As Congress enacts President Obama's massive tax cut compromise, one of Obama's campaign aides is going public -- for the first time -- with criticism of the White House's organizing strategy. Sam Graham-Felsen, who was at the center of web and grassroots strategy as chief blogger for the Obama campaign, argues in today's Washington Post that the president has left his best asset on "the sidelines":
Obama [has] a vast network of supporters, instantly reachable through an unprecedented e-mail list of 13 million people. These supporters were not just left-wing activists but a broad coalition that included the young, African Americans, independents and even Republicans -- and they were ready to be mobilized... Yet at seemingly every turn, Obama has chosen to play an inside game. Instead of actively engaging supporters in major legislative battles, Obama has told them to sit tight as he makes compromises behind closed doors.
In other words, Obama keeps going to war without his army.
Graham-Felsen argues that on most big fights -- tax cuts today, health care last year -- the most engaged, passionate and financially generous members of the Obama coalition were either pushed aside, or assigned patronizing, busywork organizing, like thanking members of Congress who were already on board. He's talking about Organizing for America, the 13-million person list from 2008 that was rolled into the DNC. "[The] administration isn't seriously interested in deploying this massive grassroots list -- which was once heralded as a force that could reshape politics as we know it -- to fight for sweeping legislative change," he concludes. While that may sound like a standard critique at this point, it is quite damning (and unusual) coming from one of the architects of Obama's grass-roots strategy.
It's worth recalling that the internet operation on Obama's campaign had fewer partisan politicos than many other teams in headquarters. The videographer had previously worked at CNN; the social network expert came from Facebook; and Graham-Felsen had written for The Nation before going all in for Obama. So their opposing views are a bit more likely to spill out in the open. Similarly, Marshall Ganz, the famed labor organizer and Harvard lecturer who trained Obama staff on organizing, showed his independent streak last month, when he criticized his former colleagues for putting OFA "to sleep," instead of mobilizing meaningful reform. "The president demobilized the widest, deepest and most effective grass-roots organization ever built to support a Democratic president," he wrote in the Los Angeles Times.
Now, even if the White House doesn't care about the merits of organizing, or its prospect for advancing better policies in Washington, the degradation of Obama's supporter network could endanger his reelection. That's Graham-Felsen's closing argument. It bucks the current thinking of the Washington media, of course, where The Village is toasting Obama for his savvy caving. In fact, right alongside Graham-Felsen's op-ed, conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer lauds Obama as "the new comeback kid" -- even predicting that "historians will mark his comeback as beginning on Dec. 6, the day of the Great Tax Cut Deal of 2010." (We can keep an eye on that.) Graham-Felsen disagrees:
Obama needs this list in 2012 [when he] will likely need to raise far more than $500 million from the grass roots to be competitive... If he continues to play politics as usual, Obama risks alienating not just the left but anyone who believed in the promise of bringing change to Washington.
That is probably the most confounding part. It is easier to make deals with a few people in secret, instead of holding transparent negotiations in public, and it is easier to work within Washington's narrow, antiquated rules than mobilizing a massive, unpredictable movement to fundamentally reform a broken system. Those are the temptations for the White House. Yet even as the midterms fade into the rearview mirror, it often seems like Obama's aides are in denial about the political costs of these strategies. The arguments of former loyalists like Graham-Felsen and Ganz are striking because they not only appeal to the idealism or "promises" of the Obama campaign, they also press blunt warnings about the president's political survival. Does it get through to the White House? One suspects that if the warnings were heeded in private, they would probably not be going public.
Ari Melber writes for The Nation, where this post first appeared. Ari Melber on Facebook.
Further reading:
Graham-Felsen's op-ed, Why is Obama leaving the grass roots on the sidelines?
A DailyKos diary about the op-ed drew over 500 comments before noon on Friday, making it one of the most discussed items on the site (a popular liberal blog).
TechPresident published a 2010 report by Ari Melber about the first year of Organizing for America.
Marshall Ganz's op-ed, How Obama Lost His Voice, and How He Can Get It Back.
Follow Ari Melber on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AriMelber
He MUST be voted out of office in 2012. We cannot risk another four years of a republican in ill fitting democratic clothes.
