Plouffe Sees ‘Screaming Siren’ Party Warning in Florida

[xchrom]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-14/plouffe-sees-screaming-siren-party-warning-in-florida.html

A former top political adviser to President Barack Obama called the Democratic loss in Florida’s special congressional race “a screaming siren,” warning that the party needs to do more to motivate supporters in November’s nationwide elections.

David Plouffe, a onetime White House senior adviser and strategist for both of Obama’s presidential campaigns, rejected the idea that the March 11 contest in Florida was a referendum on the president’s health-care law, instead arguing that the results expose an enthusiasm deficit among Democrats.

“We have a turnout issue,” Plouffe said in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” airing this weekend. “This is a screaming siren that the same problems that afflicted us” in 2010 when Democrats lost control of the House “could face us again.”

Republican candidate David Jolly defeated Democrat Alex Sink 48.4 percent to 46.6 percent in the election for a Tampa Bay-area congressional seat following a television advertising fight focused on Obamacare.

[bemildred]

1. The party hacks don't like too much turnout, it threatens their control of the party.

Grass roots bad, advertising good.

[JNelson6563]

7. Not in my part of the world, northern MI.

Any time I have been to an event (and that is very many times), no matter what level the event was (local, Cong. district or state) high turn-out has always been very exciting to the leadership in Michigan. I've played such roles at various levels and let me tell you, it's awesome when many participate. It can get a little messy at times but the energy is great!

Julie

[bemildred]

10. I'm talking about DC. State parties are where it's at, politically.

The complaint is that state parties are not supported. And without that, you cannot get real power in Congress.

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. Reality versus "Bad Democratic Party" delusion. eom

[Glitterati]

108. Some of us LIVE that reality

Here's MY real world, and I promise you, it's no delusion:

Qualifying for the May 20 primary ended Friday with no Democrats qualifying in Forsyth County. That means all the local races will be decided well ahead of the General Election in November. (emphasis mine)
http://www.forsythnews.com/section/1/article/22820/

[1StrongBlackMan]

109. How is that related to ...

Democratic Party big wigs not wanting big turn outs and/or grassroot enthusiasm?

[Glitterati]

111. Uhhh, that's pretty simple

who IS it that you would like Democratic voters to turn out and be enthused for?

When they aren't RUNNING!

You know, where I live the Mayor of the city has been in office for more than 40 years. He's so entrenched, as is the entire city council, they didn't even bother to have a city election this time around. There were no candidates for office except incumbent office holders.

Now, admittedly, the Mayor runs the city pretty well, and he's well liked by most city dwellers, including me, actually. However, the county voters hate his guts even though he's (formally) a Republican and the county votes 90% Republican. Of course, this community absolutely HATES the office holders they elected to office within 90 days of any election. I do, frankly, enjoy watching them spew their hatred and angst all over the internet while they get exactly what they voted for!

I do think, though, the city council and Mayor are actually Democrats running as Republicans. They do seem to enjoy screwing over the county commission and voters!

[Doctor_J]

16. True. They need to promise a public option and support for unions to get people to the polls

then when they're actually in control they deliver Heritage Care to Big Insurance. Then they get indignant when independents don't stick with them.

These politicos are not stupid people - they're crooks and hacks.

[bemildred]

17. +1. nt

[Doctor_J]

27. My frustration level is in the red. People like JNelson and DCBob

seem to be devoted partisans, as I am sure every DU regular is. But when the president PROMISES during the campaign that he will INSIST on a public option to keep the insurance companies honest, then when in office, with a Dem Senate and House, drops the PO with the words, you have neighbors and family members who work at insurance companies. they need those jobs.

Is is actually possible that the Fan Club doesn't see what a devastating blow this is to the party? To all of the newbies and indies who voted for him in 2008?

If they want to recover electorally, everyone from the president on down needs to run as fast and as far as possible from the Republicans on every issue.

[bemildred]

41. I have started using Full Ignore for the first time here.

Every time is see a complaint about sources or writers or slanging and waving of the red shirt, off they go. Sometimes you have to wait to be sure, mind you.

PS: see my new sig line.

[JNelson6563]

2. At this point, those who don't vote

because the Democrat isn't perfectly to their liking are worse than those who vote Rethug. People who are still Rehtugs in this day and age are demented and believe the agenda they support would be good for the country. Non-Rethugs know full-fucking-well what a nightmare it is/could be and the non-voters do nothing.

Way too many self-important assholes in this country.

In closing, take a look at Michigan's shiny new law if you're needing some clear evidence of voting: WTF?

Julie--who is living in a Rethug HELL thanks to many non-voters

[polichick]

4. Easier to blame the non-voters than a party that offers nothing to vote for.

[JNelson6563]

9. Are you involved in anyway in

seeing anything worth while *is* offered? any idea how hard it can be to recruit candidates? Raise money to help them? Get their name out there to LOTS of voters and all else that goes with it?

Probably not. There are too many people who sit back like they are at a restaurant skimming a menu of items that magically appeared. No, no, no, easily dismissing out of hand like there is an endless list of choices...

What I don't get is why all of these flawless politicos, who can obviously do far better than anyone who ever runs, much less gets elected, don't run themselves. Why is that? Seems such a waste of political brilliance and perfection...

