House Repubs Open to Question Time

[da...@aol.com]

Politico has a good story reporting that House GOPers are sympathetic to the idea. Boehner spokesman says, "We'll consider this proposal." Rs are doing better than the Obama White House on this. Who's ready to make that point?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32506.html

DC

[Micah Sifry]

Is it clear that the White House is dead set against Question Time? Sounds to me like Obama wants to be for more dialogue, just isn't ready to lose his freedom to maneuver. I would look at what he said to the Senate Dems today about being open to more forums, etc (Chris Matthews played a bit of that clip) and keep pointing to how Obama says he wants to elevate the discourse, etc etc. Some of his underlings are obviously trying to tamp down something they fear they won't be able to control to their advantage. Our advantage is in pointing out that wanting to keep control is part of the old politics of manipulation and point-scoring...

I bet WH may also decide that it has to call Boehner on this and see if he is bluffing...

It sure would be nice if someone took a reasonably good poll on this idea showing what % of the public favor it.

Micah

p.s. Here's something I wrote while on the plane to SF today: http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/demand-question-time-can-internet-change-old-game-politics

--
http://www.personaldemocracy.com
http://www.techpresident.com
http://micah.sifry.com
http://www.twitter.com/mlsif

[Michael Moffo]

Good Thursday Morning All-

I don't disagree with Micah's points from last night, but I wanted to start the day off with a brief tactical note.

First off, congrats to all on a strong Day 1 of Demand Question Time that featured over 7,500 petition sigs, almost 1,000 Facebook fans and almost 400 Twitter followers. Not to mention several high-profile sign-ons and countless MSM hits.

Aside from David Corn's CNN and a C-SPAN appearance this morning (as always, would LOVE YouTube clips!) all early indications are that it may be a significantly slower MSM newsday for QuestionTime. Nonetheless, I believe that sustaining (ie: stepping up!) the online push for today/tomorrow will allow us to maximize the viral effect as we head into the weekend-- no matter what, sigs will diminish today and die off over the weekend.

For this reason, I would submit that we ride out the week and plan an "online event" for the Monday newscycle. Perhaps a livestreamed Q&A featuring some of our highest profile petition-signers--perhaps several--perhaps something even more inventive.

This will allow us some time to formulate a slightly onger-term message strategy (as Micah said, its probably a response to the WH and GOP responses) and advance the ball via this Monday "event."   

I'll leave it there for now and await feedback as I board my short flight back to DC.

Talk soon,

M. 

Sent from my iPhone

[Jon Henke]

This is why I think we needed to define the process.  The White House won't agree to a process unless...

(A) The White House controls it - in which case the opposition party won't agree to it - or, 

(B) The process for these meetings is established, fair and does not make either side vulnerable. 

You might want to stipulate that the QT happens once every 3 months, the President gets to call the meeting, the opposition party hosts in a neutral facility (staging/logistics planned by an independent or non-partisan group), the time is limited to 30-60 minutes with no more than 5 minutes for opening remarks, etc.  

-------------

Jon Henke

(202) 595-4323

[da...@aol.com]

Mike,
I'm generally open to any and all of this. But like everyone, I have limited bandwidth. So I'd rather follow orders than create them at this point!

As for video clips, below is the embed code for Mindy and me on Hardball last night. I don't know if you can get the video from the CNN show this AM with Mark McKinnon and me. (Kudos to Mark for mentioning the website twice.) ANd C-SPAN says they will send me the code for that appearances. Can you get the BBC spot with Andrew Sullivan last night?

Thanks to Ari and Mark for their columns--and anyone else whose work I might have missed.

David

Hardball code:

<object width="420" height="245" id="msnbc204d72"><param name="movie" value="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=10,0,0,0"><param name="FlashVars" value="launch=35223838&width=420&height=245"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="opaque" /><embed name="msnbc204d72" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" width="420" height="245" FlashVars="launch=35223838&width=420&height=245" allowscriptaccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="opaque" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 420px;">Visit msnbc.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com">breaking news</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">world news</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">news about the economy</a></p>

=

[Micah Sifry]

Mike et al:

If you can pull together a set of links to press coverage, I'll pull
together a press page for the site. It would be good to include, where
possible or useful, a key soundbite from each link as a teaser line.

We're over 8400 at the moment, though I'm having a problem updating
the live number.

Micah

[Michael Moffo]

I don't have all of the media in one place, but most of what I have is on the Facebook page. I really value the interactive nature of posting the media coverage there---I still hold out hope that it will inspire supporter community to click over to the Discussion tab and use the Facebook page as a hub for debate and discussion.

M.

