http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/9...4627/619/548571


Why We Should Care About an Open-Source Convention
by Femlaw
Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 12:02:28 AM PDT
I've been offline most of the day. This morning, I got the Obama campaign e-mail announcing that ordinary citizens will have direct input into the Democratic Party platform. I got back online expecting to see the blogosphere buzzing about this radical proposal.

August 2008 will be the first open-source party convention. The Convention has always been an insider's game, with credential requirements, rules committees and professionals running the show. Not anymore.

Surely the netroots would be excited about this. Surely we would see front page stories on all the major Democratic blogs, and one, maybe two Recommended diaries on the topic. Apparently, that isn't what happened. A few diarists, it appears, posted the news, but generated little discussion. No front page stories on DKos, MyDD or Open Left.

Barack Obama just threw open the doors of the Democratic Party Convention and the people who should care the most collectively shrugged their shoulders. That's too bad, because it tells us something really important about what kind of President he plans to be.

Go here and read the rest, then come back here and discuss it

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/9...4627/619/548571

I think this "Liberal Apathy" thing is interesting, don't you?

This is a wonderful concept, I wonder who and how folks will be asked to put their ideas on the Party Platform ? This really would open up the Party to an open ended dialogue that would change the political process as we currently know it! I signed up for tickets to go down to hear Obama at his acceptance Speech in August, there was a link in the Denver Post that led to a link with the National Democratic Party website about the convention, you put your name, email address and zip code, then, they advised that they would contact you later about the tickets! I think this is a great idea that Obama has, and, a very shrewd political move! Imagine 75,000 folks jammed into the stadium, screaming for Change, very powerful for National Coverage on TV and in the news.


Edit: Yes Sky I think Liberal Apathy is alive, but once the mechism is unleashed to allow everybody to take part in the process, perhaps apathy will die out, unless of course, what others say about liberals is true, that we are snobs and really don't want involvement by the masses, thats the charge made by some of the Republican faithful I believe!

I'm not sure it's apathy as much as misdirected focus. Any of the things that we perceive as negative get plenty of attention, such as the argueably unsavory, but entirely necessary political maneuvering he has to do just to get elected.

I agree Soon2B, Obama has to move more centralist in order to caputure the most votes from the middle of the road electorate, we on the left, may not always approve, but the facts of life remain, there are more centralist folks out there than on the left. It would be political hari-cari for Obama to only address the leftist concerns!

What if there are aspects of both things?

I think the apathy comes from the many people on liberal blogging sites that have written their reps and gotten little but a form letter in return. As it stands now, if you write to the Obama campaign, they immediately send you a form letter saying, in effect, "well we get thousands of emails a day, so don't expect us to actually read your comment, much less do anything about it."

On the outside of activist progressive circles, it [the "open source" convention] sounds like a great idea, but that's because centerists are often less likley to have written and been swept away like bad dandruf.

Does anyone here honestly believe that just because they can type 500 characters on a little box on a web page that they'll be able to shift the party's platform? Personally, I feel that unless you have thousands of people willing to write the exact same comment, your individual comment won't find much interest raised.

Does anybody believe that their single vote will actually change anything?
Then why do you do it?

You can be so obtuse sometimes, Sky.
I think most people who voted in 2000 and 2004 realize that their one vote can change things.

There's a difference between voting, and trying to influence the party platform on-line in the midst of the convention.

This move dealing with an "interactive" convention is entirely political theater, aimed at making democrats and independants feel like the democrats will actually listen to them, when in actuality, it's simply impossible to take the thousands of comments seriously, unless there are many with similar perspectives surrounding one or two issues.

It's a good campaign tactic, but its aim is more for influencing popular conceptions of the party than actual outreach and consideration for their ideas and opinions.

Perhaps I am obtuse, and perhaps you simply missed the point I made.


If voting can make a difference,
If being just one among several hundred million, and your opinion still matters,
why then is this not the case with a letter?

Is it not possible that each letter writen is in effect, a vote?

no, its not.

first of all, We're not speaking of letters, we're speaking of online comments.
A letter, particularly a handwritten one, will make more of an impact than an online comment. A letter has an officially stamped postal code that would prove that the one writing at least posted the letter within an area that the governing person comes from, or holds sway in. Any idiot can fake an id from a rep's district online.

secondly, we're dealing with internal party politics, which, although public outcry may make a slight difference, will still end up representing the agenda of the people who run the party. The difference from public outcry will only shape the delivery of their policies.

There's lots of people that are excited about this election, and the democratic party is making good moves for voter turnout by embracing this public sentiment, and allowing the public to think that their voice matters. After all is said and done, it does, in the election. At the convention, its a sham. Its a way to invigorate their supporters, and a way to make them continue to believe that the party really gives a sh*t about anything but their pre-conceived agendas.

They had to do this. The progressive base is incensed about the seeming betrayal of their chosen champion (why he was chosen as such, rather than a compromise candidate for the left, I doubt I'll understand for a while, if ever), and in order to keep up appearances in the light of a centrist shift and dwindling fund-raising numbers, they had to appear to care about the populists they have angered.

So, one form of involvement matters, and another does not?
Then why bother being here, except to vent personal emotional dissatisfaction?

Clearly I don't agree with you, and though your explinations work for you,
for me they absolutely fail.


So, here we have two on-line letters. Two on-line opinions in text form.
Here we have one vote for each opinion.

but you're not voting, you're venting, as you said. Do you think what you say here changes or reinforces opinions as much as, say, a Jimmy Carter Op-Ed in the new york times? Yes, saying something is participating in the process, and that's good, but there's the extremely large matter of degree or audience, and in the case of voting (at least in theory), an equal weight to everyone's comment.

When you try to weigh into the democratic party in an online forum like the one that's been proposed for the primary, you're voice isn't only competing with everyone else they've never heard of, but with ex-presidents, congresspeople, policy wonks, editorial boards, judges lawyers, and lobbyists.

I don't see that as anywhere ner the same level as one vote per person, even with the standing electoral college.

PS... I'm not endorsing apathy, I'm just not surprised that this news didn't light up the liberal blogs like the Kos author was expecting.

It seems to me that with the technology of the computer's it would be a relatively easy task to tabulate the responses the Party would get according the the proposed planks of the platform. I even believe that new options or planks could be placed on for the viewing of the Party members. It could mean a real democracy based upon the old "town hall" meetings that were famous in the New England region of the country.

The danger however, would be the Party elite ignoring what the folks have to say and ignore the proceedings as being not what the goals of the Democratic Party hold. But one comment could help to sculpt the Party Platform, and it would mean having to reach a compromise with the other members to determine the Platform, I believe what we on this forum do everytime we write a comment on a thread one of our members posts.

Negative.

I'm a member of this forum with over 27,000 posts for 1 specific reason. (see above)
And it ain't venting. You haven't ever read my profile have you?

No sir, that's not specifically voting, even though the intention is to have some impact on voting.

I think the assumption, based on a form letter type reply, that nobody reads their e-mail is patently false.

First, it's an assumption. No one has ever provided any proof that respondents couldn't care less.
second, if I were in there position, I'd be extremely interested in knowing what "the people" were saying, if for no other reason than to avoid the parts of town that where they were boiling tar and collecting chicken feathers!

So, the assumption that writing letters, particularly e-mail letters is a waste of time is at best, an unproven assumption.