Wednesday, February 18, 2015

You say Dems failed in '14? Johnson has a stat for that


In response to criticism of his freshman term as Michigan Democratic Party chairman (including a commentary posted here on Tuesday), Lon Johnson has lots of stats to defend his first 2-year trip to the plate.
Johnson told me that he succeeded in broadening the Democratic base and making the party more tech-savvy. He offered several charts and graphs to demonstrate that the party is moving in the right direction.
But he also understands that many of the Dem faithful still point to the bottom line – lots of losses in 2014.

“We did a lot of great things, but it didn’t add up to victory,” said Johnson, who was unanimously re-elected as party boss at the Dems’ Saturday state convention.

Johnson, who ousted longtime party chairman Mark Brewer two years ago, is particularly sensitive to critics who say that his effort to boost Democratic turnout last November was largely a flop.
Strategists from a broad cross-section of the party, he explained, set a goal of turning out 180,000 more Democratic voters in 2014 than in the last off-year election in 2010. The end result exceeded the goal, with 229,000 more loyalists – not newly registered Dem voters – going to the polls last year than in the disastrous ’10 election.

The chairman is also eager to provide more party stats for ‘14:
* Some 1.5 million doors knocked and 2 million calls made.

* A 45 percent increase in absentee voting by Democrats, and a 78 percent jump in AVs among black voters.

* A 400 percent rise in emails sent and a 240 percent increase in social media posts.

* And a 50 percent increase in party membership, to 21,000.

Johnson said that he hopes to double some of those figures over the 2015-16 election cycle. And he wants to establish a basic, positive message that establishes a “bold” brand for the party.
But, while he emphasizes the stats, Johnson concedes that it takes more than internal metrics to reach the voters.

“We want to do all of that and more,” he said. “The question is, what is ‘more?’”

No comments:

Post a Comment