My frustrating call to the Washington State Democratic party....

[LisaM]

So, after Bernie's most recent assault on the Dems, I decided to give the Washington state Democratic party a call to see if they were going to right the ship regarding the caucuses vs. primary system.

WOW! What a runaround I received. After having to call the (hard to find) main number three times and trying different extensions, I finally reached a (rather patient) young man who took the brunt of my anger about the system, the different results of the caucus vs. the "beauty contest" primary, and the way Hillary supporters have been essentially bullied in the last two go-rounds.

His assurances that they were "talking about it" weren't exactly reassuring. He wouldn't discuss why they chose Easter weekend in 2016 for the caucus, nor why they allowed them to run until 11:00 pm or later in some cases. He wouldn't address why in 2008 the people running my precinct allowed people who'd come out for Obama to toss aside the votes we were supposed to take on party planks. He flat out lied to me by telling me that the new Washington state party chair wasn't a Bernie supporter.

I called the number of the precinct committee person he gave me, and the message started out, "if this is Mom or Dad...." - uh, okay, this is the number they give me for party business? (Incidentally, the area code was not even in my city, much less neighborhood).


WHAT DO I DO ABOUT THIS?

[tonyt53]

1. Gotta ask, but why would a supporter of a non-Democrat be the party chair anyway?

[LisaM]

4. That is a very good question, isn't it?

She was just elected, after losing the Secretary of State position to a Republican because of some previous baggage.

Despite the fact that our very blue state has a very liberal Democratic governor and two (women) Democratic senators and is pretty firmly in the hands of the Dems, the Bernie supporters decided that we should "clean house".

[David__77]

6. Because he or she was elected?

Perhaps that's it.

[LisaM]

7. The existing chair wasn't very good, either.

It was a Hobson's choice, but really, the caucus system has to go.

[Ken Burch]

46. Nothing would be better in the WA state party if progressives had no say in anything,

It's not possible to do progressive things in office after running as a status quo candidate. And Bernie would have done just as well nationally if the caucus system(invented by the centrist, establishment wing of the party)didn't exist.

Please don't waste your time trying to drive Sanders people away. We can't win without young progressive insurgents.

[QC]

8. That would seem to be the most likely possibility. n/t

[LisaM]

29. Let me retract on this one a little. I'm unclear now.

She was the candidate of the Bernie faction of the Washington state Dems, but I'm hearing two different sides of whom she supported.

[elleng]

2. WORSE than sad;

infuriating, and I'm just reading about your experience.

[Wounded Bear]

3. Have you posted this in the WA state group?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1082

Don't mean to deflect or minimize, but we have a few people who post there regularly and keep us up to date.

This doesn't sound good, for sure. I'm hoping we can flip a couple of our red districts, but disorganization won't help at all.

[LisaM]

5. I just got off the phone, and I'm thinking about it.

However, this is also a national issue. Bernie can't go around trying to divide the Democratic party like this. It needs to be addressed at every state and local level.

[JHan]

9. Did he say more stuff recently? I've been ignoring it all....

Because it's gotten so tiresome.

It's also revealing that these sort of dust ups happen in Dem strongholds, boggles the mind.

[LisaM]

15. Yes, he did. Of course he did.

That's all he does.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/11/bernie-sanders-lambasts-absolute-failure-of-democratic-partys-strategy

[JHan]

20. LOL... we need a speech generator ..

So this was at the People's Party summit? I suppose the plan is to fuel resentment in the hope that enough discontented democrats leave the Democratic Party and flock to the People's party. In the era of Trump, divisions are just what we need right?

[BBG]

30. Divisive?

What you call divisive others view as a call to action. Pointing out areas we need to address in order to better succeed at the polls is helpful to the cause. Or at least it is in my view.

[LisaM]

31. Calling to action and stating that the party is absolutely failing are two different things!

I don't think a party that earned 3,000,000 more votes (there were more people who voted Democratic for Senate, too) is failing. Of course everything can be better, and that includes messaging, but bringing in people like Cornel West to the DNC to berate everyone isn't helpful.

At some point, the process needs to be examined. In this case, I find caucuses to be unrepresentative and unhelpful. When people knew their neighbors and chatted pleasantly in living rooms in the evening, you might have been able to make a case that it worked. We also need to talk about gerrymandering, voter suppression, and other obstacles to voting like fewer voting spots. It was also unhelpful that, for example, in the Arizona primary it was the GOP who restricted the number of voting sites, and Hillary's camp who was blamed for it (even though it was Hillary's lawyers who later went to court).

Yeah, I call taking someone to task who earned 3,000,000 more votes on her message divisive!!