The 13 million were a short-term, expendable means to an end. That was Phase 1. Now we're into Phase 2 where Obama showed us his true colors and the 13 million are an |_|ppity nuisance that has to be muzzled.
Phase 3 is 2012 where they think they can relax and ride the "we're a terrible choice, but we're not as terrible as your other choice..." into a second term. Time will tell if that turns out the way they planned.
But it's pretty clear that the former campaign aide's criticism is way off the mark. The Administration suffers the same soaring arrogance as others, and Graham-Felson erroneously believes that Obama feels the 13 million can help him. To some degree, the President is right. He knows that letters and phone calls to Congresspeople don't accomplish anything.
And if he mobilizes Dems, then he risks losing his precious "bipartisan" label!
There are clearly a large number of empty vessels out there, but the numbers of those who now have policy sobriety due to concerns over children's futures, retirement viability, or acute suffering is growing. As a former contributor to the Obama campaign, I'm sure I'm on the list. If he comes calling for support, no one will be home. I don't think that concerns him at all. He has no need for me right now. The 13 million are to be quiet, sit in a corner, and wait for orders in 2012.
When did Obama go to war? Somehow I missed it. What did he go to war about?
Did he go to war with the Republicans by giving them a better deal than the House had already negotiated? Or did he go to war over HCR by sitting on his backside in the WH, while legislators who supported his (allegedly his) desires were beaten up savagely by Repubs at town hall meetings? Or by never stating specifically what he wanted in HCR, never trying seriously to defuse the nonsense about death panels and government takeover to the people, and never appealing to us as a people to support it - is that the war he fought?
It's clear that Obama's concept of "fighting" for his beliefs is to say "what do you want? I'll give you everything and more if you give me just a little bone to toss to the left."
His concept of bipartisanship seems to be to stand firm on nothing; just give the opposition whatever it takes to make them happy and call that compromise.
If he has any core values or beliefs, they are not apparent. If he has any ability to stand up for anything, it is not apparent. If he has any intention of keeping his word on anything, it is not apparent.
Why is he a Democrat? Oh, I know. Think about why this Repub would enter politics as a Dem.
I am not sure what it is the President should have done beyond the communications, meetings,etc that I have been informed about or participated in. There were block walks for health care reform
just like for the elections. There are house parties. There are conference calls. There are
video conferences.
I hear pundits saying where did his list go? Well the list is still working. There aren't as many
who respond or participate, but they are encouraged to and contacted almost daily by the President
or the OFA leadership.
Receiving communications from OFA isn't the same as an active organization engaged in carefully orchestrated campaigns networking to pressure members of Congress to get behind Democratic versions of legislation, and to work on the media, shaping the message.
In addition to Obama's having deactivated the OFA, Obama's told Democratic groups to stand down, as well.
Obama has a habit and pattern of doing the bare minimum possible, like sending OFA email at the last possible moment, just so that his political operatives can say, "OFA never stopped sending out communications."
'Plausible deniability' might be the slogan for Obama's career in office.
The myth of Gore Vs. Bush was that the guy you'd rather have a beer with would make a better president.
Obama V McCain had three closely related myths that defined the narrative.
The first myth: the country is finally ready to elect it's first black president - therefore the only black person running is the best choice.
The second myth: experience did not matter because experience allegedly did not help Bush or Rumsfeld.
Bush and Rumsfeld in reality were highly effective leaders. Experience enabled them to succeed in doing many bad things that sensible people object to still. That Obama failed to grasp this distinction between leadership ability and leadership intention is revealing.
The third myth: winning an election is an adequate test of relevant leadership skills needed to be President. Setting aside the important question of what other significant skills a President needs to possess that an election cannot test, this still overlooks the very real possibility that Obama did not win this election so much as John McCain lost it. I maintain that Sarah Palin was a liability for the GOP and if this is correct than, the idea that winning was proof positive of Obama's leadership ability crumbles.
I am tired of people treating these myths as truths now that a growing body of evidence reveals that Obama lacks basic leadership skills.
Anyway, Mr. Campaign Aide, if the only means that YOU and this army of 13 million have to get your message and your point across to the MASSES is a little corner article on HP, then I don't know how much assistance you could really be to President Obama at this time.
