And there it is: the GOP shows up, and we don't

[Proud Public Servant]

Really interesting post from kos on the Virginia gov election. The heart of it is a chart that I can't seem to reproduce here, but the gist is this: except for African Americans, every single reliable Dem bloc -- women, single women, Hispanics, Asians, young people, liberals, moderates -- voted at a lower rate in 2013 than they did in 2012. By contrast, reliable GOP blocs -- men, married women, over-45s, whites, conservatives -- all showed up in GREATER numbers in 2013 than in 2012.

GOTV in off-years: that's the key to a permanent Dem majority.

Anyway, interesting read: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/06/1253609/-We-can-t-win-big-if-our-people-don-t-vote

[brooklynite]

1. Maybe that's because they lost in 2012 and we didn't?

[Proud Public Servant]

5. Staying home after a big win

Is how we lost the House in 2010.

[questionseverything]

56. it's all a trust me system

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=10354#more-10354




As you can see, most of the counties and cities in the state vote on 100% unverifiable touch-screen systems. "Recounts" on those systems are largely little more than pressing the computer buttons again to regurgitate the same unverifiable numbers that were reported in the first place. There may be paper-based absentee and/or provisional ballots to be re-tallied (or tallied for the first time) in those jurisdictions, but, by and large, those numbers are unlikely to change too much, short of memory card or tabulator errors being discovered in the process or book-keeping errors on the few paper-based ballots.

So "recounts" in those jurisdictions that use touch-screen systems (officially known as Direct Recording Electronic or DREs) exclusively won't tell us much. It won't even tell us how the voters in those jurisdictions actually intended to vote

[Skidmore]

2. Or show up for the other party. Really, 31%

of Dems voted for Christie in NJ. And don't get me started on the Dem politicians who endorsed him.

[calimary]

3. Yeah, no freakin' kidding!!!

Democrats! PLEASE get it through your thick heads: chris christie is NOT your friend. And he's never GONNA be your friend. He's the enemy. Whether he has the luster of victory on him or not. He's STILL the enemy and he's not to be trusted!

[spanone]

42. nor was ronald reagan

don't get it.

[calimary]

66. ronald reagan WAS a national disaster. One of the worst things to happen to America in all of its

history. He put a human face on selfishness, and elevated it to a sacrament.

[Stuckinthebush]

19. Agreed

I was livid this morning. What bonehead Dems in NJ are voting for Christie?

Chris Mathews was trying to explain it along the lines of Reagan Dems who like a tough talking no-nonsense politician like Christie.

Please.

[Jakes Progress]

28. A Democrat who votes for Christie

is a stupid asshole or a confused dupe.

That would be the teacher hating wing of the Democratic party.

[ruffburr]

4. WTF-

Why on earth can't people understand that, Not Voting Is Voting Against ones Own Best Interests

[mimi85]

39. Too True!

Damn, some people are so damn thick! I'm no angel (by far), but I have never, ever not voted in any election since I was old enough. Used to be 21 back in the day. How friggin' hard is it??

I'm pretty much home bound due to health reasons, so I vote via mail. Hell, I'll donate a damn book of stamps to these idiots who don't get what a precious gift it is to be able to vote! People have died for that right. I get beyond pissed off when I think about it!

[Mass]

6. Bad candidate leads to lower participation.

It was true of Romney for the Republican base.

It is true of McAuliffe for Democrats.

[Proud Public Servant]

9. Definitely part of it

I have a friend who's an active Virginia Dem, and at dinner earlier this year she was going on and on about how the Dems were going to win because Cucchinelli was so loathsome. I had to remind her that the lesson the GOP had just learned with Rmoney was that it's not enough to hate your opponent; you also have to like your own candidate. I think that very much explains turnout in Va, on our side.

[geek tragedy]

12. It's very well established that our electorate turns out every four years, whereas theirs

turns out for every single election.

Candidate quality can make that somewhat better, but not much.

[gulliver]

69. Bad participation leads to bad candidates.

There are no excuses. It is on the voters.

