Former Obama field organizers start firm

[Beet]

Mitch Stewart, former Obama for America battleground states director, and Jeremy Bird, former Obama for America national field director, are starting a new grassroots organizing firm -- called 270 Strategies [270 electoral votes to win] -- to help clients build people-centered, data-driven, digitally-sophisticated campaigns by applying the historic Obama organizing model to campaigns of any kind...

...Marlon Marshall, Bird's deputy on the campaign; Mark Beatty, Stewart's deputy; and Meg Ansara and Lauren Kidwell, former OFA regional directors, also will join the firm as partners. Together, this team has played a multitude of roles in building the Obama grassroots organization since the 2007 Iowa caucuses. 270 Strategies is founded on the belief that grassroots campaigns can change the world. Twitter: @270Strategies

The firm will open offices in Chicago and Washington, DC. Obama's grassroots network -- led by Bird and Stewart -- included 10,000 neighborhood team leaders, 30,000 core team members and 2 million volunteers, Playbook reports. It was credited with registering 1.8 million voters, "holding millions of persuasion conversations with targeted voters, and replicating the 2008 electorate across battleground states."

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/01/former-obama-field-organizers-start-firm-154217.html?hp=l6

Any Democratic candidate looking to 2016 would want to get these people on board. Although it does raise questions of whether a firm such as this can really serve multiple candidates equally. If, say, Clinton, Cuomo and Biden all tried to retain this firm, would Stewart, Bird, et. al really be able to maintain an equal arms' length relationship with each campaign? Would the campaigns trust this firm with their field operation?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I see my fellow Democrats have decided that racial and gender polarization is the way to go. Sad.

[Beet]

I see my fellow Democrats have decided that racial and gender polarization is the way to go. Sad.

What in this article makes you say that?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The Obama model for winning elections is to ignore half the country and massive urban minority/single female/student turnout. It wins elections, especially for a figure like Obama, but its problems are twofold:

1. Mass urban turnout makes solid districts even more solid, but a lack of expansion into suburban and rural areas may have partially contributed to our failure to take back the House.

2. By splitting up Americans and appealing specifically to blacks, or Latinos or women, the nation is effectively divided in a way Obama himself warned of at the 2004 Democratic convention.

[NHI]

The Obama model for winning elections is to ignore half the country and massive urban minority/single female/student turnout. It wins elections, especially for a figure like Obama, but its problems are twofold:

1. Mass urban turnout makes solid districts even more solid, but a lack of expansion into suburban and rural areas may have partially contributed to our failure to take back the House.

2. By splitting up Americans and appealing specifically to blacks, or Latinos or women, the nation is effectively divided in a way Obama himself warned of at the 2004 Democratic convention.

Well said. It is both ironic and sad that this is the state of American politics, I hope it does change, the question though is when...

[Beet]

Well yes, I suppose this means that his legacy lives on through the database of supporters and volunteers that 270 Strategies will take with it. I agree that it would be a shame if this existing database, whose membership is based on the appeal of Barack Obama himself, were to prevent the party from opening up to new groups that could potentially vote Democratic but were disproportionately turned off by Obama.

However, there's also another part of this which no 2016 candidate, Democratic or Republican can ignore, which is the OFA methodology and experience- "people-centered, data-driven, digitally-sophisticated campaigns". One reason OFA was so successful in 2012 is that they started building up their organization very early and built on their experience as the most infrastructurally sophisticated campaign from 2008. The Romney people basically had to start from scratch after winning the primaries. The more you can carry over data, technology, methodology and experience from an earlier cycle and build on that, the more successful you are.

Basically, who will inherit the Obama infrastructure?

[King]

The Obama model for winning elections is to ignore half the country and massive urban minority/single female/student turnout. It wins elections, especially for a figure like Obama, but its problems are twofold:

1. Mass urban turnout makes solid districts even more solid, but a lack of expansion into suburban and rural areas may have partially contributed to our failure to take back the House.

