Graduation Report: Dems Need to Sharpen Up

| Bernard Weiner |

Last weekend, I was visiting my old Washington State stomping grounds - I lived and taught in Bellingham back in the day - to witness the graduation of my nephew from The Evergreen State College in Olympia.

Therein lies a tale, and not a hopeful one for Democrats in November and in 2008.

For the Democrats to win the upcoming midterm election, and the presidential election two years later, they must be, and must openly and consistently demonstrate that they are, street smart and aggressively on point with their base and able to draw as well from the middle (Red Dawg Democrats, disaffected traditional and moderate Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, et al.).

But if Democratic Governor Chris Gregoire's commencement address to Evergreen's 2006 graduating class is any example of oppositional smarts, the GOP has little reason to worry about the upcoming elections. (Note: They sure do have plenty of other reasons to worry.)

Washingtonians told me that Gregoire is a centrist/liberal Democrat who is making good appointments and leading the state reasonably well. With those assets in her favor, here was a perfect opportunity for this sitting governor to make some friends and influence people. There were roughly several thousand graduates and perhaps three or four times that many family members there to celebrate with their diploma-earning students. As a politician, you salivate at being able to address such a potentially friendly, captive audience.

What a blown opportunity.

THE WRONG SPEECH AT THE WRONG PLACE

A competent advance team, speechwriter and governor would have known that Evergreen is the most progressive of all of Washington's state colleges, and would have tailored the commencement speech to that audience.

Instead, Gov. Gregoire's team outfitted her with a Republican-lite speech on the glories of globalization. She had been delivering this same address at a number of other college commencements that same week, and it came across as what it was: a generic speech (and a not very well-written one at that), a one-size-fits-all address that would have been more appropriate for a gathering of business types, or, at the very least, for a more conservative college in Eastern Washington.

And so for a half hour, the Evergreen audience sat on their hands, listening to political platitudes in this somewhat boring paean to the opportunities offered by globalization. The governor dully read her generic prose as prepared, seemingly oblivious to whom she was speaking. This despite Evergreen's lib/rad reputation and despite the protest organized against her appearance by a vocal group of activist students; about 50, wearing protest t-shirts, turned their backs on her during her address, while others unfurled banners against her welfare policies, or heckled her from trees near the stage.

Her desultory, DLC-like speech could just as well have been broadcast on a large TV monitor from a remote location. That's how removed it was from the reality of the thousands of visitors and graduates sitting in the sun (and occasional drizzle) in the Evergreen quad.

AN ANTI-GLOBALIZATION HOTBED

Am I suggesting that Gregoire shouldn't have spoken on that topic? Probably would have been a politically wise idea, but if she really wanted to speak about globalization, the governor and a savvy speechwriter would have recognized that some concession to her audience and to the complexity of that issue might have been appropriate.

After all, she was speaking in a bastion of anti-globalization, and that activism demanded that she offer some acknowledgment of the issues raised by those opposing free-market globalization on environmental and human-rights grounds. (Evergreen is a school devoted to environmental education, and an intelligent Democratic advance person would have known that and alerted the speechwriter accordingly.)

How often will similar scenarios be repeated around the country in the next five months and during the run-up to the 2008 election? Incompetent planning, inappropriate speeches, political gaffes, dull deliveries -- do the Democrats really want to remain a party in permanent exile from the reins of national power?

The Republicans may be badly riven by issues such as adventuring wars abroad, humongous deficits and a languid economy at home, aligning America with torture and the suppression of civil and human rights, massive government spying on U.S. citizens, etc. etc. But, under the tutelage of Herr Rove, they know how to run a campaign, illegal and unethical though some of their campaign tactics might be.

I'm not advocating that the Democrats ape the Republicans in how to steal elections through dirty tricks, kicking hundreds of thousands of legitimate voters off the rolls, manipulating the tallies, etc. Not at all.

LEARN HOW TO FIGHT THE BEAST

What I am suggesting is that the Democrats must recognize and study the success of the GOP's M.O., and then devise creative, effective counter-strategies; in short, our side has to be at least twice as efficient, passionate and dedicated to victory if we're to have any hope of taking down the corrupt, reckless, dangerous Bush crew at the top and thus of turning this country around.

That means forethought, planning, competence, smart thinking in terms of candidates, speeches, focus on issues, staying on-message, framing the issues correctly, massive campaigns to register new voters, pre-emptively going to court if need be to guarantee honest and transparent elections, and so on.

Can it be done? Is the Gregoire scenario noted above going to be the negative example of how uncertain, incompetent Democratic campaigns are going to be conducted? It could be, but let me end this rant on a positive note.

THE RIGHT KIND OF SPEECH

The speaker after Gov. Gregoire was one chosen by the faculty: Jose Gomez, J.D., who said he's been waiting for 50 years to deliver his public address, and it was a doozy. It connected his hardscrabble life - eventually winding up working closely with Cesar Chavez on behalf of maltreated farm workers, and then with La Raza Legal Center - with the challenges open to today's graduates.

