November 10, 2006
-- by John Emerson
The Emmanuel vs. Dean fight for control of the Democratic party is in full swing. The DC establishment has awarded victory to Emmanuel (and Schumer), but they're usually wrong.
This is a can of worms, and I suggest that someone sit down and sort things out. They should just look over the last six months or so and see what actually happened. What did Dean propose, and what did Emmanuel and Schumer propose? What was actually done? What worked, and what didn't?
This is all being spun (presumably by the DC faction) as a sandbox spat over who should get credit. That's not what it is. It's about control of the party, and it's about future strategy. And this fight was started by such Emmanuel supporters as James Matalin-Cheney (née Carville). The Washington Establishment is doing what it can to freeze out Dean and the grassroots. They like their cushy jobs.
One thing I'd especially like to see is a comparison of the candidates advised by Emmanuel and the candidates not advised by Emmanuel. My hunch is that Emmanuel's advice was not very good. Duckworth did poorly, Wetterling did poorly, and I think that there were others. But Walz (also in Minnesota, like Wetterling) won without Emmanuel's help -- except for his invaluable ATM service.
Another would be a comparison of candidates supported by Emmanuel from the beginning, and those whom he supported late (who had the advantage a cash without much advice). And there should be a comparison of the strategy originally proposed by Emmanuel (supporting many fewer candidates) and the strategy actually followed.
Nobody is criticizing Emmanuel's fund-raising. The guy's an excellent ATM machine and perhaps that's what he should specialize in. My guess is that if the events are carefully studied, Emmanuel isn't going to look too good. But I really don't know.
For comic relief, here's Kos singing Kumbayah solo -- no one's heard from Emmanuel yet, unless he was speaking through Mr. Matalin. I think that most Democrats want to split the difference on this, but all the evidence is that that just isn't the way that Rahm works.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)