[emsimon33]

7. I worked several GOTV phone banks at a distance (from CA)

And now regret not actually going back to VA to canvass in person, but we need more effective GOTV methods. Fear and Fox get the Republican sheepeople out.

[tularetom]

8. Democrats will not come out to vote AGAINST a candidate

And if their party doesn't field an attractive candidate they won't show up at all.

They voted in droves in 2012 because they liked Obama.

Conversely republicans will gladly vote against somebody simply because they were told to do so.

That's how sheep decide low turnout off year elections.

[Jester Messiah]

11. Bull. That's at least 75% of why I came out to vote.

The other 25% is that I live one street over from my polling place and so not voting is really just inexcusable.

[passiveporcupine]

18. I'm in Oregon

And we vote by mail. I think all elections should be run this way. This past year, the conservatives used that "voter apathy" to their advantage by not allowing a couple of special elections to be done through the mail, in states that normally do. I'm sure a lot of people didn't bother voting in those elections. I think it should be a legal requirement in every state to offer vote by mail. Why make something so important so difficult for people to do?

[Jester Messiah]

46. Man, I wish.

But that would raise voter participation, so the GOP would fight tooth & nail against it. Which is fine with me, as it gives us a chance to break their teeth and nails. (Metaphorically, of course.)

[tularetom]

27. So, because you do it that means all Democrats think like you?

I wish they did. But i don't believe they do.

In general they won't support a crappy candidate against an even crappier one.

I think you'll see that when the VA vote is analyzed.

[Jester Messiah]

45. I made no such sweeping statement.

I was merely puncturing the earlier sweeping statement by offering a counter-example. I'm contrary that way. (Also demonstrated by the fact that I gleefully vote *against* candidates, as mentioned above.)

[Codeine]

72. I've spent my adult life voting AGAINST candidates. nt

[emsimon33]

10. Jon Stewart may have also been a factor in the young people's vote

His segment before the election on the governor's race, ended with the little kid being amazed that anyone would eat poop and the skit had identified McAuliffe as the poop candidate. If both candidates were unacceptable, some kids may have reasoned, then why bother to vote.

Like the mainstream media that Stewart so often holds up to ridicule, it was a false equivalency. McAuliffe has his problems, but he doesn't advocate jamming inanimate objects up my vagina or putting women who have just had a devastating miscarriage in jail.

[TheKentuckian]

21. The awfulness of the opponent does not turn poop into ice cream

and pretending it does is a dangerous gamble because it might just buy you worst than poop one of these days.

If the fuckwits had run just a slightly better candidate that at least had plausible deniability as something other than an out an out loon, they would have won even with a frighteningly similar agenda.

[busterbrown]

30. Yea, the conflating issues with Stewart keeps me away from watching him..

Seems he wants to show he’s fair and won’t hesitate into looking at dems.

But to compare McAuliffe with Coochinelli is bullshit..

[mimi85]

43. Same here!

Jon can be awesome but he really does have his dickish moments!

[progressoid]

13. Conservative vote was higher than last year but still lower than the previous gov race.

And the Liberal vote was higher than in2009.

[Kingofalldems]

14. Okay I give. McAuliffe should just concede right now.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

31. No. And you missed the boat. nt

[2naSalit]

15. And then there's that pesky fact about

38,000 voters being purged from registration rolls...

A U.S. District Court judge said Friday morning there wasn’t enough evidence of inequitable treatment to stop the Virginia Board of Elections from purging more than 38,000 names from its voting rolls.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/10/18/judge-rejects-democratic-challenge-to-virginia-voter-purge/

[bluestate10]

36. I am tired of excuses. People didn't show up. The Judge's decision didn't

impact. I find it interesting when I read some of the posts to this thread, the purists are talking third way Democrats, the DNC and what fucking ever to justify the fact that they blow hot are when true Democrats fucking show up at crunch time. If the rightwinger had won last night in the Virginia Governor's race, that would have sent explosive shock waves out that would have been devastating for Democrats, that would have been destructive. Even the thin victory gave teabaggers hope - that hope could have been crushed.

[Fumesucker]

47. Ahem... Democrats turned out in NJ

For Christie..

After their leaders endorsed him.