[BBG]

37. Her Message Divisive?

Seems like what was quoted in the Guardian article was criticizing party strategy and no one particular individual. But hey we still got plenty to do to better prepare for the next go-round and you are right on the voter suppression tactics that we are being hurt by. Though I kinda like the caucus process. My precinct went +70% Bern but +90% Hillary so I'm not sure the party lost anything by caucusing.

[SharonClark]

10. The guy on the phone may be a volunteer who doesn't have the answers

Your concerns are valid, I'm sure some of us have experienced them as well. I suggest you write down your concerns, call the precinct committee person and ask to meet with her/him about your concerns, call your county chair and ask how you can bring your concerns before the county central committee, and then take them to the county central committee for discussion and action. Try to make political friends with like-minded people in your precinct and county; there is strength in numbers.

If it were me, I'd find out why your precinct committee person doesn't live in your areas. They may be a 'placeholder' because no one from your precinct volunteered to do it.

Hope this helps.

[LisaM]

16. I don't think that in a rich, solidly blue state, a volunteer should be answering phones.

I don't know if he was or not, I'm just saying.

[MagickMuffin]

11. First off don't diss the precinct committee person

The State Party doesn't buy precinct chairs and committee members phone. We use our own phones.

As a Precinct Chair I know I wasn't evened offered a party phone.

Do you think all state party's can give phones out to the lower level people?

WHAT DO I DO ABOUT THIS? If you really expect change then start at the local level. Get involved at that level where you can have more direct input. Just my observation.

[LisaM]

12. I have been involved since 1972 when I worked (as a teen) for McGovern.

I should be treated with respect, not disdain. Do you know how many phone calls I've made, how many streets I've walked (in two different states), how many doors I've knocked on, how much money I've given? A LOT. Were you out there in the rain in 1988 pounding yard signs for Dukakis in peoples' front yards when you knew it was a losing battle, but you were rewarded because it brought tears to the eyes of an older Greek-American woman? Were you there in 1992 driving to peoples' houses, afraid that a man was going to attack you because you were delivering precinct party materials for his wife?

I think I've paid my dues and that my concerns about Bernie Sanders currently being on the stump trashing the Democratic party are completely valid and that I should be listened to.

[Kentonio]

21. So that gives you the right to demand answers they probably don't have

And insist a system is changed because you don't like it?

[LisaM]

22. Well, they should have answers, and I wasn't "demanding"...

but as a participant in a flawed process, I do think I have the "right", as you put it, to have a voice. I also pay money into this party at both the state and local level.

The fact that the primary and caucus had two different outcomes and turnouts should demand answers without prompting.

[LisaM]

26. Going back to this point, do YOU believe that people who are active party members

don't have rights?

I can't MAKE them change it, but I think I have the right to comment on it.

[Kentonio]

42. You certainly do have a right to a voice

Just maybe consider that the person you're calling might not have all the answers you're looking for, and is probably doing the job for much the same reasons that you're engaged in politics. They want to help people and improve things.

[LisaM]

13. Also, I didn't diss the precinct person.

If she calls me back, which I doubt that she will, I'll be nice to her.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

14. If you're looking to change to a primary system, it's going to take political will, so contact your

reps.

[LisaM]

17. It's decided by the state party....

but yeah, good advice. I'll call them next.

[suffragette]

18. Have you tried your precinct webpage? These list contact info and monthly meeting schedules.

You can find yours through the main website.

http://www.wa-democrats.org/local/ldo

I find it easier to just google WA dems precinct # and click on the link from results.

Example of a precinct page:
http://36th.org

That way you would have email and phone number and access to monthly meeting info.


You also might want to contact state Senators and your local Representative to let them know you support a primary. Some of them have also expressed this and would likely welcome your support as a constituent for this change.

Edit to add
http://leg.wa.gov/Senate/Senators/Pages/default.aspx
http://leg.wa.gov/House/Pages/default.aspx

[LisaM]

19. Thank you. I don't really expect anything at this point....

but it's worth taking down the information and trying. I've made four phone calls today.

[suffragette]

23. Counties also have webpages that include more contact info

Example for King County
https://www.kcdems.org/our-party/legislative-districts/

Example for 36th District contact info from King County page
https://s.kcdems.org/lists/org?org=36

Hope this helps you!

[LisaM]

24. Yeah, the 46th District one isn't the greatest....

but since I seem to have a wire hair today, I'll try to exhaust all options. I did send an email.

[suffragette]

27. Lots of contact info from the County page

https://s.kcdems.org/lists/org?org=46

I agree we need more local activism.

Our state legislature has been precarious ever since Rodney Tom and Tim Sheldon called themselves Democrats but voted with Republicans, then assisted the State Republicans in a coup that took over the State Senate. The Democratic Party should have been primarying them, but didn't act to censure and withdraw financial support until after they helped Republicans take the Senate majority.

That was in 2012 and we still have yet to take it back.

And our margin in the State House looks slimmer each year.

