I still cannot comprehend why you consider these things "either-or" situations, professionals versus union members. That's silly. We're all working in this together.

Some comments:

1.) You'd better believe there's energy there. In the next week, 30,000 Iowans will be getting personal letters asking them to support Dean. Last week, dozens of volunteers marched in the Twin Cities Pride parade and worked the booth for two days straight. When the time comes to canvas, you better believe Dean volunteers will be out there canvassing.

2.) "the end of the day, when the candidate fades, so does the movement." Well, of course. Which is why Kos's plan is centered around the PARTY, instead of a candidate.

3.) "impressive bucks"...so are the number and size of the individual contributions. This is what a grassroots campaign looks like. Kerry mouths platitudes about creating the largest grassroots campaign in history -- but what is he DOING about it?

We know we need to reach out to those who aren't on the internet, and those who aren't tuned into politics. Check out efforts like the Dean Media Team, which is creating burnable media for people to pass out. When people hear Dean, they like what he has to say. So far, he's been heard online. We're going to take that message to the streets.

"...as the article notes, there has been a singular failure by Dean to use the Internet to get beyond his generally upscale white core constituency."

Do you pay attention to exit polling at all? If the Democrats win this group, we've won it all.

And just whom do you think is pushing up Kerry's/Lieberman/Edwards koffers? At least Dean is organizing those who are working everyday for a paycheck, not the fat cat donor pile of the DLC.

Dean is now 180,000 strong, and we are just beginning.

I don't get it either. Yes, the unions are important. Yes, a lot of people foolishly slag them off as "special interests." Yes, they do hard work every day, and most of us--unionized and non-union alike--owe them more than we can ever repay.

So why belittle people who are just now getting up the sort of hope that allows them to commit to actively working against George W. Bush? Why assume that everyone in "the Dean brigade" will "go home"?

Maybe Dean will fade like Paul Tsongas. Maybe 80% of his activists will fade away as well. But the way you talk, you sound like you're determined to drive away the remaining 20% as well.

I'm only a mild Dean supporter so far, and in fact I'm pretty worried by the (so far) overwhelming whiteness of his base. (Indeed, my 67-year-old father, who grew up in a Detroit union family, went to a Dean meetup the other day and came away impressed but with some reservations about exactly this.) But I really can't fathom what it is you think you're achieving by proclaiming such a sour attitude in advance.

I'll agree with the other commenters that this is an odd fight you are picking, Nathan.

I won't denigrate unions and African American churches. Dean (or any other Democratic candidate) will need to demonstrate that they can appeal to, motivate and speak for these constituencies.

But I went to a meet-up last Wednesday and I had the feeling that I was participating in something novel in politics.

First, the wattage was amazing. I had never seen this much energy for a campaign at this stage. People were getting plugged in to the campaign in whatever way. It's just going to keep growing. It seemed obvious to me that Dean is going to be the nominee.

The fact that this group could self organize without any money from the campaign is also astounding to me. It feels like we've really cut through something about television and money that has been defining politics for the last 40 years.

Come join us, Nathan!

The middle class / professional white Liberals are a crucial part of the Democratic constituency, just like Union workers and African Americans. Having worked on a Democratic Campaign, I loved the support unions gave us. I also know that a whole lot of that support and time came from Teachers and the Teachers' Union, professional people. Another crucial resource were the professors and doctors and nurses and lawyers who supported us. Professionals gave us an immense amount of time and money.

While Professional Liberals lack an organizing force, they can easily be tapped by the Democratic party. All the Democratic Party has to do is speak to their concerns. It's notable how much luck candidates have when they give voice to that segment of the population.

The idea that upscale white professionals are unrepresented in politics is just kind of ridiculous. "Soccer moms" and "office park dads" are the target swing group of every politician out there.

Don't get me wrong. I'm glad Dean is tapping into the liberal wing of those folks, but hearing about the empowerment of the already privileged just doesn't get my blood racing. Yes, it's good politics and I like Dean fine enough, so it won't make me unhappy if he does well.

