Category: Campaign Finances

Should You Go to the Mansfield/Metcalf Dinner?

2/20/2015

Do you want to hang out with a bunch of Democrats on a Saturday night?

That’s the question you need to ask yourself when it comes to the Mansfield/Metcalf Dinner that’s taking place in Helena on March 7. I’m tempted to go…except for the cost.

$60 is a lot of money.

Alright, I know it’s not a lot of money for any of the people sitting in the positions of honor, or giving speeches or holding office. But $60 is a lot of money for all those voters we wanted to reach last fall, you know…the ones we didn’t reach?

I figure when I go out to eat it’ll be $20, if I’m lucky. Some of you older folks might remember when a $10 spot got you by, but I’m afraid those days are gone, much like our manufacturing jobs, free TV and respect for government.

But what am I blathering about? The $60 tickets are the cheapest, and probably the ones they want to sell the least of. After all, if they can get rid of the $5,000 tickets they can have more money for…what?

What is the Mansfield/Metcalf money used for? What is any of the Montana Democrats’ money used for?

I probably shouldn’t ask these questions, after all, I’m expected to pay for this dinner. I guess it’s only the dozen or so people that aren’t paying that are allowed to ask those questions.

Perhaps what I’m getting at is the level of privilege that events like the Mansfield/Metcalf Dinner engender. Most people in the state would never think of going, and I’m not even talking about Republicans. Most people in Montana just don’t identify with these dinners.

Maybe it was different in 1978 when this dinner got started. I’m not sure what numbers were like that year, but I expect just a hundred or so people attended. I do know that about 1,000 attended the 2013 Mansfield/Metcalf dinner, when Max Baucus spoke.

So what will it be like this year, and will I be there?

I don’t know. Maybe if I can kick up $60 I’ll head on over to Helena for the weekend and leave my son Paul with his grandma.

I wonder what table I’d be put at and how many people I’d offend. That’s one of the reasons I’m thinking of not going – I don’t really want to offend anyone.

But perhaps that’s the “rousing” part they’re talking about in the mailing. We’ll see – I’m still on the fence.

Who is PERC in Montana?

2/15/2015

Who is PERC?

Depending on who you ask, the organization based out of Bozeman could be the Property and Environment Research Center or the Political Economy Research Center.

With names like that, you know you’re gonna get screwed.

You can see the main PERC website here.

This organization sounds mighty shady. And like I said, PERC has even gone by different names to make things even harder to figure out:

In South Dakota they know PERC is a sham, but here we don’t even know anything about this organization. Or were you reading about them in the media? I sure wasn’t. Why is that?

It’s clear when you look at the money trail that this organization cares not at all about Montana. Here’s some funding for PERC, listed on Wild Wilderness:

Here’s some info on PERC’s founder and how they got started:

You really get a lot of information on PERC’s funding when you head to Wikispooks:

Wikileaks also lets you know that PERC’s board is made up of people from the Hoover Institute, the Reason Foundation, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Cato Institute, the Institute for Humane Studies, the Heritage Foundation, and some other shady, right-wing and Koch-backed hack-firms. Some of you will remember that the Hoover Institute was directly responsible for those shady political mailers that tried to get carpetbagger Van Dyke elected to Montana’s Supreme Court.

These groups are scum and Montanans need to treat them like that. Democrats need to go to war with them.

Or is destroying our environment and ruining our kids’ future acceptable to you? It’s not to me, and that’s why I go after these groups tooth and nail.

But Montana Democrats don’t, and that’s why the fight is just a waste of time. Honestly, I think Montana Democrats are in bed with these folks, although they try to make it appear they offer some resistance. I’m sure at the top, however, the bigwigs profit just as much as those rightwing nutcases.

How does that make you feel?

Here’s what the outspoken Larry Kralj had to say about PERC:

It’d be nice if Montana was taken out of the dark when it comes to this Koch-backed organization. Let’s talk about them…let’s talk about them a lot.

Gosh Darn, I’m Excited to See James Carville!

2/4/2015

I can’t remember the first time I saw The War Room, but it’s a good bet it was during Senior Government class back in 1999-2000.

The film came out on December 5, 1993, and profiled the 1992 Presidential Campaign that catapulted Bill Clinton into the White House. A large part of that campaign strategy came from the Ragin’ Cajun, James Carville.

Carville’s a pretty smart guy – you’d have to be if your mom sold World Book Encyclopedia’s door-to-door – and he got his law degree from Louisiana State University. He did two years in the Marines after graduating, from 1967-9 in San Diego, and then headed back to law school.

Carville’s first election victories began in the 1980s, and the big one was Robert Casey of Pennsylvania in 1986, followed by Zell Miller in Georgia in 1990. The man could get governors elected.

