thoughts on the battle for the Democratic Chair, part 1

Perhaps it’s best once in a while to pretend that you're not a blogger, to allow your thoughts to ferment for a while. In my case, unfortunately, that doesn't suggest that my thoughts are more well considered or less off-the-cuff.

I should begin by confessing to being something of a David Van Os fanboy. Perhaps I could then say that I was advocating a 254-state strategy when advocating a 254-state strategy wasn't cool. As evidence of this fact, I could point to a long-ago bloggers’ interview with Chris Bell. Sadly, the only thing many people remember about this interview is that I humiliated myself by signing on late and then not recognizing that it was Chris to whom I was talking to when someone referred to Amarillo as his "old stomping grounds".

In that old interview I also asked Chris about a 254-state strategy. I asked this because our Panhandle has historically felt ignored by the Democratic Party.

So, yeah, my loins electrify a bit when I hear Van Os mention a 254-state strategy.

Plus, the guy's a hella good speaker, and, having made our choice, surely our party can get behind that.

So—and, yes, I know there were paperwork problems¹ —I wasn't entirely unsympathetic to Van Os when he spoke in the battle for the chair of the Texas Democratic Party. I didn't have anything against Roy Laverne Brooks, either.

And, yeah, I did have concerns about the incrementalism of a figure like Boyd Richie. Incrementalism means to me that we in the Panhandle don't get shit.

And those concerns are obviously shared by others in the Panhandle; although I also have concerns about the way that those fears of exclusion are manifested. I don't think I'm letting any cats out of any bags that I promised not to release when I say the following: I was disturbed to watch Panhandlians on the bus home cheer one of "their own" who bragged about having "fought, and fought, and fought" the downstaters to get somebody from the "top of Texas" as a national delegate.

I think I've established that I, as much as anyone, want to see representation from this area. (Hell, I want a candidate to go up against Max Thornberry who’s supported by the party and not just a sacrificial lamb.) But I do not want to win at any cost.

The ultimate cost is that we split the party.

The fears of splitting the party in the macrocosm, like the fears of splitting the atom, are well documented – but we could also split the damn thing in the microcosm.

For better or worse we were gerrymandered by the Republicans into a senatorial district that includes Midland. I've made fun of the Midlandians, but it's good-natured kidding. We cannot pit ourselves against the southern parts of our district and expect ever to win anything at all.

{to be continued…}


spacedark


¹But only beancounters get uptight over paperwork.