2. By splitting up Americans and appealing specifically to blacks, or Latinos or women, the nation is effectively divided in a way Obama himself warned of at the 2004 Democratic convention.

The Bush model for winning elections to prop up rural turnout and not give a damn about urban areas.  

Broad outreach models are a fantasy.   Their value systems are completely different.  It can't be done.  The people split themselves up not the politicians.  Adults are already set in stone.   Republicans over 40 are Republicans to the grave.  Democrats cannot reach these people.  However, they can reach their children.

In the internet age, rural/suburban children are far more connected to urban culture than any previous generation.  As long as Democrats appeal to youths, they will be able to slowly make ground into the rural and suburban areas.  That's a long-term solution.  Nothing can be done in the short-term.

As for winning the House, you only need 10 more seats.  It doesn't require some magical new strategy to get 10 new seats.  The Democrats just need to win 55% of the national PV.

[Beet]

You guys are confusing the Obama coalition with the OFA model. The OFA model I associate more with David Axelrod, David Plouffe, Jim Messina and Jeremy Bird, than with Obama. It's about a methodology that anyone can use, even a Republican.

The Obama coalition has a racial polarization problem, which is really more of a Republican problem (this time). The age and gender divides are a myth. Whites under 30 voted for Romney by 51-44, and white women voted for Romney by 56-42. Really all there is, is racial polarization. But the thing with the Obama coalition is, Obama isn't running again. I think some of this would be ameliorated if the Democrats nominate a white candidate next time around, and especially if the Republicans nominate a minority candidate.

[King]

There's a divide on all three.  Young whites andwwhite women are more Republican than other youth and women, but also more Democratic than other whites. 

The age divide is a lot easier to make in roads in than race or gender.

[Chaddyr23]

The Obama model for winning elections is to ignore half the country and massive urban minority/single female/student turnout. It wins elections, especially for a figure like Obama, but its problems are twofold:

1. Mass urban turnout makes solid districts even more solid, but a lack of expansion into suburban and rural areas may have partially contributed to our failure to take back the House.

2. By splitting up Americans and appealing specifically to blacks, or Latinos or women, the nation is effectively divided in a way Obama himself warned of at the 2004 Democratic convention.

Uh totally disagree. Im sorry that my demographic is finally pursued and coveted by someone in the electorate.
Secondly, we're not the ones talking about "blah people" and birth certificates.

Pssh, just look at the poster before me. With Obama and a green crescent in the back. 1) he's not even Muslim 2) if he were he isn't exactly a champion for them and 3) it shouldn't even be a big deal.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

King's signature is ironic; he's not even a Republican.

[Likely Voter]

I imagine the GOP are going to try and build their own version of this.  Angry white men use social media too.

[King]

King's signature is ironic; he's not even a Republican.

Not ironic in the least.  I hold a very moderate hero position.  I believe that Obama is a closet Muslim socialist who wishes to destroy traditional America and make us follow Sharia, but I support this cause completely.

[Oakvale]

The Obama model for winning elections is to ignore half the country and massive urban minority/single female/student turnout. It wins elections, especially for a figure like Obama, but its problems are twofold:

1. Mass urban turnout makes solid districts even more solid, but a lack of expansion into suburban and rural areas may have partially contributed to our failure to take back the House.

2. By splitting up Americans and appealing specifically to blacks, or Latinos or women, the nation is effectively divided in a way Obama himself warned of at the 2004 Democratic convention.

Uh totally disagree. Im sorry that my demographic is finally pursued and coveted by someone in the electorate.
Secondly, we're not the ones talking about "blah people" and birth certificates.

Pssh, just look at the poster before me. With Obama and a green crescent in the back. 1) he's not even Muslim 2) if he were he isn't exactly a champion for them and 3) it shouldn't even be a big deal.

Snowstalker is obsessed with winning the votes of white people from Kentucky or whatever, it's his thing.