He proved he could work magic at the national level in 1991 when he drove Senator Harris Wofford back from the brink, erasing a 40-point deficit to take the win. Things like that just didn’t happen, not when the President was supporting the opposing candidate.

Perhaps that was the problem, however – it was during that Wofford campaign in Pennsylvania that Carville implemented the economic strategy that would propel Clinton, mainly through the line “it’s the economy, stupid.”

We saw a lot of Carville over those two days in Senior Government, and I think many students enjoyed the film. Now, most students will enjoy just about any film while in Senior Government, but I remember saying to the teacher that it was certainly better than Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

The last time I watched The War Room was on January 20, 2006. I keep a movie watch list so I know this. It’s a good film, and you can learn things. And after that I didn’t see much of Carville. Oh, he advised some campaigns and did some talking head stuff, but that was about it. I do remember when Tim Russert died on June 13, 2008, that he was deeply affected. I remember seeing a show they’d done on Meet the Press, Carville and his wife and their daughters, when Russert had given them a lot of toys.

It’s sad stuff thinking about that, but I’m sure James Carville thinks about it quite often, or at least once a week. That’s when he does a radio show with Tim Russert’s son, Luke, called 60/20 Sports.

James Carville is the political type that wears his heart on his sleeve. He says what he thinks, and people like him for that. We haven’t heard much from him since 2008, when he worked on Hillary Clinton’s campaign. It wasn’t until late in the primary season, mid-May, that he finally admitted Obama was likely to win. But then when it was done he supported Obama and helped raise money.

Now Carville is coming to Helena, as the Billings Gazette reported yesterday. He’ll be speaking at the Mansfield-Metcalf Dinner on March 7 and you can buy tickets here. As you can see, they’re quite expensive:

I suppose I could go if I had $60 to spend, which maybe I will. Still, I just don’t feel as though I’m wanted there, even though I got this in the mail on January 12:

Why do I feel this way? Because I disagree with the direction the Montana Democratic Party has taken and I don’t think the people that came to power with that directional change like that talk. But then I don’t know any other people that are looking at these three maps and thinking we have a problem:

The 1964 Presidential Election in Montana

The 1992 Presidential Election in Montana

The 2014 U.S. House race in Montana

So we’ve got some problems here. I point those out, no one wants to listen. What can you do? I guess buy a ticket for $60 to $5,000. That way a southerner can tell us the answers to our problems. Should be interesting.

Taking a Look at the 2015 Montana Legislative Calendar

1/5/2015

How will the 164th Montana Legislature go down?

How you answer that question depends on a variety of things, none of which are really important. What is important is where your money is going, and what it’s getting for you. The other guy? Eh…he doesn’t really matter.

This is true no matter what party you’re in, because it gets down to capitalist principles deeply embedded in the very fiber of our beings, which in turn are hardwired into our survival and self-preservation mentality.

What does this all mean? It means if you’re paying 150 people in Helena $192.64 a day ($82.64 a day plus $110 per day per diem) then you damn well want to know what that $28,896 is going each day.

Since the session is going from January 5 until April 20 or so…that’s $2,167,200 we’re spending…and let’s not even get into the healthcare costs for those folks. Can you imagine if one of those drunk House members fell down on the ice outside the Capitol and you had to pay for it? My God, and that’s not even factoring in any drives up to Marysville.

Let’s not dwell on previous sessions’ dirty laundry. Instead, let’s look forward to which will be aired this year:

January 15: State of the Judiciary Address (1 PM);
January 28: State of the State Address (6 PM);
February 2: State of Education Address (1 PM);
February 9: State of Tribal Nations Address (1 PM);
February 27-March 2: Transmittal Break (No Session);
March 3-6: Easter Break (No Session);

That’s as far as the 64th Montana Legislative Calendar goes. I’m not sure how many weekend those lawmakers will put in, nor am I sure how much they get paid on weekends and for holidays. I’m sure it’s more than you get paid at your job when you’re not working. Personally, when I’m not working, my job pays me $0.

But Montana’s not like every other state in the union, and we do things differently.

For one, we have a session every two years instead of how the last Constitutional Convention wanted it, yearly. But you have to blame lobbyists for that.

Next, there is no legislative staff, unless you’re someone like Rep Zolnikov, who was smart enough to save campaign money for the transition, or just had a ‘less competitive’ race.

After that, it’s quite common to see uneducated ignoramuses in key positions, like with The Vixen. Oh, she’ll get your knickers in a knot if your goal is a more effective Montana public education system, but that’s what happens when you have people with absolutely no experience in what they’re legislating. And I’m sorry, but Bible School is not an accredited institution in my Book.

Finally, we’ve got youth run amok. It’s a real pity that Young Gun Republicans like Knudsen and The Vixen give all of us younger political types a bad rap (including you younger, responsible Repbulicans). They’re adherence to idiocy and total disregard for rationalism or accountability ensures that those that have held the reins for so long will continue their unjust rule and the state will slide ever backward into stagnation, obscurity and finally redundancy.

