define "insider" and "outsider"... does it matter?

what do you think is meant by "insider" and "outsider"? and do you think either term is negative? does it matter?

it's apparently a big deal to some people in the election... what about compared to the current crop of dem nominees?

who's a good "insider/ouysider" and who's a bad "insider/outsider"?

Snubbed again by the state party faithful, Kerry nevertheless turned defeat into an asset, painting himself as the "outsider" to Shannon the "insider." http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061903.shtml
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=108&topic_id=58258&mesg_id=58570&page=

Since you're next post is entitled 'context', I find it ironic that you use this quote from Kerry's 1984 Senate primary campaign!

Nice try, though. :hi:

Dean Statement in Response to DLC's Charge that Public Servants are "Fringe Activists"

“Once again, the DLC has chosen to put their own political agenda ahead of the progress needed to unite the Democratic Party. This election has barely begun, and the DLC has repeatedly dismissed people who attend caucuses, who get out the vote, and now the 1.3 million members of AFSCME as ‘fringe activists’ who do not reflect ‘the mainstream values, national pride and the economic aspirations of middle-class and working people.’

“The DLC staff can say what they want about me, but they owe an apology to the 1.3 million members of AFSCME. Our teachers, our health care workers, and our state and local public servants don't need a lesson from Washington insiders about the needs and concerns of middle- and working-class families. What they need is a Democratic Party that will stand up for them.”

Posted by Mathew Gross at 04:27 PM
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000206.html

Tell From and Reed of the DLC What You Think
Click here to sign a letter to the Democratic Leadership Council telling them that you're an active Democrat who supports Howard Dean. You can tell your friends about the link, too: www.deanforamerica.com/DLC

Posted by Mathew Gross at 01:29 AM
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000240.html

Fineman on the DLC Memo
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000213.html

Former DNC-Chief Steve Grossman to DLC: "Creating Conflict is Not Leadership."
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000225.html

Liberal Oasis on Howard Dean and the DLC
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000226.html

Will the Real DLC Please Stand Up?
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000228.html

Congressional Members Call on DLC to Stop Divisive Tactics
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000238.html

Activists Are Out of Step
By Al From and Bruce Reed
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251866&kaid=85&subid=65

The Real Soul of the Democratic Party
By Al From and Bruce Reed
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251690&kaid=127&subid=900056

What are you trying to say? What does it all mean? Or do you have nothing to say so you just decided to post a bunch of links?

corporate money. Corporate money that makes it impossible for Dems to be Dems.

Corporate money drives everything? I do believe it does for some fat and happy Republicans, like Tom Delay, and it very likely influenced some Dems, like Tom Daschle vis a vis airlines and Joe Lieberman vis a vis insurance companies. But to paint every "insider" in Washington as corrupted by corporate money is simply foolishness. Paul Wellstone? Sarbannes? Tom Harkin? Yeah, he's a corporate lackey, huh?

There are divergent interests in this country, and a leader must reconcile them. Corporations do have some valid interests that are NOT out to screw everyone. But the proliferation of HUGE conglomerates whose claim to fame is buying up more small companies and squeezing them for increased profits (ala WorldCom), or using the acquisitions to muddy the books so they LOOK profitable (ala Enron)
is part of what is terribly wrong in this economy.

There are conflicts between small interests, too. Farmers and environmentalists. School districts. Wanting to "work with our allies" and yet also wanting to pressure them to adopt higher labor and environmental standards to equalize trade.

Politics is reconciling conflicting interests, or as has been happening for a bunch of years - riding rough shod over some interests in favor of others.

IMO, the House is much more prone to charges of corruption or at least undue influence because they have to campaign again every two years. That's silly and a waste of time. They should serve 4 years.

I think using the "insider/outsider" theme in a campaign is simply a strategy to get more votes. And I don't think that's a necessarily a bad thing, because it can get a candidate like Dean or Clark more attention from people who are completely turned off by politics or feel alienated by the system.

It's interesting to me that both Dean and Schwarzenegger are calling themselves "outsiders." Dean has a more legitimate claim as an outsider IMO because of his grassroots fundraising approach. However, when he advertises himself as an "outsider" it doesn't really speak to me, because he already has my attention as a Democratic voter who wants to hear his type of message. But it doesn't turn me off either, and fortunately his campaign does have actual content.

Schwarzenegger, on the other hand, is an "outsider" in terms of actual governing experience, and the whole GOP machine (Pete Wilson, etc.) behind his campaign contradicts this "outsider" status. But I think that the outsider theme of his campaign helped get more votes, even though his campaign was completely content-free (in contrast to Dean's).

So in conclusion, in my own opinion "insider/outsider" rhetoric does't have much value when I consider candidates. But in the big picture I may be the exception, because "outsider" candidates may get more attention and, ultimately, more votes. It's a campaign strategy that has been proven to work. But that doesn't mean it will always work.