The Gadflyer and MyDD have both mentioned the possibility of Simon Rosenberg leading the new Democratic National Committee. But Jerome Armonstrong recommends a smarter manuever:
Way back in the Summer and Fall of 2003, when we were flying high with Dean and the Netroots, there was one guy in DC that figured out what was going on, and took a lot of shit for trying to parlay that understanding to the DC Democratic Party establishment. That was Simon. I have an easier solution. Why don't we just call the NDN the new DNC?
With all of the talk about a Shadow Governement, why don't we decide where are dollars are best served in creating the type of Opposition we need. Who do you think will do better, the DNC or the NDN?
Since our loss, I argue the
New Democrat Network has been more deserving of our
support.
The NDN is leading the
discussion of how we can do better and history shows the NDN has a far quicker ability to react and with a message that resonates. Who do you think does a better job of talking about values, Terry McAuliffe, or the NDN's
"Restore the Promise of America" campaign?
Personally, I think Rosenberg would do a great job of running the party. But any change in the DNC will take time as a lot of powerful people have a vested interest in the status quo. Even if Roseberg does take over the DNC, I think the blogosphere should provide him the funds today to mount our opposition.
You can donate to the New Democrat Network:
Posted at 07:23 pm by blog swarm