Good luck Montana legislators – I have a feeling you’re going to need it (and maybe something a little harder as well).

How Would Dirk Do It?

12/22/2014

I’ve been thinking a bit this morning about how Dirk Adams would upset the normal Democratic order of things in Montana.

What would it look like? Whose toes would get stepped on? Who would lose the most money…who would gain the most?

I’m sure the TV stations would do really well if Dirk Adams ran for governor in 2016…or is there some other office open that makes sense?

The House? Ha, don’t make me laugh. Some legislative seat or a statewide spot that’s #3 or #4 on the list below the top dog? C’mon!

No, he’d go for governor, and he could do it too. He’s got the money, and with the right kind of campaign, he could really put that money to use effectively and sensibly.

Again, what would it look like?

Fire up the social media accounts post-session and start your weekly newsletters highlighting Montana hits and misses;

Poke your base and let them know your intentions with your email marketing campaign;

Get your flyers and mailers and remittance envelopes and all the rest of it printed up, begin going to key state events with your table set up;

Get vocal about city council elections and back key candidates across the state. Begin building your alternative network of both allies and donors;

Behind the scenes, get those YouTube advertising videos produced using university students that can give you affordability and a unique perspective;

Hold a conference late-2015 and invite the people you support for the legislature in the 2016 elections. Begin building your coalition;

Announce your candidacy and begin raising money, a break after spending your own for the past year;

Start traditional campaigning January 1, 2016.

You can’t have some pansy-ass attempt to run a campaign like we saw with Mike Wheat this year. Galen Hollenbaugh had a better one, but he also got no support from the party.

That’s the thing – you can’t really expect any support from the party.

First, Adams will be running against the establishment boy;

Next, the party only supports sell-outs and those that toe the national party line, which is, for all I can see, just sucking bankers’ and healthcare companies’ dicks;

Finally, the Montana Democratic Party has no money, and no support from national. We make money for national, they don’t give us money.

But…isn’t Adams a banker? That’s the fucking beauty of it. Just like those old saints were once sinners, so too can a banker find Jesus, or in this case, J.C. Penny’s discount rack.

Yep, I’m excited about this, mainly because Bullock is so, well…Bullock.

Does the guy have an interesting bone in his body?

I’ve never met him, so I can’t say for sure, but I’ll tell you the exact moment I knew he couldn’t get the job done.

Do We Want Our Politician to Dance?

I saw a video of Jeff Bridges doing the Dinosaur in Darby a while back. He killed it. Montana Governor Steve Bullock? Eh…not so much.

And that’s when I knew. It was that time in Darby for a school food program with Jeff Bridges, and I’d originally shelved this article…you’ll see why. Anyways, they had them get into a classroom where the kids were dancing, and Bullock got thrown in there. He tries moving around and…it’s just too painful to watch.

Perhaps you’ve seen the video of U.S. Representative John Lewis (D-Georgia) doing the Happy Dance. He did pretty dang good. The internet is full of videos of politicians dancing, whether it’s Madeleine Albright doing the Macarana in Congress (for more great dance videos, check out this Washington Post Politicians Dancing article).

I’d argue that we need more politicians dancing. I think a lot of democrats especially got scared off from dancing by the infamous Howard Dean Howl, which could possibly turn into its own dance one day.

But from watching the video of Jeff Bridges, golly, I think that’s who we need as a politician. Someone not afraid to get out there and act a little silly. Is that Dirk Adams? Eh…I’m not so sure.

I’d rather have my politicians acting a little silly when music’s playing. After all, they act far too silly when they’re supposed to be working. I mean, the work our politicians do is a joke. Maybe if more of them scheduled ‘Silly Time’ into their schedules they wouldn’t have to do it so much at work.

But back to Bullock. If you look closely at the video, yep…there it is, about a minute and a half into this dance routine, and his face just takes on this look of utter disgust, utter despicability, so much so that I knew we were in trouble. It’s terrible to watch.

One of the biggest things about politics is looking like a fool on a daily basis. If you cannot do this with a smile on your face and a self-depreciating laugh, holy hell, you’re in trouble.

I’m amazed he made it this far, but then just like Martz, it doesn’t take much to ride a pair of successful coattails into office. And now the way he’s getting pushed around by the bankers? And I’m still waiting for someone to tell me what the hell he’ll have to run on in 2016.

I’d like to see a former, and hopefully reformed, banker come in and push him not around, but just out of there.

It can be done. Ask Leif Erickson.

Using Excess Campaign Funds to Hire Staff

12/9/2014

Isn’t it great that legislators in landslide districts can use the campaign money they raised but didn’t spend so that they can help those districts?

