Running a campaign in rural Oregon
By Gus Frederick of Silverton, Oregon. A native Oregonian, Gus recently became campaign manager for Jim Gilbert (D), challenging Rep. Mac Sumner (R-Molalla.)
What's it like to run a new rural progressive campaign in a majority pachydermic district? To me, that question was as relevant as what kinds of rocks there are on Mars to most folks. But since the first of September, I am beginning to find out!
No stranger to the political scene, I grew up as a 'Mall Brat' with parents working near and in the Marble Palace. Maybe that is why I steered clear of any sort of career dealing with politics. Focusing instead on the arts: both graphic and aesthetic.
But being unemployed with time on my hands, I volunteered to help on Jim Gilbert's second try for State Representative. A month later, I have now found myself employed and running the campaign as manager. A trial by fire, but so far an extremely interesting ride! The key thing in all of this is of course the candidate himself. One of those rare types that has vowed not to take any contributions from PACs or other special interest groups. Instead, the campaign is fueled entirely by donations from individuals and small businesses. By contrast, the opponent is running on a record that includes a long list of 'big money' special interest donations, with votes to match.
So here I am, in the thick of it.
As an artist, I am drawn to that smokey cloud of graphics from the opposition: Field sign with Website; Slick three color tri-fold legal-sized mailer; And the smiling face in the pictures, proclaiming 'Our Representative.' Our representative whose voting record matched Karen's by 98%...
But who is that man behind the curtain? I still see things through my right-brained artist's eye, so tend to see between the lines of code and color choices. The pre-packaged website contains the usual slick issues and 'meet the man' pages. His slick mailer likewise has that formula 'Generic Candidate' look and feel. One could almost imagine template files supplied by the State republican machine. Red, white and blue CD-ROMs with InDesign and Quark files. And lots of little Republican elephant clip art too.
But the most interesting observation to me is that the smiling face of our representative has a look of weariness to it. Like he is simply going through the motions. Perhaps almost wishing for defeat so that he can go back to selling real estate. But maybe I'm reading too much into images.
Meanwhile, Jim continues to walk the district door to door. During the summer he drove his biodiesel tractor in numerous small town parades throughout the district. He shows up at house parties and nursing homes with different varieties of fresh fruit from his farm. It goes deeper than the straight issues. It goes to attitude. And I like Jim's, biased as my humble opinion may be.
So now that I'm here, in this new sphere, I thought it would be interesting to see how a new rural progressive like Jim Gilbert will fare in today's changing scene, weather and authorities permitting, of course! Stay tuned!
[Editor's note: Help Jim Gilbert - donate and volunteer.]
|
Sept. 30, 2006
Posted in guest column. |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Sep 30, '06
I enjoyed hearing Thom Hartmann's interview with Jim Gilbert and I was delighted to see he won the endorsement of the Silverton paper. Links to both the endorsement and radio interview are on Jim's home page: http://www.jimgilbertfororegon.org
In his interview with Hartmann, Jim mentioned he compiled a list of his opponent's corporate and special interest campaign contributions. I'd love to see that list posted on Jim's website.
Oct 1, '06
Gus - I have an honest question that I'm hoping you'll discuss (And to be upfront: I do hope Jim Gilbert wins). Why is it almost an article of faith by folks on our side that it is important that the campaign is fueled entirely by donations from individuals and small businesses?
Here I'm distinguishing just this aspect of the campaign from the other grassroots organizing for two reasons.
First, there are important corporate examples of progressive values like Costco who this article of faith would seem to demean.
And second, note the relationship between money and grassroots politics in this article:
Campaign 2006: The Republicans' Secret Weapon http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1541237,00.html
3. Low tech can be better Caller ID, TiVo, cable channels and satellite radio all make it harder to reach voters than it was just a few years ago, increasing the importance of person-to-person appeals, the hallmark of old-fashioned, grassroots campaigns that used to connote an amateur or a low budget. "You clearly have to have TV ads," says White House political-affairs director Sara Taylor, "but for a little less TV, you can buy a whole lot of pizzas and phone lines and salaries for young men and women right out of college" to make phone calls, knock on doors and recruit and manage volunteers.
In this case, money buys a lot more committed feet on the ground doing grassroots work than a strategy which (perhaps misguidedly) believes money can be made an issue and thereby really is self-defeating by limiting the ground game. I've never understood why our side (and I'm not including you in this) become all but irrational when discussing the role of money in campaigns.
