I'm saying we have nothing to replace him with. Who is gunning for the top Texas state party chair right now? Do you honestly think that Linda Chavez-Thompson would take the job? And who is going to back her with any money?
Thats our problem in Texas. The top job also comes with the fundraising anchor. Whoever wins that job (remember it is an elected job) also has to raise huge amounts of money.
So lets say Richie were to resign right now. What would happen in the immediate future - (2010-2012)? Give me one name of someone who could fill the spot immediately and start raising enough statewide money to turn the tide? Talk about the dream ticket - I'd love to see the candidate who could do it.
Richie isn't even up for re-election until 2012. In 2012 it's going to be a presidential election year and turnout will be bigger. I'm not saying things will get better but it's going to be a whole lot muddier in terms of anger turnout.
It's easy to blame Boyd and make him the fall guy. Getting rid of him and expecting things are going to get a whole lot better by 2012 just because we have a new pony won't make it happen. Because again we have failed to address the core of the problem - which is voter turnout and outreach to Latino voters. And that isn't going to change because the money and top down management structure in our Texas state party doesn't even know that it's a problem.
I'm sure you have read both Kuff and Greg's posts on Latino turnout and because we trust consultants and politicians to get out the Latino vote - we get what we pay for - pretty much nothing.
Greg's Opinion 11/29/10The Diminishing Base of Hispanic Democrats (snip)
If there is a one point that I’ve been reluctant to air publicly, it’s this: The two worst classes of people to talk to about Hispanic outreach are 1) Hispanic politicians, and 2) Hispanic political consultants. While there is certainly insight to be gained from both, neither has much of an idea of how to make the dream of massive electoral turnout among Hispanics happen.
In discussing Kuff’s blog post from earlier this month on the topic with him a while back, I made the point that one reason you never hear the alleged master plans for ginning up turnout being talked about is because too often, there’s a golden goose at stake. In other words, there are groups and individuals out there that will promise you massive increases in turnout among Hispanics. And for a small (or large) sum, they’ll promise to put it into action. With their people, with their plan, with their supervision, and often … with little accountability. If the candidate wins, then no questions are asked. If the candidate loses, you just move on down the line and pitch the next
moneybag candidate. This isn’t solely the case in Hispanic politics, mind you. It’s predominant among a number of base-partisan communities of all colors and all stripes.
Off the Kuff 12/2/10More on Latino turnout(snip)
One reason why I suggested that we begin thinking about this problem by thinking about raising money address it is because I think to some extent the question of Latino voting needs to be removed from individual candidates and campaigns in favor of a more holistic and ongoing approach. I don’t know how much the Democratic community as a whole learns about what works and what doesn’t from one campaign to the next, I don’t know how much of what does get learned gets transmitted from one campaign to another, and I don’t know how much of what gets learned is worth learning. Wouldn’t it be nice to institutionalize that? Tell me if you think I’m off base here.
I think Kuff is right. We need to detach outreach money from the candidates and make it a separate "statewide" initiative.
:shrug:
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
