Blogs

Take Back America Opening Plenary - Part 1

The session starts off with a video showing horrors of what has happened under the Republican years. Iraq, Katrina, Global warming. The video contrasts what has gone on with great Democratic and progressive leaders. Rosa Parks, John F Kennedy talking about putting a man on the moon, quotes from Martin Luther King, like, “A man dies when he refuses to stand up for justice” quotes from Robert F Kennedy, such as his Ripple of Speech quote, or his paraphrasing George Bernard Shaw.

With that as the backdrop, Robert Borosage from Campaign for America’s Future starts off with opening comments. (These are quick notes as the session is going on.)
“Welcome to the fifth annual Take Back America conference…I know you’re ready to take back America, because you’ve already started.” There are going to be over 3000 people from 40 states across the tribes. Labor to Moveon, Hiphop to CodePink.

“When we started, this was occupied territory… Delay, Frist, Bush, Rove, Libby, Cheney”

Need to put together a bold agenda for America’s Future. A Real Security Strategy. Ending the disastrous occupation of Iraq will be the first step. Shared Prosperity agenda. This year, more women will declare bankruptcy than will graduation from college. We need a concerted drive for energy independence. Revive the American Dream “We are all in this together.”

“We have the power”, the speaker and graphic proclaims, channeling Gov. Dean. He goes on to say that the price of Democratic lobbyists is soaring. Everyone chuckles, but it makes me feel uneasy.

Key constituents to be reached include Single women, Labor, African Americans, Latinos, Young, and Independents.

“This is not time to trim our sails or tack to the illusive center.”

“We can Take Back America, it is up to us.”
(Technorati tag: tba2007)

(Categories: )

Campaign Philosopher

The other night, I was at a fundraiser for Jim Himes who is running for Congress in Connecticut’s Fourth Congressional District. After the event, we were talking about his speech and some of the issues of the day, such as education and immigration. Part way through the discussion he asked if I had ever read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. I was surprised at his question, since I am in the middle of rereading it. I wondered later if he had seen me reading it, read a blog post I’ve written recently about it, or if someone else had suggested he ask me about it. At some point, we’ll get together and talk about some of my thoughts about how it applies to campaigns.

I had recently read the section where Pirsig asked his class to write an essay defining quality. The class became outraged and indignant when they found out that Pirsig didn’t have a good definition of quality and was hoping that someone in the class would come up with a good definition. It made me sit back and think. What would it be like if a candidate admitted he didn’t have all the answers and asked his constituents to help him find solutions to the problems our nation faces? Most people suggest that such an approach would be political suicide. There would be similar outrage and indignation as Pirsig’s students expressed, but unlike a required English course, the voters would probably drop the candidate pretty quickly.

Nonetheless, it seems a laudable goal, to find politicians that admit they don’t know it all and are willing to learn from their constituents, for I do believe that there are a lot of smart constituents that are not involved in the political process, either as activists or lobbyists. I do think that citizen councils could bring a lot of valuable new ideas to the political process.

Yet this would require a special sort of politician, one who is more interested in solving our countries problems than simply being an elected official, and who could still get elected nonetheless.

I’ve often wondered how any of our current politicians would stand up. There are only a few that I think could stand the test. If Gore were asked if he would rather be President or see an end to global warming, I bet he would chose an end to global warming. If Edwards was asked if he would rather be President or see an end to poverty, I think he would chose an end to poverty. If Kucinich were asked if he would rather be President or would want to see World Peace, I suspect he would quickly choose World Peace. I’m just not sure about any of the other candidates, or what various people in races further down the ticket would say.

In our current political climate there doesn’t seem to be much room for idealists or philosophers. Perhaps one day, that will change, but until then, I keep most of my philosophical questions reserved for the blogs.

Frames and frameworks

Wikipedia’s definition of a Software framework is: a reusable design for a software system… Software frameworks can be object-oriented designs.

In the political world, George Lakoff has been trying to get progressives to think about a different type of frame, as illustrated in his book, Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values, Frame the Debate. Jeffrey Feldman takes this further in his website, Frameshop, where he talks framing the debate.

All of this harkens back psychological frames. Working Psychology defines a frame as ”a psychological device that offers a perspective and manipulates salience in order to influence subsequent judgment..

It seems as if there are some interesting parallels between psychological terms and technology terms and thinking about technology from a psychological frame is a useful task that isn’t done frequently enough.

One interesting place to explore this is in Marc Andreessen’s blog post, Why there's no such thing as Web 2.0. In the post, Andreessen, criticizes O’Reilly’s short definition of Web 2.0 as lacking crispness. Yet he does talk about O’Reilly’s phrase describing Web 2.0 as an “architecture of participation”.

Well, there are technological design considerations that can help websites facilitate participation. Using forms on a webpage so that people visiting the webpage can contribute content as text, or even upload sounds and pictures to incorporate into the website can facilitate participation. Adding the ability to rate and/or link to other content also facilitates participation. Making the content available as widgets so it can easily be incorporated into other websites facilitates participation.

Yet what are the psychological components that facilitate or inhibit participation online? How do fears about conflict and the persistence of online content inhibit participation? How does the desire to establish relationships and to be heard encourage people to participate? How can people running websites use ideas from psychology to foster participation that will make the website attractive and successful?

I think Andreessen is partially right and partially wrong. Too many of the people talking about Web 2.0 seem to think of it in terms of the underlying technological tools. Yet what really facilitates an architecture of participation isn’t the technology, but an understanding of group dynamics online, and so far, I am not seeing people sufficiently explore these dynamics.

(Categories: )

Bloody Hands

(Categories: )

Where will the first vote in the 2008 Primary be cast?

I must admit, I don't know all the nuances of how voting in the 2008 primary works.  As I understand things, New Hampshire is required, by state law to have the first primary, right?  So, should we assume that the first vote in the 2008 primaries will be cast in New Hampshire?  Perhaps not

New Hampshire does not have early voting, so the first vote in the New Hampshire primary will be January 22nd, with perhaps a few possible exceptions for absentee ballots.

California is scheduled to have its primary on February 5th, and has early voting, which begins on January 7th. 

Over on MyDD, there is a diary entitled, Vote Hope's California Challenge: Beat Iowa.



Early voting in California will begin Jan. 7, and we will be running a sophisticated, voter-file-driven program to turn out our early votes before the Iowa caucuses even begin.

Their goal is to get 500,000 Obama supporters to vote in the California primary before the Iowa caucuses (let alone the New Hampshire primary).

(Cross posted at BlueHampshire)

(Categories: )
Syndicate content