I think it is, because that way those legislators can go back to that district in 2 years and just crow about all that they’ve done.

They had extra staff to help them draft legislation;

They had extra muscle to get that media word out;

They had resources so they could do their job.

Now, if you’re not in a landslide district, if you’re in a district where you were in a tough primary fight and then a tough general race, you might be screwed.

For all your money went to getting elected, which was its purpose. But gosh darn, you know what? Now you’re even further behind than when you started!

The Magical World of Political Mailing Lists

I got to thinking about this today after getting this email:

Now, I was surprised to see this, and even more surprised when I scrolled down. It’s a Mailchimp email and you’re supposed to have signed-up to a list to get those. I don’t remember signing up for this list, and any content marketers will tell you that’s a big no-no to send to email addresses that haven’t signed-up. So I asked about this:

Good answer. Anyways, it’s nice to get information about what’s going on, and this one got me to thinking…mainly because I had this thought:

Legislators hiring staff? WTF!

I figured this was something worth getting to the bottom of, even if I wasn’t planning on doing any political footwork today. Here’s how the conversation went:

I liked that response, helping the constituents…very political. And it got me thinking…how many Montana legislators actually have staff?

The Magical World of Montana Political Staff

Nearly 2 years ago today, Montana Streetfighter had a post up detailing staff hirings ahead of the 2013 Montana legislative session. In that article it’s listed that Representative Hunter had an aide.

I’m sorry, but can anyone refresh me on Rep. Hunter’s legislative accomplishments in 2013? I guess he had some – he’s still got his leadership position.

Excuse me if I sound a little untoward, but the idea of having help, and paid help at that, just doesn’t sit right with me. I mean, wasn’t it just the other day that I read a comment saying something about some legislators not even having enough money to buy a proper suit?

Comment from MT Cowgirl, under the image of women in dresses

That’s perfectly alright, I guess, just don’t expect that person to mean anything. I mean, they have no staff.

So this presents a problem for leadership on both sides of the aisle. On the one hand, you have those with staff, the people with dedication and resolve and the willingness to get the job done. They raise money, and they do whatever it takes to do so. Because they know damn well that they need staff around them so they can move up to the next level.

On the other hand you have the guys that didn’t raise much money, and therefore have nothing left over. They need every penny of that paycheck just to get by, and any work they do will come from their own hand, or one of the helpful lobbyists extending theirs.

In case you haven’t figured it out by now, this blog’s main theme is the have’s vs. the have-not’s.

This issue of using excessive campaign funds rubs me the wrong way, leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and makes me shake my head. Oh, it might be alright, it might be in the rules. But that doesn’t mean I have to like it.

I got into this conversation with my wife last night. I brought up the example of winter.

You know, a lot of people don’t like winter and they complain about winter and they just hate it!

But it’s winter!

That doesn’t mean they have to like it, and you’re going to have to expect they’ll complain about it!

Then move where it’s warmer!

How many times can we as a country keep moving? The world’s a global place now, however silly that may sound, and the policies and procedures of one locale affect them all. Instead of walking away from our problems, maybe we should solve them.

That’s what Daniel Zolnikov is trying to do, and he thinks saving some of that campaign money so he can use it to do the job he told constituents he’d do is the best damn use for that money. I’d have to say, those 5 to 10 Diane Sands mailers sitting in the Missoula landfill probably agree (well, not the ones that helped get that extra 35 votes).

I’m not arguing that Zolnikov won’t be more effective – I think he will be, he has Kyle Schmauch as his communications director – and I’m sure he’ll be able to argue his positions more effectively because of it.

I’d also like to point out how easy it is to get a leg-up in Montana politics, or as we’d say in the world of online marketing, how ‘niche’ it is. It’s a small world, with a small audience. Here’s an under-30 representative from Billings – someone that in any other state would probably be laughed out of even trying for a spot in the legislature – and who will probably be a name we hear of more in the coming years. Schmauch will ride those coattails, either getting a position in the legislature himself, or getting a higher position on someone else’s staff, steadily moving up until he’s at the national level.

Think that’s a joke? I remember Marnee Banks from my Chinese languages classes at UM in 2007-8, back when she was still dragging herself out of the dorms in the afternoon. Now she’s Jon Tester’s press secretary or communications director or something like that.

Interesting things can happen in the Treasure State, and it doesn’t take a whole lot of treasure to make them come about. Of course, if you’re in a district where you can run unopposed in the primary and then win in the general by 71.8% then you don’t need to spend a whole lot in the election. So then you’re just raising money for after you’re elected.

Or am I completely stupid here and that’s not the case at all?

I don’t like it, and maybe there’s not a whole lot I can do about it. I’ve said time and time again that the Democrats need to change their strategies so the state isn’t slipping away from them, so they can have those kind of races instead of Republicans, where you win by a landslide.