Gomez showed how it was possible, and vitally important, for single individuals to make major differences in their own lives and the lives of others through sincere and dedicated commitment to honesty and social justice. The audience responded enthusiastically to his passionate speech, to his life story, to his urging the graduates to make a difference in their communities.

That's the kind of energized, focused, progressive policy and speechmaking the Democrats need to fire up their base, and to make us believe in the significant differences between the Democrats and the Republicans.

A huge slice of America is waiting to be energized and moved to action and support. The sooner the Democrats get their act together - and Howard Dean's 50-state experiment may well pay off in this regard - the easier it will be to generate the anti-GOP momentum necessary for November and for the race in 2008. Let's get to work.

-- BW

and dead armadillos.

If "globalization" were so great, wouldn't we all be enjoying the fruits of it by now?

The fact is that union-busting and merger mania is killing wages in this country.

Are you better off today than you were four years ago?

If you're an average American who works for wages, the answer is hell, no.

boeing, microsoft, agriculture - all export dependent.

but to be so tone deaf at evergreen, which is located IN THE CAPITOL of Olympia, is typical gregoire. she is the quintessential Wa state dem - playing prevent defense from the start. there's a logjam of them at the top of the party, and they're not going to get out of the way for anyone with a sharp, focused, challenging message.

we need the loud & proud voices of our big dogs like Clinton, Gore, Edwards, etc... to go a tear about the middle class being bankrupt by the globalization crap. I have no idea where these men & women stand exactly on the losses of the working class, I'd HOPE it was on the citizen's side.

I'm THRILLED I wasn't at that speech...

www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable <<<-- check it out - 2006 & 2008 Pro Dem Anti Rep stickers

But all in all, it's a VERY complicated topic and certainly not appropriate for a commencement speech at Evergreen.

that got her in office, well at least her recount actually got a Dem in

And thanks, BTW, to Bernard for an excellent article.

The maddening media ineptness of Governor Gregoire and other 'moderate' Democrats is quite frustrating.

As an Oregon resident who works primarily in Washington, I get exposure to both Gregoire and our own Governor Ted Kulongoski, politically in much the same mold.

The kids graduating from Evergreen State deserved better than a regurgitation of a stump speech.


These Democrats have to learn to speak more passionately to their constituents in a way that connects with them.

Lots of great points to be sure, but the underlying assumption... that Democrats are struggling against the Republicans... I believe is faulty.

While the MSM certainly tries to make it seem like most Americans are still solidly behind the President and the Republican controlled Congress, the polls just don't show that. Public disapproval over the war, the economy, and everything else to come out of this Administration are at record lows... and not just "record" for Bush, but "record" for most of the last half century.

The Uber Factor is ELECTION FRAUD! Let me say that again: ELECTION FRAUD! We have evidence now that AT LEAST the last two Presidential elections were manipulated mercilessly to force a desired result, and questions about the Busby/Bilbray special election in convicted felon "Duke" Cunningham's district are just starting to emerge.

Like Stalin said, "It's who COUNTS the votes." And when you have rampant unfettered election fraud taking place, increased rhetoric and stronger messages to increase voter turnout aren't worth ice in hell when elections can be stolen.

Yes, your points are great and definitely should be taken to heart, but the mistaken belief that Democrats aren't reaching the populace because of poor rhetoric is just wrong. The voters are on our side. The facts are on our side. Even the current rhetoric is on our side. But what we DON'T have is anyone taking the need for "vote security" serious enough to elevate it to the NUMBER ONE issue... ahead of even the war or Global Warming!

Yup, the voter security debate is one we need. It's not going to happen, however. The Republicans don't want to acknowledge that there is a voter security problem. Can you blame them? The only way voter security will be improved is if the Democrats gain power and then take corrective measures. Kind of a difficult task if you ask me.

Democrats have an opportunity to get on the right side of several issues one being illegal immigration. It doesn't look like it's going to happen so we are going to lose momentum.

A most basic Catch-22... you need Dems in office to fix the election system in order to stop elections from being stolen from Dems.

I don't see this as hopeless as one might make out to be though. We have a VERY small window of opportunity here... one, maybe two more elections.

Right now, those who would manipulate the vote still must rely on the brute force tactics like voter suppression: preventing people from getting to the polls in the first place, too few voting machines, destroying or invalidating ballots, et al.

But once the transformation is complete... a 100% non-auditable electronic voting system in all 50 states making recounts totally impossible... watchdogs can still identify and blow-the-whistle on election hanky-panky. People can still *demand* that they receive a provisional ballot and then protest when it is not counted. Too few voting machines in a particular precinct will raise more than just eyebrows this November (raising healthy concern and public outrage).