[Michael Moffo]

PS--I just discussed QuestionTime with Chris Hughes and he has signed up (in case you want to add him to the public list)

[Mindy Finn]

The President did the Q & A with question from YouTube and is hosting a conversation with OFA members tonight.  This is all well and good -- and clearly part of an effort to renew the two-way relationship promised (perhaps thanks to Micah's posts and his plunging approval ratings).  However, this is not a substitute for the regular conversations with the opposition party in Congress to stop the gridlock and start solving.

With Boehner appearing warm to our mission, what do folks think about taking the next step of working with them on the logistics to make this happen? As David Corn suggested this morning, might we we publicly show appreciation for Boehner's support and offer to help define terms? In this case, we are not demanding specific terms, but trying to move the ball forward, rather than drive a wedge between the congressional GOP and the WH.

[Michael Moffo]

Mindy and all--

I think pushing the news of GOP willingness is huge. But, it ought to be done at a distance and in a transparent way. I fear that "taking the next step of working with them on the logistics" is the fastest way to undermine White House cooperation. They won't like the optics and it will move away from a bi-partisan citizen/journalist/activist group calling them out and move toward the GOP is calling them out.

As much as we want to turn up the heat over time. Both sides need to have the opportunity to look like they are making a heroic decision to "answer the call" of our movement. Not get bullied into it by the other Question Time adversary.

This is based upon my experience with the Obama team. But, of course, is just my opinion. I will say that this posture is exactly what we should be discussion now, so I'm happy you raised it.

M.

[Clay Shirky]

> However, this is not a substitute for the regular conversations with the
> opposition party in Congress to stop the gridlock and start solving.

We should, I think, be careful about attributing progress on
instrumental goals to question time. It's clear that for some set of
citizens, gridlock is the Nash equilibrium, which is to say the least
bad solution.

We should do this for more philosophical reasons, which is that it is
the right thing to do, because it is in accordance with our (lower-d)
democratic principles, even when it leads to outcomes people don't
like.

-c

[da...@aol.com]

I think we need to have Boehner show a little more leg. (Sorry for that image!) His guy said "we'll consider the proposal." That sure is better than the White House no. And I wrote about that today: http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/02/gopers-more-open-question-time-obama. We can note the difference between the GOP and WH responses, but we shouldn't hail anything, until we get a yes of some sort. After that, we can decide how to play things. So I ask Mindy and any other of our GOPish comrades if any of them can draw a more detailed reply out of Boehner's office. I tried to talk to his spox, Michael Steel, this afternoon, but we haven't connected.

Thoughts on this?

Then, should we consider recruting other marquis names--and who would that be? Palin and Gore? People whose participation will be newsworthy. I know that Phil Griffin, the head of MSNBC loves this idea and says he wants to help. If we got him, Jonathan Klein, pres of CNN, and Roger Ailes to come in at the same time, might that help?

Thoughts on that?

Thanks again to all participants. I've had a fun time going on cable news with Mindy and Mark and agreeing on something!

David

[da...@aol.com]

Bit of bad news, QT Team.....I spoke to a House Republican leadership aide who is in the position to know. He said don't expect Boehner to go further on his own. He said, "I wouldn't expect to see movement from us until there is movement from the White House." I asked if he is aware of the WH's position so far. Yes, he said. Then, I added, there seems to be a stalemate. He replied, "It could well be taken that way."

To journos/bloggers/etc. in the group, please don't use this quote yet.

Thoughts? Reax?

Dc

[Mindy Finn]

Just saw this. That sucks. But I understand the position of not going it alone.

I liked the idea presented this morning from Mike Moffo re: a livestreamed Q & A discussing the importance of this, along with a continued push for TV coverage and petition signatures to keep the pressure on.

Has anyone talked to others in GOP leadership i.e. Cantor?

[Micah Sifry]

First thot: we have them just where want 'em: equally blocking something the American people want.

Sent from my iPhone

[Jon Henke]

Nobody else is going to take the first step, because that makes them look weak and puts them in a vulnerable negotiating position.  You have to find positive and/or negative incentive to do it.  What's in it for them? (as libertarians and public choice theorists incessantly point out/nag, "It would be good government" is not a major factor in their calculation)

You might find some non-partisan 3rd party (or group of 3rd parties) who would be willing to set up the "safe process" that the WH and Republicans could accept without making themselves vulnerable.

As a hail mary option - direct,  very pointed press - what if an organization reserved an appropriate space, specified a process almost identical to the Baltimore Q&A, picked a date and said "We're going to host a completely fair and neutral Q&A between the President and members of the opposition party.  So far, [XX thousand] Americans have indicated they support this process.  We will livestream the results, and let everybody who has signed our petition who was willing to accept question time."