[KamaAina]

63. Bearing in mind that the repuke AG candidate ledas by 219 votes, pending a recount,

that mattered.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

16. In 94, I was one of millions who didn't vote and didn't file for an absentee ballot

as I was in Dallas for 5 weeks where G. W. Bush defeated Ann Richards, Cuomo (my governor at the time) lost his re-election bid and Clinton lost the House and the Senate. I only began paying close attn after that blowout. And got introduced to "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and Other Observations".

It's going to take a national referendum to get Dems to the polls in 2014. Something really dealing with inequality. I don't think the social issues matter in mid terms.

[scheming daemons]

60. Get Minimum Wage Increase referendums on as many state ballots as possible!

That will get the 99% out.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

62. I agree completely. How do we influence the DNC?

Can we start a campaign to garner help from Debbie Wasserman Shultz?

[SleeplessinSoCal]

68. Here comes the minimum wage hike referendum . . .

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama is throwing his support behind congressional Democrats' proposal to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 and peg it to inflation, more than a dollar higher than the $9 proposal he made in his State of the Union address in February.

A White House official confirmed to HuffPost Thursday that the administration backs the legislation introduced earlier this year by Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.). The Hill reported Thursday that Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said the White House was willing to get onboard with the measure.

"The President has long supported raising the minimum wage so hardworking Americans can have a decent wage for a day’s works to support their families and make ends meet, and he supports the Harkin/Miller bill that accomplishes this important goal," the White House official said in an email.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/07/obama-minimum-wage_n_4235965.html?ir=Business&ref=topbar

[scheming daemons]

70. i mean putting it on state ballots as a referendum

So people can vote directly for it

[SleeplessinSoCal]

81. So do I. This is how you get there. n/t

[cui bono]

17. I'm confused. I thought we swept Virginia?

[Iggo]

20. ...and we won.

[frylock]

22. isn't that the job of the DNC? getting out the vote?

perhaps Debbie Waterboy-Schlitz should be focusing on that rather than what it is that Rep. Grayson may have said that rankled her tender sensibilities.

[HereSince1628]

24. Based on my experience in WI,

the DNC gives a shit about state and local politics

The most important message this century was from Howard Dean: Dems MUST have a 50 state strategy.

The DC dems walked away from it.

[frylock]

29. word up

[zeemike]

44. Yep...they walked away from it.

There are timed that I think they like being always on the edge of losing, so that they can raise more money from making us afraid of the GOP winning.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

51. Rec

[leftstreet]

55. +1

[uponit7771]

73. +1

[struggle4progress]

23. Yup.

[aquart]

25. We blow it every fucking time we don't bother to vote.

I am sick of dumb Democrats.

[Cryptoad]

26. Then explain why

why the percentage of the total GOP vote was 13.3% lower that it was in 2009,,,,,,,?
Even is you give all the independent votes to the GOP , it is still doesnt add up!

[Cosmocat]

32. I lost a school board seat

and the turnout differential between Rs and Ds was the difference.

Bizarre ratio of close to 70 to 30 Rs to Ds.

[Snake Plissken]

33. This is nothing new, Democrats suck ass at getting their message out

The two most talked about issues in this country are Benghazi and a few bugs on a website.

Republicans set the agenda, set the narrative, and democrats let them, so what else do you expect to happen?

And then there's this

[bvar22]

57. You can thank the "3rd Way" "New Democrats" for the muddled message.

Back when Democrats had a Democratic Platform and STOOD UP for the Working Class, we didn't have this problem.

CENTRISM...because its so damned EASY!
You don't have to STAND for ANYTHING,
and get to insult those who do!




[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center] [center] [/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[AnotherMcIntosh]

65. Rec

[bluestate10]

34. The far Left purists will find holes in the information, at least in their minds.

African Americans are the most stout supporters of President Obama, they fucking get it. African Americans saw that Terry needed their votes and they fucking came up big at crunch time. The purist love to call themselves the heart of the Democratic party, they aren't until they prove it at crunch time, when races are razor thin. Imagine if those purists had voted, would the AG race be a tossup now with the republican having the advantage? People can write and talk all they want about how important they are, but if they don't prove like African Americans in Virginia did, then their words are empty.

