Chip Forrester Writes Tennessee Obama Supporters

18 Responses to “Chip Forrester Writes Tennessee Obama Supporters”

1. lookingto2010 writes
   January 16th, 2009 9:50 pm

   Wow - I’m impressed. Something tells me we won’t get a letter like that from Charles Robert Bone. Here’s to Chip Forrester - he may have been in the TNDP for longer than Bone, but he’s putting forth more effort to mobilize the Obama supporters than Bone. Unless Bone starts turning the screws to the Executive Committee, my bet is that Forrester, with 46 commitments, will be the new TNDP Chair. If not - well, something fishy is going on.
   Forrester’s got my vote - even if it doesn’t count!

2. Jason's Ghost writes
   January 17th, 2009 11:36 am

   Wow, sounds like Chipster is acting like he has this in the bag. Maybe he ought to talk to Mumpower.

   Maybe the Chipster ought to explain to these people where he’s going to get the money to do these great things. No big-time Democrat will work with him because he has lied to them about one thing or another over the years. I’ve heard that Al Gore hates him. Everyone knows that Bob Clement does for good reason. Now he pisses on Bredesen, Davis, Gordon, Tanner.

   Democrats are dumber than I ever thought if they make this guy chairman.

3. Harrison writes
   January 17th, 2009 11:40 am

   I hear that Chip has even bought 66 flags to fly above the TNDP to commemorate his election!

4. Ben writes
   January 17th, 2009 1:48 pm

   If he’s pissed off Clement, Davis, Gordon, and by association Bill Fletcher, he’s doing something right.

5. LeftWingCracker writes
   January 17th, 2009 2:19 pm

   I’ve met both of them and like both of them, but I lean toward Forrester because we HAVE to get away from the Republican-lite, don’t-offend-big-money campaigns that we have run.

   Other than The Honorable Phil Governor (who is barely more Democrat than Kent Williams, if that), we haven’t won a statewide race with those campaigns since McWherter and Gore’s re-elections of 1990.

   We need truly populist economic stances for our candidates and campaigns (and NOT the xenophobic populism the Goopers put out) of the type that Obama ran on.

   It is extremely telling that the Bredesenites ran screaming from Obama, look where they’ve taken us.

   Nothing against CRB, he’s a good fella, but I think Chip is more likely to take us where we need to go.

6. Harrison writes
   January 17th, 2009 5:59 pm

   You probably ought to blame the Odomites. They’re the ones that lost the House. Or blame Chip, who as treasurer personally approved of every single Party expenditure last year. Or just feel free to blame Bredesen who won all 95 counties. Clearly, he doesn’t understand the state’s political landscape. You, Cracker, sound like a clown. But it doesn’t really matter. No one is engaging in the Party under a Chip regime. Hope you like church because Chip is going to have to have a big collection plate to pick up every nickel and dime he can find to keep the lights on. No donors, no funraising, no party.

7. Sue Justice writes
   January 18th, 2009 12:09 am

   So what your saying Harrison, is that these people are not supporting the TNDP if Bone isn’t chair. They sound like they would make fine republicans…good luck to all!

8. LeftWingCracker writes
   January 18th, 2009 12:22 am

   Harrison represents the fatcats who got the party into the mess it’s in now, and wouldn’t understand the REAL meaning of being a Democrat if you spelled it out to him.

   Ever hear of the 50-state strategy, Harrison? It’s why we have majorities in both Houses of Congress and the White House.

   Your way is done, pal, whine all you want about it. I’m sure Mumpower would take your money.

