Under the Dome

Weak NC Democratic Party could Hagan chances, The Hill says

A report The Hill, a Capitol Hill, is reporting that "weak state parties in the South risk hurting Democrats’ chances of holding — or gaining — critical Senate seats in 2014.'

The article by the Cameron Joseph says that struggles in Louisiana, Georgia, and North Carolina "could force national Democrats, and the candidates themselves, to step in with big-dollar investments to build get-out-the-vote programs that are often left to the party’s state-level operations.''

“There’s a lot of drama in all of those places,” said one national Democratic strategist. “That means a lot more responsibility for coordinated campaigns in those states and really elevates the importance of field programs, things that are traditionally done by those state parties.”

All three states have endured turmoil at the top of their party structures, as scandals and power struggles have left efforts to build voter lists and recruit down-ballot candidates untended, says the Hill article.

The consequences could be significant.

Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) face tough reelection fights, and Democrats are excited about the prospects of former nonprofit CEO Michelle Nunn (D) in Georgia.

But those candidates face increased jeopardy if the state leaders tasked with fixing their parties fail.

“They have to be able to immediately restore confidence in the state parties,” Southern Democratic strategist Tharon Johnson said of a trio of new party chairmen.

“You have to show people you’re competent in those states. They have to get it together organizationally and financially and have a plan. … It’s places like Georgia and Louisiana where we have more work to do.”

Read more:

Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

How the Dems doing on paying the back income taxes?

I think I recall one high-up NC State Democratic Party leader was in arrears paying his state and Federal income taxes. Then I think his name was listed in a home foreclosure or something like that? Of course it may be one of those "any publicity is good publicity" things.

Whoever wrote this article....

...must have only consulted the paid political consultants! This article gives a totally erroneous account of what happened in North Carolina.

The article did not mention that the DSCC took sides in the 2012 NC Senate primary for one candidate who lost, and then didn't support the eventual nominee. Nor did they mention how NCDP staffers and other politicos pulling for the DSCC backed candidate failed to bring their "A-game" for the nominee - Elaine Marshall.

The article also didn't mention that sexual harassment charges were allegations, and that 18 months later a variety of circumstances proved Parker and Parmley innocent and showed that the charges were false!

The article also didn't mention that the sexual harassment allegations were cover for the real crime: political consultants trying to keep taxpayer check off money and their expensive and ineffective no-bid expensive insider contracts! The leaders of the attacks against Parker in 2012 and against our current Chair now are either current or wanna-be political consultants or politicos.

The story also wrongly claimed that Parker was forced out. Parker was not forced-out - he served out his entire term. Parker did resign from office, but his resignation was rejected by the NCDP State Executive Committee in May 2012 by a larger margin and number of votes than put him into office in early 2011.

The same consultants who tried to force Parker out in 2012 tried to interfere with Party officer elections in early 2013, aided and abetted by some NCDP staffers. After Randy Voller won, they vowed to either force him out or work around him. What they are trying to do is keep the money-laundering from the big donors to the candidates's paid consultants without it going through the Party. That's because party-building builds a larger volunteer base from the grassroots up - meaning less money is needed to get out the vote. Less money means less control by the donors or the paid politicos.

The article also claims that OFA only had a shadow organization in 2012 due to the Parker/Parmley issue. OFA built a shadow structure in 2008, and never really gave it up. They hit the ground in 2011 well before any of these allegations were brought up by the consultants in April 2012.

No one whose income comes directly or indirectly from paid political work seems to be capable or or wants to admit that two big causes of the failures of 2010 and 2012 were the death of Howard Dean's 50-state strategy or Jerry Meek's 100-county strategy for party building - a death directly ordered by OFA starting in June 2008. And OFA has always been trying to supersede the party at almost all levels ever since then.

The losses we've experienced after the November 2008 are directly attributed to our failure to build the party so it's more important that any one candidate or small groups of top ticket candidates. If we don't scrap OFA's influence in the Democratic Party - especially in these southern states - we will be doomed to repeat and magnify the historic losses we experienced after the November 2008 elections.

Cars View All
Find a Car
Jobs View All
Find a Job
Homes View All
Find a Home

Want to post a comment?

In order to join the conversation, you must be a member of Click here to register or to log in.