Oct 1, '06
I'm glad to see Jim Gilbert getting some recognition. I had the opportunity to meet him last November at the Rural Caucus retreat and was impressed by his integrity, clarity, and honesty.
Jim is well suited to represent a mostly rural area that depends a great deal upon agriculture. He knows his area, and will truly represent that district.
I think Jim Gilbert represents exactly the kind of candidate that the Democratic Party should work to find - he is District oriented and knows his area.
As for where the money comes from - well it IS an issue if an out-of-area group tries to buy a local election. It doesn't play well in my area to have out-of-area people coming in throwing money around to buy votes, and I'm sure it doesn't play well over in Gilbert's district. It can be a deciding factor.
Oct 1, '06
Ask, I once worked on a campaign where the incumbent wasn't really threatened but put out regular newsletter mailings to supporters anyway.
Those mailings were done in his law office as "mailing parties" where old friends of the politician mixed with young college student friends of the campaign manager.
At the legislative level as this was, the only "pay" was the pizza fed volunteers after the mailing was finished.
The reason for the "article of faith" you talk about is that not many years after that campaign there were people in both parties saying such tactics weren't effective---mailings were supposed to be put out by mailing houses, therefore candidates had to spend more time raising money. After all, we were told, "money is all that matters and only professionals know how the game is played". Except that slogan did not lead to a rise in Democratic victories at all levels. Sometimes the opposite happened.
I have been researching my state rep's C & Es. She hasn't been seriously contested before this year, and now it is a contest of ideas, not a contest of money (incumbent has ending balances in the 5 figures, challenger in the 4 figures). And yet this incumbent takes money from out of district and out of state, and in 2004 spent $4,000 contributing "pass throughs" to fellow legislators running for re-election. I think (as was discussed in the Legislative Comm.) that pass throughs ought to be illegal. As someone said at the Legislative Comm., people writing a check to "Friends of John Doe" expect it to go to the Doe campaign--if they'd wanted to contribute to other candidates they could have written checks to them.
There are some legislative campaigns this year which are heavy on the volunteer effort / candidate meeting the voters strategy, in some cases running against incumbents raising more money for a legislative campaign than some/many of their constituents earn in a year. In a number of weeks we will know who was successful. The KOS link (under "Lefty Blogs" at the right of the BO home page) about Oregon races doesn't say all the big money incumbent legislators are in "safe/likely" races. Some previously thought safe are now written about as competitive.
Elsewhere on the BO blog, Jefferson Smith has detailed results of studies on various campaign tactics. I am not sure that "salaries for young men and women just out of college" is at the top of that list.
Oct 2, '06
I know this is old history by now but I was gone over the past weekend so I didn't get a chance to comment earlier so here goes. First, the candidate's name is Jim Gilberston not Jim Gilbert. Second, I am so glad that you have begun to take charge of his campaign. I have several friends who are doing volunteer work for Jim here in Gilliam and Wheeler County. As they say, "We are small but we vote!" Third, I just picked up my mail and in it was probably the best mailer that I have seen this for any candidate this whole election cycle. Great work!I really think he has a chance to win this race.
Oct 2, '06
Not in this district! Farmer Jim Gilbert is running in HD-18, (Clackamas and Marion Counties) while Farmer Jim Gilbertson is running in HD-59, (Gilliam and Wheeler Counties).
Cheers!
Gus Frederick - Campaign Manager - Friends of Jim Gilbert
Oct 2, '06
Posted:
http://www.jimgilbertfororegon.com/bigmoney.htm
(With appologies to Thomas Nast! ;o)
Gus Frederick - Campaign Manager - Friends of Jim Gilbert
Oct 4, '06
I am helping Jim Gilbertson's campaign in DIst. 59. Like Dist 18, it is tough but winnable. Gilbertson won 46% of the vote in '02. He is out walking, talking and getting upsigns in the small towns, which is how Michael Payne will tell you he won in a much more Republican dist 59 in 1992.
The mailer that Dale Thompson refered to refers to Jim as a traditional Roosevelt Truman Kennedy Demcorat with photos of those three included. It mentions Jim's support for Measure 44 (drug pooling) and his opposition to the corporate kicker. It is a great piece that was done without a consultant. I typed the text and Witham and Dickey designed it.
<h2>As of the recent C/E report, Jim actually had slightly more money in the bank than John Dallum, who has wasted most of his $40,000 on non advertising expenses. Jim is targeting very well and I think the race is winnable. Unfotuantely, nearly all of the money and attention will be focussed on a few races that will end up spending %250,000 or more.</h2>