The Busby/Bilbray race in San Diego has me the most concerned because if that election was indeed manipulated as I believe it was, the dearth of serious investigation and public concern fills me with dread over what to expect this November. No election should be seen as too small to warrant concern when the stakes are so high. And the stakes were enormous for the GOP in that one, far greater than I think most Democrats seem to be aware. The need for this very topic is evidence of that. The "loss" in SD was a demoralizing defeat for Democrats: "If we can't win there, to replace the most corrupt politician in the country, then how are we supposed to win lesser races where the case for corruption is more ethereal? That election is already having the desired effect!

Voters (and watchdogs) need to be more diligent this election cycle than ever before, and be quick to speak up when violations first raise their ugly head, because we're quickly running out of opportunities where election fraud can be relatively easily proven.

Don't make political speeches at graduations. Just say some fluffy, personal, inspirational stuff. this is the time to celebrate the accomplishments of the people in the audience - not the agendas of those at the podium.

Better yet...universities shouldn't hire politicians to speak at graduations, unless they want to alienate a portion of the student body.

A couple of weeks ago I got together with my son (23 and single) and nephew (39 and single). Neither is a political activist nor a committed ideologue; however, both think Bush is an idiot and his regime crooked. Both are vaguely liberal. In other words, they are more like most Californians than people at DU.

One would think that with Schwarzenegger's approval ratings where they are, Angelides would be a shoe in. Apparently, this is not the case. My son and nephew are both contemplating voting for Arnold.

I pointed out that Arnold became governor in a recall election in which the voters expressed no confidence in a governor who wasn't be accused of any criminal wrongdoing, but simply faced a budget crisis not entirely of his making for which he had no good solution and spent too much time fund raising. So the Hollywood action her becomes governor. The budget crisis, of course, is even less of his making, but he has no good solution and he spend entirely too much time fund raising. So why wouldn't anybody want to vote Schwarzenegger out if he's really no better than a governor who was recalled?

The problem for both my son and nephew was the thought that Angelides would be yet another politician who would have no solution to California's budget crisis and would spend entirely too much time fund raising. We could have stayed with Gray Davis if we wanted that kind of thing, and their reasoning now is why change again to another booby?

Phil Angelides has his work cut out for him. He can't just sit back and expect to ride into the governor's office on Schwarzenegger's unpopularity. He has to convince voters that he can do what Gray Davis and Arnold Schwarzenegger couldn't. Otherwise, the voters are likely to stick with the more familiar booby.

are entirely too representative of the population as a whole. People vote for all the wrong reasons, and cast specific votes for all the wrong reasons.

In March of 2001 we (husband and 2 sons) made a trip to Australia. Great trip, great country. Many people there asked us what we thought of George W. Bush -- and remember this is only three months into his term. We made it clear we thought he was an idiot and please don't hold us accountable for him because we certainly didn't vote for him, and by the way, were were beyond convinced that he'd gotten into office in a coup. And invariably, the Aussie questioning us would say, "Hmmm, I'm yet to meet an American who voted for him."

All too often when I tell that story (including during the five months left remaining before 9/11) it's interpreted as no one being willing to admit to having voted for him. No. It's a clear indication that those who did vote for him (somewhere nearly half of the electorate, after all) don't travel abroad.

Even more telling was a conversation with a couple of women in the van back home the day we arrived back in the U.S. They had voted, apparently for Republicans up and down the ticket, but felt it simply didn't matter who you voted for, because soon enough they'd disappoint or disgust you since they were all alike anyway.

Have no doubt about it. They're going to steal this coming election. My prediction is that Democrats won't take any new seats, and will, surprise, surprise, lose a couple they'd looked certain to win. There will be many irregularities, long lines in Democratic areas, no lines in Republican ones, and exit polls will, oddly enough, not quite match results, especially in the unexpected Republican wins.

2008 will be more of the same. Perhaps the Democratic nominee will be highly regarded and will dominate the polls from the beginning. Perhaps the primary will divide the party and there will be dark muttering amongst the rank and file about not being happy that person is the nominee. I hate to make really specific predictions, but consider what it will be like if our guy (or gal) goes against John McCain. Can you imagine Hillary trying to run against him?

No matter who our nominee is, the essential theme of the campaign needs to be something along the lines of "They've done enough damage already. Let real compassion show the way to heal our country." But no doubt everything will get lost in ad hominem attacks and issues that don't really matter, and terrible slurs on the character of the nominee.

They aren't saying the definitely will vote for Arnold. They want more information. An informed voter isn't necessarily going to see eye-to-eye with me. We should laud them for asking questions.

For my part, I have no doubt that Phil Angelides will be a better governor than Schwarzenegger. My son and nephew are unconvinced that he will be any better. I'll let you know how they feel in November.

I like to think of myself as a well-informed voter for the most part, and there are times when I have a lot of trouble voting for a particular candidate because of that whole issue of which person really would be a better choice. And it's up and down the ballot, not just President or Governor.

graduated Sehome 90 and WWU 98.

Gregiore is a conundrum, she obviously has some agenda, can't figure her out yet.