I checked with President Howard Dean and he says without netroots he would not have been elected

If you think the netroots were responsible for Howard Dean not winning the presidency in 2004, well, you really need to read Netroots Rising. :)  Seriously, though, I haven't really talked to anyone (or read any serious analysis) who thinks that Dean's loss was the netroots' fault. To the contrary, if you read the book, you'll see the combination of: a) Dean campaign disorganization and failure to fully utilize the netroots resources they had; b) the corporate media's wildly irresponsible reporting, particularly of the non-scream "scream;" and c) the Democratic political establishment's decision to defeat Dean.

Anyway, here's Howard Dean on the netroots: "The Internet is the most significant tool for building democracy since the invention of the printing press...power is shifting away from centralized messaging and toward voters who demand that politicians listen to them before spekaing to them."

Now here's Steve Jarding: "this transitional era is a tsunami...the greatest democratic movement technologically maybe ever." Jarding adds, "in one or two cycles, you're not going to have a campaign where blogging is not instrumental."

Finally, here's Jim Webb: "The netroots have been a tremendous help to my campaign and a huge inspiration to me personally...I am where I am in large part because of their support."

The "Draft" movements got Clark to the point where he COULD win, the "professionals" then destroyed everything that had been built up.  Don't believe me?  Read the interview over at the Netroots Rising blog with Clark's first campaign manager Donnie Fowler.  That's his assessment, 100%.

The only issue I have with the dean people is how PBS did a story on Ron Paul's netroots (without regard to his politics), and they did an interview with some girl from the dean campaign talking about how she thought paul was a loser, and I was like, "haha, she is the sore loser." because it totally felt like she certainly was one to be talking.  Seriously, watch the video (accessible by the link above) and most likely you'll agree, she's just upset that her campaign was unsuccessful.

And thus, I made a reference to netroots success ;)

I can't believe that Resnick didn't think Harris Miller's loss was based on ideology.  It was absolutely the ideological differences that cause H-M to lose.

I, for one, found his pro-outsourcing, anti-labor positions, offensive and out of line with the rest of the Democratic party's platform.  H-M, also rubbed me as an elitist, and not concerned with the wider views of the general electorate - in stark contrast to Webb's views.  Webb is a true populist, and to me (and I'm no professional), netroots and populism are closely akin to each other.

If the same race were held today, Webb would beat H-M again.

differences, particularly on trade and outsourcing, played a major role.  Also perceived electability.

But, the fact is that Miller just isn't a good person.  And I mean that sincerely.

I'm not sure how his mind works, but the outcome has been devestating for IT workers in this country.  He is no friend of ours.

It will be my goal to make sure he never gets elected beyond the local level.  The only time his shadow will ever darken the Congress is when he is asking them for special favors for big business; I guess we can't stop that.

I totally enjoy it when people call a spade a spade.  Good going!