Daily Archives: June 5, 2008

Political Organizing and Fundraising – This century we’re in…

The Obama campaign has cleared one hurdle – the number of delegates needed for the nomination.  Now the real race begins and his campaign must adapt to the new nature of the battle.  So far he has been very adept at adapting.

The most important feature of Obama’s campaign strategy has been his reliance on new folks to the political process, grassroots volunteers and millions of small (and recurring) donations to his campaign war chest.

Obama and his campaign team realized and embraced the dominant role of the Internet from the very beginning of his campaign.  This pivotal decision was the backbone of his success – political organizing, get-out-the-vote (GOTV) efforts and fundraising.  The Facebook-like software that the Obama campaign uses, served as a National, State, Local and Issue-driven “virtual office” and campaign infrastructure.

The Obama campaign was not an Internet campaign; The Internet infrastructure merely acted as a conduit, a clearinghouse and an incredibly efficient “office assistant”.  The Internet enabled the Obama campaign to be focused on the issues and the skills of the grassroots volunteers – driving every local event and action, and supplying the hundreds of thousands of “foot soldier” volunteers that spearheaded the GOTV efforts. 

Senator Obama recognizes that the Facebook-like software they have relied upon has enabled his campaign to build and organize “communities” of real people – who interact with one another in-person and online.

The Howard Dean campaign of 2004 introduced the political world to Internet applications. The Obama campaign has embraced the cutting edge and breadth of electronic media and communications.  This almost total reliance on Internet applications has yielded dividends that are astronomical: 

Total funds raised to date:   around  $250 million

Percent of donations that averaged less than $100/each:   90% were less than $100

Total number of ACTIVE volunteers:    around   750,000 active volunteers

Total number of financial contributions given:   more than  3 million

Number of groups formed affiliated with the Obama campaign:  around  8,000 Obama groups

Total number of Obama “Events” held:    around  30,000

Reliance upon long-standing models of political organizing and fundraising has not been sufficient this year.  John McCain has relied on the old models:  large exclusive, invitation-only fundraisers.  He has raised far less than half of what Obama has raised.  McCain’s campaign is an old-fashioned “top-down” affair, and on-the-ground activists have played a much smaller role.

McCain, the professed campaign-funding “maverick”, has been increasingly relying upon a “hybrid” donation scheme, allowing individual contributors to donate up to $70,000 to his campaign.

 Obama will need to rapidly expand the size of his “big tent”.  It’s my guess he’ll still be relying upon the same methods (and a few new ones) that have brought him to this point.  He’ll always be a “community organizer” at heart.

 

 

Obama not always an agent of change …

and this one reflects extremely poorly on him.

(my emphasis below)

“Let me be clear,” Obama said, “Israel’s security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable. The Palestinians need a state that is contiguous and cohesive and that allows them to prosper. But any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel’s identity as a Jewish state, with secure, recognized and defensible borders. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided,” he added, in efforts to secure the Jewish vote.

(Abbas slams Obama for saying Jerusalem to stay Israel’s undivided capital, Haaretz, 06/06/08)

Quite frankly this issue could easily become a deal breaker with my willingness to vote for Obama.

If I don’t hear a change in attitude over the course of this summer my vote will be going to McKinney or some other candidate. I am not going to support a presidential candidate who is willing to subvert our nation’s and the world’s interest to that of a powerful lobby … Israeli or other.

I would certainly like to see a reference to the Arab Palestinian people’s right to a land with an identity of their own choosing and with secure, recognized and defensible borders.

Attitudes like that expressed by Obama above are a deal breaker because they expose the underlying assumptions and principals of the declarant. In this case Obama is exposing himself as no different than the same neo-cons that have helped to put us in the domestic and international mess we are currently in.

Like us in the U.S., Israeli will not be asked by Obama to bear any formal responsibility for their actions. Everything in Palestine will be the fault of the evil Arabs and nothing will change.

The America We See

( – promoted by odum)

The LA Times has an overview of how the rest of the world is reacting to Obama’s victory:

http://www.latimes.com/news/na…

It is hard to overstate how intrigued the rest of the world is with Obama’s rise.  It simply doesn’t fit the narrative that has been formed of America over the last decade.  America isn’t just about entrenched elites and political dynasties.  

I was in Qatar last week on an overnight stay on my way back from Sri Lanka.  At passport control instead of asking me about the purpose of my visit, the official asked “McCain or Obama?”  When I replied Obama, he smiled, stamped my passport and gave me the thumb’s up.

It is nice that the rest of the world is seeing the America we see.

Entergy web

Vermont Yankee low rate aging nuclear power plant is in the news again.The Times Argus has the story.

Press releases early on said one thing regarding responsibility for the decommissioning fund when the reality was slightly different .

Entergy of New Orleans and Entergy of Vermont confuse each other’s areas of responsibility .Wait until the new shell Enexus is added to the tangled corporate web of liabilties.

The real gem and credibility builder is this from David O’Brien DPS regarding press releases . “Press releases aren’t binding in law,” O’Brien said. “What’s binding in law is the Public Service Board order” approving the sale. “What difference does it make what a press release says at the end of the day?” ….Gov.Douglas’s man all the way

This is of course true but perceptions from press releases matter also as well as binding legal power

Today the responsibility for decommissioning Vermont Yankee is with its owner,” Entergy Nuclear vice president and chief financial officer Wanda Curry told the House Commerce Committee on April 16. “You can think about it in numerous ways, but its owner is Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee. Its owner is not Entergy.”

That would appear to run counter to three Entergy press releases issued in 2001 and 2002. The first, dated Aug. 15, 2001, announcing Entergy’s plan to buy Vermont Yankee, said, “Entergy will also assume decommissioning liability for the plant and the plant’s decommissioning trust fund, which is required by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.”

David O’Brien, commissioner of the Department of Public Service, agreed with Williams that the key 2002 legal documents leave Entergy’s parent company off the hook for decommissioning costs at Vermont Yankee.

“Press releases aren’t binding in law,” O’Brien said. “What’s binding in law is the Public Service Board order” approving the sale. “What difference does it make what a press release says at the end of the day?”

http://www.timesargus.com/apps…