frequently around here, but the bailout thing still has be stunned, an unbelivable acceptance of Big Government as Big Brother, Sister, Mom, Dad and Maiden Aunt, there to soften all blows. As we've seen since, this "gotta have it NOW!!!!" boondoggle has not only inspired companies to simply say "Forget new business models, we'll just go get more money from our customers through the government!" but it's not even what it was to begin with! It seems like Paulson just got this big pile of money and THEN thought about what he would like to do with it.

Bush sure did Obama a big service with this. And McCain went along with it, no surprise--he is a fan of Teddy Roosevelt, but not the one most conservatives seem to like but the real TR, who was a liberal no matter how you slice it.

Forget that McCain looked like he was panicking, Bush trusted his economic team, and now it looks like all their Chicken Little stuff did precisely what it was intended to do--deliver even more control over the economy to DC. Does anyone seriously believe that Obama's economic team will be more conservative than Bush's? And how conservative was Bush's?

[PghBaldy]

Yep. How effective has been in the past? Not very, except for grabbing the credit, doing nothing, and moving on to higher offices. He has accomplished nothing except for moving on up.

[Caipirabob]

Is there anybody home in the Republican establishment?

I knocked, but it sounded like John McCain, and he says he's busy...

: (

[napscoordinator]

Given the narrowness of Obama’s victory

Narrowness? I wouldn’t say that. 357-187 electoral votes. 4 percent popular vote. I think he won a pretty big margin.