But they don’t want that, don’t ask me why. And the idea that Bullock and Tester are going to take that same losing message national? God help us.

Folks, I’ve got news for you – Bullock lost in 2014, and a gain of two seats is not a win. When you don’t have the legislature, that’s not a win, that’s five months of damage control.

Montana Democrats don’t want to think like that, however. I don’t like the feeling of sand running out of my ears after my head’s been in it for so long, but guys, can the country afford what just happened in Montana? Or is that legislature not fucked?

I don’t know, just shake your head and move on, let them play their games. It’s pretty clear to many, or to me at least, that these Republicans like Zolnikov will team up with Democrats like me in the coming decade or so, and you’ll see a real wave of change in national politics.

It’s the economy, stupid! The national debt is killing us and there are no jobs. The jobs we have suck, everyone knows this, except the few on the top scrambling to keep theirs. Their benefits and retirement will be gone soon enough, however, and then they’ll be down here in the ditch with the rest of us.

Then what? I guess we just hope to hell there’s not a landslide to bury us alive.

Who Benefits from the Jon Tester Billboard West of Helena?

11/16/2014

Why is this political sign still here, 2 years after that 2012 election?

What is the Republican billboard west of Helena?

Jon Tester Billboard outside Helena

Who's paying for that Jon Tester billboard outside Helena?

I mean, why the hell is that sign still there 2 years after the election that sent Tester back to the Senate for 6 more years?

And for the love of God, couldn’t that sign be put to better use, highlighting the Democratic message, getting our points out, or at least just making the Republicans look stupid? How about a billboard that looks like this?

But maybe that sign’s already pushing the Democratic message, for the Democratic message in Montana is that of the underdog. But what if that was taken too far, and that underdog status was being used in ill and nefarious ways?

We'll get to that below, but until then...what about Denny Rehberg?

I don’t really believe that he’s paying for that sign, but then who is paying for this stupidity? And how much does this stupidity cost?

That’s a two-part question, so let’s get to the finance part first.

This isn't the billboard in question, I just want to give you an idea of the impact and exposure they get

What are the rates for these billboards? If you go with Lamar Advertising, you can look at this nifty spreadsheet…which honestly, is a super pain to look through. (download spreadsheet)

It has multiple advertising types, but billboards are rare to find. To give you an idea, 4 weeks of a Helena Digital Poster cost you $1,827 and have an average daily impression rate of 24,662.

Helena Posters have a 4 week cost between $1,300 and $2,400.

There are other companies advertising as well, and I’m honestly not sure which company is selling that advertising space right now…it’s awfully hard to see. I do know that the sign is lighted, so you can see it at night, and I’m sure that adds to the cost. (Still think it’s abandoned?)

What’s interesting is that in June of 2012 the billboard advertisement against Tester wasn’t there, as you can see from this Google Maps image of the location by the Red Roof Café:

So it was put there, supposedly by the Rehberg campaign, following the 2012 primary and into the general election cycle. And then the election ended and the billboard was abandoned…or was it?

Maybe it’s being paid for by the Montana Republican Party, and that’s fine. Maybe it’s being paid for by the National Republican Party, and that’s fine.

But don’t call me stupid and tell me that Montanans for Rehberg is paying for this, not more than 2 years after the election. The site is dead so you might as well not click the link. Oh, and here’s what they look like on LinkedIn and when you type them into Google:

Think Montanans for Rehberg is paying for that sign? Who are they?

Or are they dead? What is going on…and should anyone know about it? Should anyone care?

Countless drivers driving by for the past 2 years don’t care, and perhaps that’s a testament to the power of billboard advertising in Montana more than anything. I’m not sure it justifies those prices companies like Lamar and others are charging, however.

Yep, this is sketchy stuff, and now we have to begin asking a few more questions:

If Montana Commissioner of Political Practices Jonathan Motl can’t even investigate something in his backyard, something glaring him in the face and anyone else driving into town over the pass, what can he investigate? It sure isn’t shady political mailers, we know that.

If Jon Tester and the folks he has working with him and for him can’t even bother to look into a billboard that’s been sitting there for 2 years with an organization that doesn’t exist anymore footing the bill, then what else can’t they do?

If such a glaring oversight, such a missed opportunity, such a slap in the face to Montana Democrats and national Democrats will just be left to slip by so easily, what else will?

Those are interesting questions, but I’m pretty sure no one’s asking them, just like no one’s asking about this billboard. And maybe that’s the idea. For if it’s not Democratic ineptitude it’s at least Republicans banking on such, and to me, that doesn’t bode well for 2016.

So let’s ask a few more tough questions, the kind we’d rather not ask. Because what if it’s not Denny Rehberg paying for the sign, or even the Republicans? What if the sign hasn’t even been left abandoned?

