Running Against The Party

I consider myself a mainstream Democrat. If you want to measure me, my contested caucus track record this century is Bradley-Dean-Obama-Clinton-Warren.

I recognize that Mainstream Democrat is not the most popular thing to be these days. But I'm a voter too, and I don't really care for it when people run within a party by running against the party - whether that's Rob Sand's "parties are bad and we should all just work together" approach, or the clenched fist Well ACTually, What Socialism Means Is approach. I want to make the party better and stronger and I don't think attacking the party helps that.

Neither one of those approaches speaks to me. They're both assuming "mainstream Democrats will vote for the nominee." Which is what we do and what you're supposed to do. Buy into the process, accept the outcome. Sometimes YTIИU is a punch in the face.

But: of those two approaches, I believe Sand's approach is more likely to produce a general election win in Iowa.

Unelectable

OK, here's one that's been bugging me:

I understand as well as anyone that if Iowa Democrats are going to succeed, we have to win more votes in our rural areas. I understand that better than most Johnson County Democrats; it's been a very long time, but I've actually run a race in a rural district (with zero support from the state party of that era). I know that the world is a very different place once you get six miles from Kinnick Stadium.

But that mindset does not need to extend to disrespect for those of us in the remaining blue counties, or candidates who come from the blue counties.

Remember all those special election wins and over-performances from 2025? Johnson County provided way more than its share of volunteers. We are constantly shipping volunteers all over the state to other counties that need a hand.

You know that money that is so hard to raise out in the small towns? We understand that we have more than our share of the good paying jobs here in Johnson County - but we give that money to candidates all over the state.

And when you're trying to bump that vote share up from 28% to 37% or 41% in the rural counties, don't forget that you also need that 68% or 70% out of Johnson County - 15 points better than any other county in the state, in every statewide and congressional contest, up and down the ballot.

We do these things gladly. We understand that to win, we have to win everywhere.

But.

I am really sick of hearing that someone is "unelectable" just because he comes from my county.

What does that tell us here in Iowa City? It tells us, "We're OK with you doing the heavy lifting. We'll quietly thank you for the margins and the money at the fundraisers in your county, as long as we can make a couple jokes at your expense in the rest of the state. But Johnson County legislators only get to run in unwinnable statewide races. We're happy to let Jean Lloyd-Jones (1992) or Art Small (2004) take one for the team when we can't find anyone else, but we'll point to them after the fact and say 'See? We told you Johnson County candidates are unelectable.' And don't you dare think about putting up one of your own in a high profile winnable contest."

I'm not going to say anything negative about the other leading candidate. But if supporters are going to use where a candidate has run and where he comes from as a talking point, it's a simple fact that his district is 100% urban. It's a non-issue. It should be a non-issue.

I'm not saying "it's our turn" (even though, frankly, considering what we do for the Democrats of this state, it is way past our turn). I am saying: evaluate Zach Wahls as Zach Wahls and stop using "candidates from Johnson County are unelectable" as a slur.

Showing Up Matters

Since Koni's passing, I've been going to a lot more events than I used to. Being around people keeps me positive. And I missed a lot of events in the past five or so years because I was very busy as a caretaker, first with my parents and then with Koni. 

 

Over the past five years, there have been some times where I was grateful for virtual attendance options. Zooming in meant I could skip the drive over and the drive back, and spend that time taking care of things at home. It was just easier.

 

But did I get the same things out of virtual attendance that I would have gotten out of being physically present? Of course not. The meeting was called to order, the presentations were made, the meeting was formally adjourned, the feed ended. I had none of the little conversations you have before and after the official business, none of the relationship building and maintaining, no, "hey, let's go grab a drink" opportunities. So much less of those little things that make participation a positive experience.

 

The mindset developed in our community, toward the end of peak COVID, to an almost dogmatic level, that virtual attendance was Just As Good As in-person attendance, and that disagreeing with that premise was "ableism." I watched my friend get bullied out of the county party in part because he dared to ask that question.

 

I understand some of that. Like I said, I'm just out of a long period of caregiving. I also have a somewhat hidden disability that makes certain crowd situations, especially where there's conflict or hostility, hard (one of the many, many reasons I prefer a presidential primary over a caucus, but that's another story). We shouldn't abandon virtual options for the general public or rank and file members.

 

But leaders, in an organization or in government, have a different level of responsibility. If you're taking on a leadership role or an elected job, you owe it to everyone to show up and make yourself more available and more accessible - to everyone, not just "your" people. Yes, it's less convenient. But you made that choice when you chose to be a leader.

Nothing is an absolute, and there's good reasons and excuses. As a Sometimes thing, virtual attendance can be a useful tool.

 

There are a lot of very experienced rank and file staffers in our local government. We're the institutional memory. We know about a lot of things that aren't in our job description or even in our department. If you get to know us, you'll learn a lot.

 

But when your default mode is Virtual Is Just As Good, when you miss out on all those countless hallway interactions and opportunities for one on one conversations with the public because you're literally phoning it in, are you really doing the same job?