This isn’t really that surprising.
Mike Tate, the face of the state Democratic Party for the past six years, will step down as party chief at the end of his current term.
“This is not a job you do for a career, but one you have the honor of holding for a short period of time where you try with all your might to do everything you can to grow the party and help elect Democrats,” Tate wrote in an email obtained by the Journal Sentinel.
“Accordingly, today I am announcing that I will not seek another term as chair at our convention in June.”
There should be no shortage of candidates to replace Tate, and while some bloggers have already been quick to start attacking some of the potential candidates, I’m going to reserve judgment until I’ve had an opportunity to hear what the candidates have to say on how they’d do things if elected Chair.
Very wise but you could open a thread to solicit questions for the eventual candidates and you and your fellow contributors pare it down to 7- 10. Then when they’re announced send each one a questionnaire and publish their exact responses. Don’t want to tell you what to do, of course, just a suggestion.
I am not too surprised either, just time for a new perspective, doesn’t automatically mean the new chair will be an improvement. Ultimately its membership along with an engaged populous that will administer change. To be fair Mike Tate presided as chair during some difficult elections for Democrats nationally and across the states.
It’s a start. Having a smirking, 30-year old guy from Milwaukee really isn’t the image to project to Boomer blue-collar white guys in Medford. And no, a Tate clone is not acceptable for a replacement (I’m looking at you, Jason Rae).
Mike can probably do well behind the scenes and in the fundraisers, but you can’t go 0-for-3 on a statewide level and stick around. Let the rebuilding begin!
Attempts to communicate with my state Chairman or his staff were reduced to leaving messages which went unanswered. I was told that even county chairpersons suffered the same. Are not politics another form of the art of communication?
In my 50 years in the business world, the “Boss” always had an open door for the “grunts.”
I hardly see Jason Rae as Tate light here…and give Mike credit…he was 1 – 3 on state races.
The only statewide successes while he was chair were Baldwin and Obama, but both kept the state party at arms length.
Bigger than Tate.
Start with Wall St partner and enabler in chief, torture practitioner (who refused to prosecute those torturers before him), chief of the health insurance company profitability guarantor, leader of the “we don’t care if your are homeless and hungry or spied on for no reason,” brigade and while he’s at it the key chooser of this weeks extra-judical candidate for assassination, and free-trade promoter extraordinaire, Barry Obombya.
Your uni-party D’s no different from the uni-party R’s in Congress. Hand-in-hand on the corporate revolving doorknob as if the citizens of the country voted for corporate rule and militarized police repression and “private” government partners like Google, Yahoo, Amazon and Microsoft getting government subsidies and no government oversight, or six corporate media “outlets,” combining to get out the corpor/government message to an increasingly less discerning or educated nation.
Start there at the very top people, and then look at your county D party and notice that your local leadership just re-inserted themselves into the same roles of control they had the last go round. The leadership in my county each completely vested in the socio-economic status quo. No message, no plan but to beg for your money and your vote and to claim they are the lesser evil. And saddest of all, none of them actually out putting themselves on the line for anything they might claim to stand for.
Argue about the new DPW chair all you want to. Pretend that change will come from the top. Others have already repeated the definition of insanity.
nonquixote “…doth protest too much methinks.” But I believe we are on the same page for the most part.
I accept that most leaders, especially politicians, are flawed, some more than others, if you consider the truth that one cannot possibly satisfy everybody. Consider also that “compromise” is a basic skill required in politics to be productive as opposed to a suicidal position. I believe you are a “purist” just I was in my younger days.
I concede your, “No message, no plan” has some application here, but I hold that a leader is essential and can provide or contribute or inspire to a means or path for change.
With a gerrymandered state such as is Wisconsin, the party of the people can only overcome the inhumanity and bribery of the party of the plutocrats with… drum roll please: TURNOUT! In other words there are more of us than them. Even better, it is ever increasing in the black and brown segment.
The solution of “TURNOUT” is simple; however, it is the means or methods employed conjoined with leadership by example that is essential to overcome the unfairness or criminality of Gerrymandering and voter suppression.
Morning Duane,
Yes, turnout the turncoats. Glad to see that you understand we are in a class war and relatively few current Democrats out of Washington DC are looking out in any fashion for the barest essential needs of the 99%.
Nothing purist about anything I bring to the discussion. You are either with us or against us when seeking a position of leadership. That’s not too complicated. Pick any issue, let me know (as a potential leader) where you stand. Don’t start compromising before the deliberations even begin.