What if Jon Tester is paying for that sign?

Now we’re getting into some conspiracy here, and I think we should ask a few more questions:

What if the Democrats threw the 2014 elections, figuring it’d help their chances in 2016? (or her chances)

What if the Democrats bankrolled those shady political mailers in Montana, the ones that helped Mike Wheat so much?

What if Jon Tester was paying for that sign so he could create a seemingly ‘negative’ public perception?

See, when people in Montana are attacked, those people often end up garnering a lot of public sympathy, even if they’re guilty. Here in Montana, we don’t like people being drug through the mud or put through the ringer. And perhaps that’ll mean we vote for ‘em.

I’ll admit, all of those ideas are quite farfetched, but I can’t help but think of the first two especially. Maybe that’s because I’m a novelist, or just enjoyed The Parallax View and other conspiracy movies.

We have to ask ourselves these questions because, let’s face it, we’d rather not. So let’s ask one more:

If Jon Tester can’t even take back a billboard, how’s he going to take back America?

Thoughts from the 2014 Montana Election Front Lines

11/13/2014

I headed down to the Missoula Democrats’ meeting tonight. The reason I did this was because Dave Kendall sent out a tweet shortly after the election saying the Missoula Democrats would meet tonight to figure out what went wrong.

Now, you’ll see a lot of people on social media and the TV shouting to the heavens on what went wrong and what we can do about it, but just about 25 of us showed up in Missoula tonight, the overwhelming majority – I’d say 90% - the regular crowd that shows up each or month or whatever. Not an encouraging start.

Nonetheless, the self-flagellation must go on, and it did…though with five minutes of ‘spin’ first, or the accomplishments of Democrats both nationally and in Montana, if you will.

I just grabbed a sheet of paper before going in so I could write down my thoughts, and this is what I managed to put together before we really got started:

Strategy
Message
Target Audience
Selling Point

Implementation/Execution
HQ: Signs, phones
Doors: Burnout, apathy

Impediments
2016 = President
Apathy on our part
Federal/state divide (Montana has always historically led the nation, yet now the nation is leading us)

So that was my short list, my ideas. What did we kick of the meeting talking about? DPQs.

Now, DPQs are…well, I’ve already forgotten, but they’re something to do with gauging how likely a candidate is going to do in a certain area.

Yeah, not real sexy…but we talked about it for a good 10 minutes, like it’s some kind of Moneyball of politics (which maybe it is, but it doesn’t get people fired-up to vote).

I’m terrible with names and couldn’t tell you many people that were there, but most were local precinct captains, or the real get-out-the-voters. If you think of the Whip in Congress and the Legislature as the person that gathers the votes and finds the necessary votes for an issue, then the precinct captains are the people on the ground that find the votes for a candidate.

How do they do this? By taking the message of the party and using it to fire up the base, get the needed boots on the ground to hit the doors, and making those calls and stuffing those envelopes.

Some of these people there tonight have been doing this for twenty years, and in heavily and traditionally-Democratic areas, like Bonner and East Missoula. These are areas that national Democratic heavyweights like Jim Messina know well, and in his case, he would have known them from his time studying the local political scene while running Daniel Kemmis’s re-election bid in ’93.

So this is known, what this area is, and what should have happened. But what should have happened didn’t, and it sure the hell wasn’t from a lack of trying – Bill Geer’s and Dave Strohmaier’s campaigns attest to that.

One thing that was brought up tonight was how Republicans are allowed to act like children in a shopping mall that can’t get their way. They can break whatever toy they want if we won’t buy it, and we let them get away with it. Hell, we buy them a new toy.

When Republicans shut down the government and tell women to enjoy the paltry sums they make and then try to blame the problems they created on the Democrats…why the hell are we letting them get away with this?

One thing I heard tonight that made a lot of sense was a comment that the Obama Administration went into its shell this election. It’s no secret he’s got an adversarial relationship with the media, something that strikes me as odd – isn’t the media so liberally-biased and so controlled by the left that this would be a good thing?

People are tired of Democrats not standing up for themselves. People want year-long message campaigns, like doctors doing public service announcements informing people about their health. Well, let’s inform people about how sensible Democrats are and how idiotic, draconian, imbecilic, and just plain dumb Republicans are.

It really shouldn’t be so hard, and we’ve got the infrastructure in place to do that. We’ve got social media and we’ve got blogs and we’ve got friendly reporters. Hell, it’s so damn easy to manipulate the media into doing what we want, why isn’t it being done?

The Republicans coasted to victory. Maybe it’s that Democrats can’t figure out if they should run from Obama or run toward him. There are accomplishments, like lower unemployment and…well, I’m not sure what they are, and I haven’t really felt them myself, but they are there, damn it!