9. Harrison writes
   January 18th, 2009 9:40 am

   Thanks for that dazzling analysis, LeftWingQuacker. In case you didn’t notice, the Obama campaign actually did not run a 50-state campaign. They didn’t invest a dime or time in Tennessee, among other state. It just wasn’t part of their strategy, and I respect them for making the calculating decision. But the downside meant that they surrendered the state and the Republicans ran the board here. The Odom crowd made a bad situation worse by fielding terrible candidates in key races. Regardless, what the heck does a “50-state strategy” have to do with a state party chair race? Instead, we ought to he talking about a 95-county strategy. I’d be more inclined to tie my fortunes to Phil, who engineered the first clean sweep. Or Harold, who ran to the center and came within two points of serving in the Senate. Or Lincoln, who wins in a congressional district covers one-quarter of state. Or Bart, who regularly triumphs in Republican bedroom communities across Middle Tennessee. Or Tanner, who pioneered the Blue Dog approach to governing. If you really think these men, who win, are the ones who “got us in this mess,” then you really are as dumb as you sound. In the meantime, if your way is so correct, why did Obama only carry six counties in Tennessee?

10. LeftWingCracker writes
    January 18th, 2009 9:54 am

    Bad House candidates? That I can agree with. Harold? You can have him; he spent the last 8 of his 10 years as my congressman ignoring us so he could run to the right of Corker and lose.

    The problem with Blue Dogs is that they never move the argument. Look at the Goopers; everything they do is to move the argument in their direction, and we never do that.

    Since the rest of Tennessee outside the Big Two is still several years behind the rest of the country, apparently, everyone’s afraid to challenge Republican orthodoxy. If all we are going to do is give people an echo, not a choice, why should they support us statewide?

11. Harrison writes
    January 18th, 2009 10:11 am

    I don’t think you’re going to bring along “the rest of Tennessee outside the Big Two” by force-feeding them a political ideology they don’t want. So then the question becomes: How best to win? Like it or not, the blueprint is there. Follow it. Or don’t. But if you don’t, be prepared to bang your head against the wall for the next decade until voters in those outlying areas can manage, as you say, to “catch up with the rest of the country.”

12. Harrison writes
    January 18th, 2009 10:34 am

    I just watched Meet the Press this morning and they were talking about Obama having dinner with conservative luminaries George Will and Charles Krauthammer. Then they blasted him for letting Rick Warren offer the inaugural invocation. Then Chuck Todd called Obama an “appeaser.” So tell me: Is this the kind of bold new day you envision, Quacker? Or is this just the same “echo” that makes you upset with Bredesen, Davis, Ford, Tanner and others?

13. Ben writes
    January 18th, 2009 10:46 am

    Yes the Bredesen blueprint: Run against an un-electable nutjob (with personal baggage), dump 3 million of your own money into it, and run when the outgoing GOP governor has a sub 30% approval rating. It’s easy as can be!

14. Harrison writes
    January 18th, 2009 11:08 am

    Or yet another way to look at it is: Run as a Democrat in the immediately post-9/11 world in which Republicans still had a groundswell of political support. And run as a Democrat at a time when legislative Democrats had the same terrible approval ratings as Sundquist because of the income tax. And run against a Republican who took up permanent residence in Bush’s lap at a time when Bush’s approval ratings were still in the ’70s. And run against Air Force One, which during that period established a permanent shuttle route between D.C. and Tennessee for the sole purpose of beating you. Then, after you’re elected, struggle through budget crisis after crisis, and then become the first governor in history to get re-elected with every single county.

    Do you understand what a clown you sound like when you make these kinds of absurd statements?

15. benintn writes
    January 18th, 2009 4:36 pm

    I always take Chuck Todd at his word. If Chuck Todd says it, it must be true…

16. Harrison writes
    January 18th, 2009 6:02 pm

    I can’t wait to hear Ben and Quacker’s commentary after the Rick Warren blessing. That will be rich.

17. Ben writes
    January 18th, 2009 8:59 pm

    I actually have no problem with the Warren thing (I honestly don’t care much either way). I can’t speak for anyone else but my skepticism of CRB and current TNDP tactics, are just about that-tactics (and success), not ideology.

18. Fenway writes
    January 21st, 2009 10:48 am

    It is a shame that the TNDP does not encourage/require the two contenders for the Chairmanship to publicly articulate and post their vision and goals for the party, and to publicly engage with us Dems who might have questions for them. This would be EASY to do on the website and via a discussion board.