Then we have your hard core progressives and other supporters who are active all year around. And the comments by the former campaign Aid make me mad because HE makes it sound like the whole base is gone. Also he paints the left and progressives almost as extreme as the Tea Party members. If we don't get what WE want...you get the point..
As much as we'd love to see change and a new way of dealing in Washington, it WILL not happen over two years or even eight years. It's just broken and Obama by himself, cannot change that. I get it.
I recently broke away from a few progressive groups because I saw them fall into the same ideology as the Tea Party and the GOP. Our way or the highway! Yeah, like that works on any level.
Blaming Obama for everything, when the facts of how his first 2 years played out has been reported Ad nauseam, is not only futile it's disheartening. To give up the fight so soon?
With no disrespect to the Huffington Post, just that you don't reach as many Americans on a daily basis as say Fox News or ABC News.
Anyway, Mr. Campaign Aide, if the only means that YOU and this army of 13 million have to get your message and your point across to the MASSES is a little corner article on HP, then I don't know how much assistance you could really be to President Obama at this time.
13 million is a large number because they all have at least that many ears listening to them in their family circle. Then you count in the friends etc. You get the point.
HF serves a purpose as well. I would say only 10% of the articles posted here, makes it to the main stream media sites. With FOX, I would say 0% makes it as they spin everything.
I really dislike that the left is becoming like the right on certain fronts. But we all still just follow the one thing that is important to us. EQUALITY! I think that's what it boils down to. The grass roots effort will help Obama again. They are a force :)
Just as long as everyone keeps their head straight and don't forget WHY they care in the first place.
And I don't need a huge audience for my soap box moments. I do my best work face to face, talking to people and talking about the issues.
Are you saying that it is futile and disheartening to see Obama subjected to so much unreasonable criticism, or are you saying that continuing to support Obama is disheartening because he fails to fight when it counts and so is not living up to what he promised ?
I actually find both problematic.
Today I heard an interview on NPR with a Republican Senator who accused Obama of pursuing a far left agenda that was out of touch with America. I was annoyed that the Journalist just carried on with his intereview as if this was a statemnt of obvious fact instead of challenging waht was an obvious falsehood.
I am also pissed off that Obam allows the GOP to define him, and define the terms of all the major issues being addressed. This failure by Obama to show more initiative as the actual leader, in my opinion is the single biggest problem with what he is doing. He's acting like a referee instead of like the head coach who does absolutely everything possible to destroy the opposition and give his side a victory. By adopting the stance of the referee he has taked his team off the field and he does not seem to understand that this guarantees failure.
It's been two years since Obama took office and I would say, it's been a really wild ride for him.To make comments on his performance so early on in his presidency is justified but I wouldn't judge him based on that 'cos the country has not been in this mess for...well not in any of our life time.
Yes,he thought that he'd bring the country together.I wish he could have but it's obvious, the country is too frayed and it's going to take a lot of work to get it back together. The hatred on all sides, Dems, libs, Tea Party,GOP...yeah. It's not gonna work. And I'm kinda pissed off that the right is not even willing to give him a chance. They really are not. So where do we stand?
Nowhere. We are stuck and that is the worst thing possible. Maybe if the GOP for a second remembered WHO they work for, it might make a difference. And no. It's NOT the top 1%
And before you brand me as just another lib...I'm going by what the GOP has done when it comes to legislation and how they have tried to work us out of this hole that we are in. And I don't see HOW they really are working FOR the people.
Not really.
I'll say it again--Obama let us down.
He didn't frame a message for his team up for election or the troops in the streets.
And now--what I had gathered from other sources already--we see that he refused to even use the machine he built that won him the White House to ensure our victory this Fall.
The only question up for discussion anymore should be...
Why???
Do you have a better theory?
Obama's wildly successful 2008 mojo has been replaced by skepticism and outright abandonment. It's hard to see a scenario where he ever approaches at all the kind of hero worship that was heaped on him back then. What happened? The voters got played, but they wanted to believe so very badly. They looked past the reality of who he was and had always been, closed their minds, raised their hope, and just stared lovingly and wishfully into his big brown eyes, thinking America's Apollo had indeed come to earth.