Again, there’s nothing much to get excited about. If we as a party could figure out some answers to get over this resource-extraction existence we’ve always had in this state, maybe it’d be a start. Because frankly, that divide between Democrats that support fossil fuels and those that don’t is going to rip this party apart at the state level.

How do you counteract that? I’m not sure, but I can’t help but think we need a unified message, and we need it now. The 2016 election cycle started last Wednesday and we desperately need that national message that then trickles down to the state and local areas.

I couldn’t help but think of the following image tonight:

We need to help John Tester take that 2016 Senate and the only way he’s going to do that is if a Democrat takes the White House. We need that person or those candidates running, and soon, so we can get someone to rally that message around and behind.

Again, local is waiting on state which is waiting on national. And when I say waiting on national, I mean we’re tapping on a turtle’s shell and hoping they stick their head out soon so we can get some direction.

This is the wrong approach, and the numbers tell the tale. From the Williams/Williams fundraising dinner in May, the Missoula Democrats raised $19,738.87. The cost of that was $11,668.35, leaving us with a net gain of $8,070.52. Next, or at least over the course of the year, $7,800 was given to campaigns. That leaves just $270.52 out of that Williams Dinner.

There are a few other expenditures here and there, some more income, but let’s face it, is the one major cash-cow for the Missoula Democrats. And we’re giving $7,800 to campaigns? Campaigns need to be giving that money to us!

How many of you saw that image of John Lewis knocking on doors on Election Day? That’s great, but we need about 100 people doing that, and we need to be paying them. That starts on the local level.

How much money will Amanda Curtis and John Lewis have left in their campaigns? I’m not too worried about Curtis, but Lewis picked up just 515 more votes than Curtis, and he was running a full year before she was…or close enough. How do you explain that?

I see a devastating mismanagement of resources here, and I blame state and I blame national. If politics is local, why the fuck are you not putting your money where your mouth is?

Get that money to the front lines, or by God, you’ll see the exact same thing in 2016. And somebody, please go to the White House or the DNCC with a fucking pair of pliers and rip that damn shell off and throw it into the deepest part of the ocean you can find.

Because I saw a lot of frustrated Democrats here in Missoula tonight, and I know I’ll see a lot fewer in 2016…because another cluster-fuck like 2014 and many of us will give up for good.

Why is the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation Meddling in Montana Elections?

10/24/2014

It appears that the Montana Secretary of State has filed a complaint alleging 3 and possibly 4 Montana election laws were broken. Here’s a story on the Valley News and The Republic.

Additionally, it appears that the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation paid for the mailers using at least some of a $250,000 grant that had some matching funds with Stanford.

You can learn quite a bit about The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation really fast on Wikipedia, and they go back a long time and have a long tradition of excellence. They’ve funded universities for years, they’ve helped the environment, funded the performing arts, and generally made the world a better place because of their philanthropic deeds.

You probably know the name because you’ve heard it at the start of nearly every PBS News Hour. They always name off their sponsors, and that’s why I recognized so many of those names earlier today when I began digging into the funding for the Hoover Institute. Trust me, you have that list next to the TV at 6 PM tonight and you’ll see some overlapping.

Anyways, it’s been reported in the media and in the complaint that Linda McCullough filed today that this organization is complicit in this crime, having funded the mailers from their grant to the university.

Now, maybe they can get off the hook and say that none of their money was used. I mean, we know that it couldn’t have cost more than $50,000 here in Montana, and that’s if you’re putting a Forever Stamp on each and everyone of those mailers.

But they went to New Hampshire and California, too, and that’s going to be more than the $100,000 that Stanford matched. So yes, they are liable.

I hope California Watch looks into this. It’s that state’s leading nonpartisan investigative news agency, but it was started by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Talk about a conflict of interest, huh?

I’d imagine PBS and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation will want to get this shit off their shoes real quick. It’ll grow over the weekend, and come Monday, whoa boy, it could stink to high heaven.

One thing that I found was the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, which is a conservative think-tank that specializes in taking down civil rights initiatives, immigrant bills, and affirmative action stuff. One of their major funders is the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, as well as Exxon Mobil, Chase Manhattan, and the Sarah Scaife Foundation.

That last one there, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, just happens to be the same organization that gave more money to the Hoover Institute than any other organization between 1985 and 2008. They're also big funders of ALEC, the American Legislative Executive Council. Herein may lie the connection. And don't forget to leave out Reynolds America, or Big Tobacco...they're also funding ALEC.

You’ll remember from previous reporting on this issue by Montana Cowgirl that the Stanford professors responsible for the illegal Montana mailer are part of the Hoover Institute as Fellows, so there's another connection.

Back in August Inside Philanthropy reported on the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation’s attempts to reduce gridlock in Congress by having more moderates elected. Could this policy have been used against them?