[Blue_true]

25. Our Party.

Need to do the following IMO.

1. Go to Primaries in all states.
2. Have the Primary Open with the following requirements. New people that just turned 18 or are new permanent residents to the state can register up to one month before the Primary as a Democrat or Non Affiliated. Anyone registered as a Democrat or Non Affliated 9 months before the Primary can pull a Democratic ballot.
3. Delegates, including Super Delegates get awarded in proportion to the vote percentage for each candidate WITH IT BEING LOADED TO ENHANCE THE VOTE IMPACT FROM BLUE DISTRICTS, except for 2 Super Delegates that get automatically get awarded to the Primary winner.

I think all of the changes above would allow Democratic leaning Independents participate in our Primaries while preventing ratfucking by republican leaders determined to blow up our primaries.

[LisaM]

28. Or from Greens or Independents, too.

Years ago I would have accepted the Green party as a legitimate ally with shared goals to help elect liberals. IMO, they've lost that privilege by the candidates they've run, the harm they've caused, and their lack of commitment to working on behalf of the environment above other issues, which is their ostensible mission.

[Blue_true]

50. I agree. I absolutely do not consider Greens allies.

They should be treated like republicans until their sustained actions prove otherwise.

[L. Coyote]

32. Just glad i don't have a job taking calls like yours.

What you do about it is organize for the party at the grass roots level. The party is only as strong as the people who take part and support the candidates.

[LisaM]

33. You act as if I've never answered the phone on behalf of a party/candidate. I have.

And really, a main part of running parties and candidates is earning votes. I do vote, and if I feel as if I'm not getting represented, I think it's fine to pick up the phone and call.

I've expressed my frustration on this issue through other venues with them such as email and Facebook, too.

[L. Coyote]

34. I have.

The Robert F. Kennedy campaign in 1968 was my first job in politics, then aide to a Senate candidate, so yes my experience goes back just a wee bit.

[LisaM]

35. Mine too - I worked on the McGovern campaign to start

and many other state, local, and Federal races since. I do not understand why the Washington state party is clinging to a system that most of the Dems in the state can't participate in, or don't feel comfortable participating in.

[suffragette]

36. The new WA Chair supported Hillary, even raised funds for her.

Tina Podlodowski supported Hillary early on and consistently throughout the campaign. The Vice Chair supported Bernie. Together they formed the Unity ticket.

Thought it might be helpful for you to know this beyond a doubt.

https://www.seattlemet.com/articles/2016/11/28/podlodowski-considers-challenging-ravens-for-state-democratic-party-chair

As for the Clinton/Sanders divide, Podlodowski says while she was an early Clinton supporter, she’d “describe [herself] as an Elizabeth Warren Dem, though—progressive, and wanting to get things done. I was honored in my race to be supported by both the Hillary and Bernie folks in our party. Now there is time for a bit of truth and reconciliation and a rebuilding of a progressive democratic party.”


https://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2017/01/tina-podlodowski-joe-pakootas-elected-to-lead-the-washington-state-democratic-party.html

Podlodowski, fifty-six, and Pakootas, fifty-nine, had campaigned together as a unity ticket (abbreviated as #PodPak) for the party’s top two officer positions.
~~~
Podlodowski supported Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for President last year, while Pakootas supported Bernie Sanders.
~~~

Podlodowski and Pakootas’ weeks of outreach paid off, as Podlodowski was elected by a three-to-one margin over the incumbent Chair Jaxon Ravens, while Pakootas was elected by acclamation, with no one else having been nominated.

Tina Podlodowski is the second woman and the first lesbian to become the Chair of the Washington State Democrats, while Joe Pakootas is the first Native American Vice Chair in the party’s history. Their terms began this afternoon following their elections and will continue until the party next reorganizes until January of 2019.


http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2015/06/10/hillary-clinton-is-coming-price-to-talk-with-her-2700-and-up/
It turns out that June 20 will see both morning and afternoon Hillary fundraisers.

Ex-Seattle City Council member Tina Podlodowski and Barcy Fisher will hold a 10 a.m. Clinton event at their home. It will feature Jason Collins, the first NBA player to come out as gay. Tickets start at $250.

“Brunch at our home more of an LGBT focus as it is Pride Month,” Podlodowski messaged Wednesday. “Afternoon with Hillary herself on a wide range of topics.” She reported “great response” for both events.


http://www.king5.com/news/politics/chelsea-clinton-to-hold-gotv-campaign-rally-in-seattle/339870795
SEATTLE -- Chelsea Clinton will campaign for her mom in Seattle Saturday.

The rally for Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine will be 2 - 4 p.m. at Town Hall in Seattle. Sen. Patty Murray, Secretary of State Tina Podlodowski and The Northwest Girlchoir are expected to attend.