That would be the positive/negative incentive.  It's one thing to not initiate a Question Time forum, but it would be another to actively decline to participate in a forum that occurs - especially if the "other side" does participate.  

-------------

Jon Henke

(202) 595-4323

[Michael Moffo]

I think this is going in a great direction, but I think its fair to say that Secret Service considerations make the actual arrangement of a venue impractical. Let's also remember that the Office of the President of the United States deserves the prerogative to orchestrate the actual event so that it is befitting the office.

Bottom Line: I think Henke's point about "positive and/or negative incentive to do it" is right on. I'd submit that creating a political/media atmosphere where this is apparent is where our focus ought to be laser-focused right now. The simplest way for us to do this is quite simply to STAY IN THE NEWS. In order to do that, Demand Question Time needs to provide fresh meat for the machine, several news cycles per week.

I still firmly believe that the president and the White House want to do this and they are inclined to do it. I think everyone knows this is a good thing (albeit with some risk of going wrong). If we maintain a posture of enabling them to do the right thing and staying positive and values-based, we can maintain relevance and progress.

That's where my earlier suggestion comes in. But, I think we need to hear more ideas about how we can accomplish this. Andrew Rasiej suggested that we begin to engage the entire list of signers -- to determine the way forward in a directed, but transparent and empowering way. He also suggested asking signers to provide more information about themselves, such as political affiliation, to better illustrate the depth and breadth of support. Several of these kinds of actions could be incorporated into a live online even early next week.

Micah, if others agree with this concept, perhaps we start a new thread (or Google doc) where people can submit ideas about ways to extend and enhance the petition's visibility, relevance through an event early- or mid-next week.

I've certainly typed enough. What are everyone's thoughts?

M.

[da...@aol.com]

Would any top GOP leader actually take a position on this counter to Boehner's lead? But I'm all for askin'. Mindy, you have any contacts to contact?

[Micah Sifry]

Mike--

I agree that we need to dream up and implement some fun tactics to
keep DQT in the news, just to keep building the list and maintain
momentum.

Definitely, let's start a fresh thread for discussing that.

Separately, we also need to brainstorm and plan for the steps we think
we should take to help organize the energy of this proto-community
without getting in the way of where it might go.

Options include the ones suggestion by Rasiej...opening up the
demandquestiontime.com site as more of a blog with comments on posts
where we hope to spur discussion of tactics and strategy...using
collaborative brainstorming tools like IdeaScale or Google Moderator
to try to rank ideas...etc.

Converting the site to a blog format (with the petition button and
open letter language clearly fronted) is easy.

We also need to get a mass email provider lined up if we want to start
communicating with the list we're growing.

Micah

[da...@aol.com]

A quote from Obama's speech at DNC fundraiser last night:

"We've got to change the tone of government and politics here in Washington and all across America.  I'm not going to give up on that either.  You know, the American people are right to be frustrated about a Washington where every day is Election Day -- and the basic theory is, "If you lose I win."  Where we're not measuring success by what we're doing for the American people, but how we look in the latest Gallup.  No wonder people are frustrated.That’s why I went to the House Republican caucus the other day.  We had a good discussion -- (laughter) -- about the challenges that are facing the American people, our ideas to solve them.  That was good for the country.  It's good for our democracy.  I had fun."

But apparently not enough fun that he wants to commit to doing it again.

DC

 

[Micah Sifry]

Is there a parallel quote from the Republican side?

[Micah Sifry]

This is from today's NPR story, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123423411:

>>In Congress, the House Republicans are game.

"Absolutely. We need to do more of that," Republican Whip Eric Cantor
says.

"More give and take with him, from the heart, from the man," Rep. Zach
Wamp of Tennessee agrees. "I think it could be very helpful for our
country."<<

I'm beginning to think that after a little more listbuilding we do an
ask to the list to call/fax the White House asking Obama to "just say
yes" to Question Time.

Micah

> >>>> > codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#v..."><param

> >>>> > name="FlashVars" value="launch=35223838&width=420&height=245"><param
> >>>> > name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param
> >>>> > name="allowFullScreen"
> >>>> > value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="opaque" /><embed
> >>>> > name="msnbc204d72" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640"
> >>>> > width="420"
> >>>> > height="245" FlashVars="launch=35223838&width=420&height=245"
> >>>> > allowscriptaccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="opaque"
> >>>> > type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
>

> >>>> > pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=..."></embed></object><p

> ...
>
> read more »

[Susan Crawford]

Who has ties to the NYT, Post, WSJ editorial boards?

> 420px;">Visit msnbc.com <http://msnbc.com>  for <a style="text-decoration:none !important;