I’m just trying to get my head around how this organization could have been hoodwinked into this scam against Montana, which we now know is most likely illegal.

It seems to me that the Foundation may have been led astray through their efforts to fund schools and make them better. Could a lot of these right-wing charter school nuts or other people have gotten their hooks into them that way? When I see the William and Flora Hewlett Foundations’ name come up on the same page as the American Legislative Executive Council, I have to wonder.

I’m sure those that know this Foundation will wonder too. They have a large list of groups they support, and maybe some of those groups would look askance at this.

The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation publicly supports these groups. Behind the scenes, however, they support organizations that act to thwart the missions of these groups.

After all, the grant money that the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation is giving to universities is then being funneled back into dark money groups to be spent against the very causes they publicly support. If there's ever been a case of the right hand doing something while the left doesn't know about it, then I'm blind to it.

Perhaps the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation is as well, and that really makes me wonder if I should be donating to them this tax year. Many in Montana are about to wonder, and I have a feeling some in Washington might soon be as well.

Were Any Montana Election Laws Broken with Political Mailers?

10/24/2014

Update: It appears that the Montana Secretary of State has filed a complaint alleging 3 and possibly 4 Montana election laws were broken. Here’s a story on the Valley News and The Republic.

Additionally, it appears that the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation paid for the mailers using at least some of a $250,000 grant that had some matching funds with Stanford.

I expect there will be a lot more digging on this as the day turns to night. Stay tuned to Montana’s major blogs…Montana Cowgirl, Flathead Memo, and Big Sky Words.

It’s past lunchtime here in Montana and there’s been no news from the Montana Secretary of State or Commissioner of Political Practices on these shady political mailers that were sent out to influence the Montana Supreme Court elections.

Were any laws broken? That’s what it comes down to and we’ll have to dig into the Montana Code Annotated a bit, a real headache…and perhaps why there’s been no news.

This is what I found, starting with prohibitions concerning mailings:

13-35-603. Prohibitions concerning mailings. A third-party registrar may not mail a voter registration or absentee ballot application in the same envelope as campaign literature if the envelope is marked to resemble a mailing from an election office.

That’s under the Third Party Voter Registration Act, which I’d probably have to be a lawyer to understand. But since there’s no one else writing on this, I’ll soldier on.

In that same Act, campaign literature is defined as:

13-35-602. Definitions. As used in this part, the following definitions apply:
(1) "Campaign literature" means material that advocates the success or defeat of a candidate, political party, or ballot issue.
(2) "Third-party registrar" means a person, other than an election official, who is supporting an organized effort to register voters or to assist voters in applying for absentee ballots.

I’ve made it clear in my previous post on this today that these mailers have influenced Montana voters, and this was their intent. I believe those university professors were just middlemen for larger right-wing organizations trying to bypass and circumvent the political reporting process.

In that regard, they need to be registered as advocating on that candidates behalf…but which candidate? With the mailer in question, it’d have to be the Republican-supported candidates, and I think we know which ones those are.

Remember, I’m not saying their hands are dirty, it’s just that they sure don’t seem to mind this benefit, and even seem to bask in it. The Montana Republican Party has already tried to spin this into an ‘informative’ mailer for voters, which they claim benefits them.

Does it benefit the voter, or the candidate? Was something illegal?

See, I doubt there’s been any official misconduct by the campaigns:

13-35-204. Official misconduct. A person charged with performance of any duty under the provisions of the election laws of this state is guilty of official misconduct and is punishable as provided in 45-7-401 whenever the person:
(1) knowingly neglects or refuses to perform that duty; or
(2) knowingly and fraudulently acts, in the person's official capacity, in contravention or violation of any provision of the election laws.

I just don’t think those that planned and executed this were that dumb. Sure, if you left it up to the various candidates, then yes, there’d probably be a line of bread crumbs or bloody handprints or whatever. But these guys are professional election-riggers, so they don’t make kiddie mistakes.

Deceptive election practices might get more at what ails us here in Montana with these mailers…but again, that just gets to candidates, not those damn PACs, which were probably responsible for this.

How about deceiving an elector? No, that’s more to do with something else. Illegal influence of voters might be something that could work, however…but again, I’m not sure. I’d imagine this list has been bandied about this morning in the Capitol, huh?

There’s one last one, and that has to do with fraud & swindles and goes with sending things in the federal mail. I’m not sure there’s anything there.

For if there was, why would it take so long? Could it be that we need to know who to charge? And if that’s the case, we need to know who paid for that mailer.

So who paid for the damn thing? Great question, few answers…and as of now, I’m still not sure any laws were broken.

We’ve reached a standstill, and hopefully something else will develop before the day is through...or any other jokers get it in their heads to try 'breaking the law.'

©2013 BigSkyWords.com