[SidDithers]

35. Well said...

Sid

[1StrongBlackMan]

67. Slight correction …

African-Americans are the most stout supporters of DEMOCRATS, even the imperfect ones … they/we get it.

[treestar]

71. +1 the base is not anyone who would ever suggest not voting nt

[BlueStreak]

37. Well, Democrats have jobs they have to work

Seriously, the core of the GOP is retired people and subservient women who know their place. They will always have a turnout bias.

I certainly agree we have to keep working that. But I don't think we should automatically accept the conclusion that Democrats care less.

And let us understand that the demographics continue to lean our way. The only way the GOP wins nationally and in any of the purple states is with a combination of the turnout advantage and dirty election tricks.

Actually I think it is quite impressive and surprising that we got enough turnout in Virginia on an off-off year election. That gives me more hope that we will be able to inspire a better-than-historical-average turnout in 2012.

[DireStrike]

38. I think we need to yell at democratic constituencies more

Tell them they are stupid not to vote for whoever the fuck we decide to run. That will work, right? Definitely much better than running someone who actually stands for their interests.

[LittleBlue]

40. Run candidates that people want to vote for.

Trying to shame thousands of people won't work.

Let's try to get some real progressives to run that we can be proud of. Not Terry fucking McAuliffe.

[underpants]

41. That's why "Republicans hope for rain on election day"

It still holds true today

[stevenleser]

48. Lots of work to do here, it has almost always been this way in non-Presidential election years.

The first thing to do is to push the idea to make fellow Democrats understand that even the smallest local elected office matters a great deal. Because they do.

[hfojvt]

49. don't think that really uses the right stats

The poster at Kos is comparing percentages of voters between elections.

But that doesn't really show WHO is staying at home.

Okay, in 2012 under 29 year olds were 19% of the electorate and only 13% in 2013 and 65+ went from 14% to 18%.

But I am betting the facts show that a whole bunch of 65+ voters stayed home in 2013 as well.

There were 2.07 million votes in the Governor's race and 3.85 million in 2012. So only 54% of 2012 voters came out to vote, and turnout was not 100% in 2012 either.

Lots of GOP voters are also not showing up as part of that 46%+ who did not bother to vote.

[Coyotl]

50. What a great sign for 2014 and 2016. We don't even show up = we sweep to victory!

Just think about how the Teapublicans are sweating bullets over this simple equation.

Because, in 2014 and 2016 the Dem turnout will be much higher, but the Taepublicans will be the same.

[unblock]

52. the gop knows that voter suppression in its many forms is their one last hope.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

53. Is Terry McAuliffe a liberal or a progressive? Or is he another 3rd-Way politician?

[woo me with science]

64. +1 I believe the "lesser of two evils" game is wearing thin.

I think people are sick and tired of being told they must support candidates they can't trust to represent their interests, just because the other guy would likely be even worse.

[uponit7771]

74. That's life, no one is going to always get a clear choice and with people clear choice is the except

...exception

[woo me with science]

75. No, that's a cop out.

The fact is that Democratic Party candidates have not been representing the interests, values, goals, and policies they pretend to represent during elections. They pretend to do so, but we have a money in politics problem that ensures their actual loyalties lie increasingly with corporations and big money donors rather than the voters they claim to represent. The Third Way is not a grass roots phenomenon. It is a deliberate infiltration of the party, bankrolled by corporate interests.

Lesser of two evils is a strategy and a symptom of money corruption in our party. It is not a fluke or an inevitable mismatch between voter ideals and merely imperfect candidates.

[uponit7771]

76. No, it's reality... we can always run a better candidate after choose the best of the worst availabl

.. but not voting for the best of the worst is at best... non productive

[woo me with science]

77. That's not an argument.

Flat denial that we have a corporate money problem driving policy in politics, even within the Democratic Party is...to put it lightly...absurd.

You have no answer to the points I made here. What you are offering is the typical corporate line: be content with the lesser of two evils, pretend that we are not being moved steadily in a corporate direction, and don't call attention to the blatant corruption of the system that produces the scam.

