Last night, several bloggers (some party activists, some independents such as myself) had an informal meet-and-greet with Matt Weyandt, the new executive director of the Democratic Party of Georgia over beers at Manuel’s.
I had planned to ask him questions about the state of the party apparatus. Randy Lewis has said a couple of times in the GA Politics Podcast, for example, that the GOP has the state organized down to the zip code and that the Democratic Party has nothing comparable. When I found out he’d only been on the job a few days, I realized that I probably need to wait a month or so before I asked him those questions so he can have to time to assess that situation.
Luckily, considering the DPG has said they will have open gaggles every couple of weeks or so with bloggers and anyone else who wants to show up, I should have the chance to ask later. Matt said he’d be happy to give a podcast interview in a month or so. Martin Matheny, the new communications director, has an open door policy and makes himself available constantly over email and GTalk. And if you’re wondering just how on top of the new technologies the new staff is, check Martin’s Twitter account or read the DPG blog.
What I did ask Matt about last night was another topic that’s near-and-dear to a lot of people’s hearts: the best approach to fielding candidates. The netroots, as it were, mostly believes that fielding a candidate in every election, regardless of how abysmal the chances for victory are, is the best approach because it’s good for brand recognition and leads to long-term growth. Some other party activists I’ve spoken with think that’s a crazy waste of resources and that all effort should be focused on competitive districts.
Matt’s answer to which approach he favors was diplomatic, something along the lines of “we’d like to field candidates in every district and hope to in the future, but right now that’s not realistic with the resources we have to work with.” I’m paraphrasing there, so don’t hold him to that quote.
Some of the time was spent brainstorming ways to get volunteers out in those less-than-competitive districts. Read Shelby’s post for more info on this topic.
A couple of people who were there said that things already feel different. The old director would attend mixers with the unwashed masses, but would stand in the corner and not speak to anyone, one commented. Long-term, we’ll see how things pan out, but the new DPG appears willing to listen to ideas from all corners.






WHOA. Did you say “blog?” I hadn’t been paying much attention before (the inertia is hard to overcome), but I just looked at the DPG blog, and…
no comments allowed? Hmph.
Rusty: I can’t be there. Ask the questions for me.
Some good news Sid: they’re contemplating doing two gaggles per month, and making one an in-person thing and one a conference call so folks from outside Atlanta can stay in the loop.
Rusty, Randy didn’t start saying that until the Republican Party agreed to pay to put their press releases on his site and the Democrats didn’t. Why do you think he was visiting the office?
Additionally, I’ve said many times that the proof that it’s just GOP talking points/bs spin is that Baker, Thurmond, Irvin, Marshall, Barrow, Levitas, Crawford etc got elected.
In particular the Republican Party outspent the Democratic Party + candidate in the house races for Levitas (82) and Crawford (16) probably 2 or 3 to 1. Levitas is essentially in a Democratic district but Perdue got over 60% in Crawford’s rural district. If they really had it goin’ on to the level Randy talks about, how could Rick Crawford pull out a win in this circumstances.
And one more thing to think about, when Rick Crawford ran in the same area for Congress in 2004 he only got about 39% of the vote. So it’s not just that the voters out there love him so much they’ll vote for him no matter what.
Or maybe the better question to ask Randy is why didn’t they apply their magin in that area in 2006 like they did in 2004?
Redistricting also tells an interesting story on the Congressional level. When we did redistricting in 2001 we went from 3 seats to 6 (after the ‘04 election). When they did redistricting prior to the ‘06 elections no seats changed hands, even they though they specifically drew 2 districts for specific challengers to our Democratic congressmen. Barrow didn’t even live in his district anymore or have his base of Athens.
If Randy wasn’t talking out of his ass, how could Marshall possibly get 50% in a district at the same time Perdue was getting 62% in the district? Finally when you consider the fact that the Marshall campaign doesn’t do field (field is essentially what Randy is talking about for the GOP) you see the real value of this supposed Republican machine.
[...] to get along and not enough kicking ass, based on what I’ve heard talking to people and my own impressions meeting with staff. And I agree based on everything I see that the Democrats’ bench is thin compared to the [...]