But there are millions of working families out there who are being screwed every day by Dubya. Someone like Kucinich or Shaprton is at least speaking directly and passionately to those folks who most need help-- if they were mobilizing those folks who really are generally voiceless and ignored in politics, I'd be far more excited. That was the Rainbow Coalition back in 1988 and it was an exciting phenomena.

Dean is tapping into the anger of core Democrats-- something I've noted would be out there -- so I'm not that surprised by the result. I've been saying for over a year that Democratic anger will toss Bush out on his ear next year. So plaudits to Dean for recognizing that and not playing it safe. And for mastering the technology to tap into money from that anger.

But don't talk to me about "grassroots" as long as its as upscale and monochromatic as Dean's support has been so far. The progressive grassroots is far more racially and economically diverse.

Now, Dean's campaign is in an early stage. So take these comments as a challenge. Harnass those meetups and plan door-knocking in black and latino and poor white neighborhoods.

And don't feel like I'm singling out Dean. I was just as critical of the antiwar movement more generally for its failure to do broader outreach. So take the challenge and hit the bricks.

I personally think Nathan has a point. While upscale white professionals are important, they also tend to skew overwhelmingly towards Republicans and the Republican party. What Dean has succeeded in reaching is the small liberal subset of said group, and while he's been very effective at that, I haven't yet seen any guarantee that his appeal within that demographic is going to break out of that subgroup.

Besides, Patrick (and the others) missed one point: Democratic wins are all about turnout, and it ain't the white professionals that aren't turning out. It's the traditional Democratic constituency: minorities, the working class (that isn't wedded to Dittoism, that is), youth- and they're precisely the group that the Dean "wattage" isn't yet attracting.

Still, I wouldn't blame this on Dean. It's not his fault. It's the fault of the makeup of Internet users themselves. The Internet remains an upper-to-middle class playground, and those who are comfortable with it enough to blog and such are disproportionately the sort of (American!) white professionals that Nathan is talking about. (Yes, the kids using instant messengers are a big group, but they're politically alienated in a way that "meetups" won't solve.) That goes a long way towards explaining the disproportionate conservatism and libertarianism online, but it also is a burden for Deanies.

The solution, perhaps, is to leverage the Internet Dean energy offline. Get them off the Net, away from the meetups, and out there pressing flesh, producing campaign materials, yelling on street corners, whatever. More important than any of that, though, is what Nathan's identifying with that "80%" remark: the energy needs to be not just for one candidate, but for liberalism and progressivism itself. That's what the conservatives did, and that's why they keep winning.

Nathan,

As you point out, Dean has managed to energize a particular demographic (mostly white, upscale, internet-savvy.) But Dean had to start somewhere-he wasn't going to win the Democratic nomination by knocking on doors in poor neighborhoods. He had to make a big splash, earn some notoriety, build a base, and then move on to the next step from there. I'm sure that Joe Trippi and the other wizards on the Dean team are acutely aware that they need to broaden the foundation of their campaign....

"The idea that upscale white professionals are unrepresented in politics is just kind of ridiculous. "Soccer moms" and "office park dads" are the target swing group of every politician out there."

This is true. However, a lot of LIBERAL white professionals are unrepresented in politics because candidates are too busy tryin to appeal to suburban swing voters. The thing that is great abou Liberal white professionals being energized is:
1) they have money
2) they can volunteer
3) they are well positioned to reach out to suburban whites
4) their positions do not require taking any positions that negate one's ability to target the working class
These people always vote Democrat when they turn up, but they aren't all energized by every candidate. Ironically, the candidates who can reach them are often the same candidates who are good at minority and union outreach.

copithorne wrote:

"But I went to a meet-up last Wednesday and I had the feeling that I was participating in something novel in politics."

Its a novel experience if you are a white upper-middle class professional not usd to partcipating in a labor, activist or church organsiation. Surely that is Nathan's point.
The "interest group" politics that these organsiations pursue, whatever its flaws, is a much more reliable way of building commitment than a personality cult. That goes for Nader supporters too, I might add.