[uponit7771]

78. No on denied corporate money, I'm denying that 1. Looking for perfect in humans IS practical its not

...2. life were a multitude of humans having to choose said non perfect yields a consistent result enough to complain that perfect 1 doesn't exist in a political party...

that to me is shouting in the dark with a fully charged cell phone and internet connection

What I would fight for is a means to get the near perfect into office, people don't want that though...

Right now we run with what we brung, the more practical solution is to fund people who'll pull the McAllifs to the left without destroying either candidacy.

[woo me with science]

79. I'm sorry, but that's just silly.

It's silly to pretend that corporate Democrats are moving us incrementally leftward AT ALL.

We are not moving leftward. We are moving rightward into corporate slavery. The gap between rich and poor is increasing, not decreasing. The rich are getting richer, and more and more of us are being driven into poverty. The middle class has been devastated. Public schools are being closed. Paved roads are becoming gravel roads. No, we are not moving leftward. All of the recovery, ALL OF IT, has gone to the wealthy few. It was not a recovery. It was a deliberate restructuring upward of the wealth in this country, and the pattern is only escalating. And it is escalating because of POLICY.

It is an outright lie that corporate Democrats are moving us leftward. Exactly the opposite is true. And the insulting cherry on top in the corporate talking points is this outrageous implication, which you just repeated here, that what people are demanding is somehow extreme...that we are demanding "the perfect."

That's ABSURD.

All we need are genuine, sincere Democrats in the old tradition, who will simply stand for traditional Democratic goals and values, so that we move leftward instead of continuing this march deeper into corporate slavery:

Defending Social Security and Medicare instead of using them as bargaining chips.

Pushing economic policy that actually works, rather than corporate scams like austerity that impoverish ordinary people, enrich the one percent, and starve and damage economies.

Standing with working citizens instead of predatory corporations and banks trying to deregulate themselves.

And fighting for simple Democratic principles, like that no one in this outrageously wealthy country should have to fear homelessness or destitution merely from being sick or elderly or wanting an education or having only one breadwinner in the house.

Non-corporate-driven Democrats don't negotiate and fast-track super-secret trade deals that will impoverish millions and elevate corporate power over national sovereignty. Non-corporate-driven Democrats don't vote bipartisanly to gut financial regulations on big banks that have already destroyed the middle class in this country. Non-corporate-driven Democrats don't give soaring speeches about the merits of austerity and recommend cuts in Social Security and Medicare when child poverty in this nation rivals that of ROMANIA and one out of five seniors is hungry.

We have a cancer in our politics. We have a deadly malignancy of corporate money driving and corrupting policy direction in both parties. The corporate Republican Party has long been corrupted in this way, and they have tried to loot the country for a long time. The only reason the looting is succeeding now is that corporatists have infiltrated the Democratic Party, too, and Democrats have abandoned their traditional role of standing BETWEEN the nation and these policies.

The demands of the 99 percent are not extreme, but neither corporate party seems interested in them...except during election seasons, when they invariably dust off the old talking points and pretend they do.



.

[uponit7771]

80. I never said they were, I'm claiming it's silly to NOT vote vs progress with what's available

... , work them if possible and if not get someone else.

The machine needs a new way to get something else, not hold back getting what's available in office

[Agnosticsherbet]

54. This pattern is common throughout history

Democratic Party members don't show up in off year or even midterm elections. Conservatives are more disciplined as a party and as voters. That African Americans showed up is a change, and I think it is part of feeling empowered since the election of President Obama. They have seen that their votes make a difference and know what it means if they don't vote. Other demographic groups, not so much, though I heard on MSNBC that unmarried women were also critical in Democratic election wins in Virginia, likely due to the Patriarchal attitudes of the Republicans.

[Puzzledtraveller]

58. People vote for faces

[scheming daemons]

59. Yep. We struggle to get ours out in off year elections

The GOP base is largely retired white people.

And they vote in every. single. election.

[Wounded Bear]

61. Common knowledge....High voter turnout favors Democrats.

If it weren't true, Repubs wouldn't be engaged in so much voter suppression.