[LisaM]

40. Yes, see above. I pulled back on that statement.

I had bad information and I realized that.

[suffragette]

41. Great. I think I read somewhere that she also thinks a primary would be better.

I know we don't always agree, but I am also in favor of changing to a primary. I believe it would be more inclusive and therefore more representative of diverse populations.

I am happy that I have come to know one of my neighbors better because of the caucus. Even though I caucused for Bernie and she for Hillary, we both voted for Hillary in the general and now talk politics when we see each other. That was a nice bonus.

Yet I agree with you that people are excluded in the caucus process and that should not happen and it should be changed. People who have to work that day or to take care of someone or who are out of town should be able to participate and vote. And there are a thousand more reasons someone might not be able to caucus.

[DefenseLawyer]

38. Wasn't it a lot more fun to be a Democrat when it was a bit more exclusive?

A place where you and your friends could meet and plan parties and fundraisers without all the riff-raff?

[LisaM]

39. No. It was fun when it was the big tent and everyone was welcome.

9lumbers, professors, priests, and little old ladies playing bingo.

[susanna]

43. YES. It was. n/t

[Ken Burch]

48. Everyone's welcome now.

It's just that the centrists aren't guaranteed dominance and there's a chance for non-millionaires to be heard.

[susanna]

44. Please stop. n/t

[Ken Burch]

45. I can go as far as agreeing that you should have received better answers when you called.

(at least to the degree you could expect them-nobody who answered the phone at party HQ in 2017 would know why the caucuses were run the way they were run in 2008...btw, why are you still mad about 2008? Obama won, and obviously beat McCain by a larger margin that you candidate would have, and his platform was essentially identical to HRC'S, so what have you got to be outraged about from nine years ago?)

But this "Bernie only did well in caucus states and it's all his fault Hillary lost" thing is bullshit.

I don't defend everything the guy has said since the election, but Bernie is blameless in Hillary's defeat.

And the fall outcome was determined by the personal doubts Trump was able to raise in the voters' minds about our nominee-Trump would have been just as effective in doing that no matter when Bernie dropped, and no matter if Bernie had run at all.

There's no inherent difference in the legitimacy of outcome between primaries and caucuses. Bernie won primaries(New Hampshire, Indiana, West Virginia, Oregon, for example) and was only narrowly beaten in several others(such as Illinois, Missouri. and California)

And the discrepancy between the Washington caucus and primary results is explained by two things:

A) There were no delegates at stake in the Washington primary, so the Sanders campaign simply didn't bother contesting it. If it had been for delegates, they would have contested it and the results of the Oregon primary prove they could have won that type of contest;

B) By the time the meaningless Washington primary was held, the general consensus was that Hillary would be nominated. It's likely that, with no delegates at stake, some pro-Sanders voters voted HRC in the primary as a unity gesture.

Therefore, the Washington primary result does not delegitimize the caucus result, nor does it prove that Bernie's support was not broad-based and genuine.

There's no purpose served at this late date by trying to retroactively prove there was no mass support in this party for what the Sanders campaign represented, and there's no reason whatsoever to think Hillary would have done better in the fall if she'd made no significant concessions to Sanders policies in the platform. We lost because the platform wasn't mentioned, not because of anything it said.

The fact is, prior to 2016, we were, in practice, the party of the billionaires(that's what being "pro-business" means-it means saying "screw everybody who isn't already rich)on economics, the party of management against labor, and as much the party of war and cuts in social programs as the GOP. We no longer stood for anything, in the actual policies we carried out, other than the defense of choice(a necessary progressive thing to defend but not transformative or liberating BY ITSELF) and a fairly watered-down version of LGBTQ rights. We were not on the side of working-class people of any race or of the poor. We were not on the side of the 99% against the 1%.

We were mildly progressive on the issues the 1% tolerated mildly progressive views about.

THIS is why we've been in long-term decline at all levels as a party since the 1990's. And a party in long-term decline is always going to have trouble winning the White House. None of that would have been counteracted and made irrelevant if only Bernie hadn't run and if only the primaries and convention had been bland, centrist, and reduced to the meaningless statement that our candidate wasn't incompetent.

[Ken Burch]

47. All decisions on the caucus were made before Bernie even considered running.

They were made, in fact, by party insiders who preferred Hillary. Please stop acting like the Clinton campaign was the victim of an injustice here. She lost in the Washington caucuses because her more conservative views were not popular with rank-and-file Dems in 2016 OR 2008.

There's no anti-Hillary conspiracy here, and by 2017, it's extremely unlikely that anyone who helped plan the 2008 caucuses was still in any significant position of responsibility in the Washington State Democratic Party.

Move on already.

[BainsBane]

49. It's disconcerting to see a so-called progressive movement

focused on reducing access to the franchise by expanding the caucus system.