Probably too modest.

Julie

[polichick]

12. Actually I've been an activist for the party since the 70s...

Worked more campaigns than I care to think about.

The party has sold its soul.

[JNelson6563]

15. You must live in an awful place.

[iemitsu]

64. Yeah, I live there too.

Its called the United States.

[polichick]

118. Howdy neighbor!

[iemitsu]

126. Hey, good to see you.

[RBInMaine]

85. Bull fucking shit. You are making sweeping accusations and being hyperbolic.

[polichick]

117. You can keep voting for Third Way hacks if you want...

I stand by my post: the party has sold it's soul.

[RBInMaine]

122. BULLSHIT. You are drowning in pipedream purity. Please find reality.

[polichick]

124. Reality: voter turnout will continue to be low because the party has sold its soul...

You can call fellow voters all the names you like and keep cursing like a kid having a tantrum, but that's reality. Better to face it asap.

[iemitsu]

127. You're assessment is 100% spot on as far as I'm concerned.

Abusing disaffected democratic voters is not the way to strengthen the party. Addressing the concerns of those disaffected would be far more useful for getting folk to the polls.

[RBInMaine]

84. That is a load of TeaLeft horseshit. Please, enough of that WHINING. It is Democrats fighting to

increase access to healthcare, a better minimum wage, for the rich to pay more, and for better income equity.

I am sick and tired of the LIE that Democrats aren't offering enough. Some want the entire world to change

overnight, and short of that. they whine and bitch and piss and moan and stay home.

The problem was a problem of ONE flawed campaign in ONE district. They didn't go after the voters they needed to turn out, such as young adults, minorities, etc. Had they done that, they would have won.

[polichick]

116. Good luck getting voters to the polls with that story.

[JHB]

18. True, but so what?

Scolding stay-at-homes may be satisfying, but unless you do something to get them into the voting booths you're just pissing in your beer. And keep in mind that it's more the "just not interested in politics" people who fail to show up in great numbers -- for primaries, special elections, and just about any election that doesn't have the inescapable visibility of a presidential election -- than the "not perfect enough" crowd.

So how do you get people into the booth? Regularly. Every time.

[myrna minx]

21. Yes. The 2010 mid-terms were lost due to "independents",

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023763623

but blaming it on "purity" liberals is a great DU urban legend that despite proof to the contrary spins on and on...

[treestar]

26. But then you'd have to disagree with the ones who keep repeating over and over

That they were disillusioned by a failure of progressiveness.

Can't have it both ways. Either take the blame or admit to being wrong about the reasons the people didn't come out to vote.

[myrna minx]

31. I posted facts. It's nonsense to claim I have to admit to something or take the blame

for something. The facts speak for themselves. People are free to say whatever they want, but it doesn't make it factually true.

[treestar]

35. Well if the facts are the independent voters didn't feel like voting

then all of the demands of the farther left "base" they are being "betrayed" and not getting enough of what they want aren't the cause. All of the mouthing about the "Third Way" is wrong, then.

The real reason is people are just lazy and think the President does everything. If nonvoters really were going to vote Democratic, then people need to make more of it as a civic duty and campaign on that to help get them to undergo the slight inconvenience of going to the polls. Quit claiming they are so stupid as to be staying home because the President hasn't managed to get real progressive legislation out of a Republican Congress so they are spiting themselves by leaving Congress Republicans.

[TheKentuckian]

114. Only if you start with the assumption that independents are corporate conservatives

or even out and out right wingers but not quite Teabaggers.

[myrna minx]

131. I don't accept your framing and what I find to be false choices.

Last edited Thu Mar 20, 2014, 11:17 PM - Edit history (1)

The liberal base can still work hard to door knock, drive the elderly to the polls, phone bank *and* feel betrayed by the third way rightward pull and direction of the national party. I don't accept that false choices you present in this argument.

Also - voters aren't "lazy" - that's a bit of a haughty view of our citizens. In addition, I've never claimed that the voters are stupid either - yet another false frame.

Do you do realize that voters in in Ohio and Florida have had to wait for *hours* to vote? In horrible weather conditions? There are punitive Koch brother funded voting laws erupting up all over the country to prevent the right to vote for many! It's not a slight inconvenience as you say, in fact people have missed whole work shifts while waiting to vote because of the oppressive poll lines. The revocation of early voting which aids non-traditional workers like servers, factory workers etc - not just 8-5 workers has depressed voter turnout too.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/11/04/1136701/why-the-lines-are-so-long-in-florida-and-ohio/

Voters need to feel the issues they are passionate about mean something to those they elect. Democrats win when they promote populist positions like raising the minimum wage and expanding Medicare to cover the aging Boomers. Voters don't go to the polls for shitty fast track trade deals and oil pipelines. If voters in voter caging areas are to stand in line for hours, we better make it worth their while. Calling them lazy (and falsely claiming I called them stupid) isn't the way to go to GOTV>

[1StrongBlackMan]

53. I wonder if ...

the ones who keep repeating over and over that they were disillusioned by a failure of progressiveness will ever imagine that their protestation just might have influenced those "just not interested in politics" folks and youth and independents that stayed home in 2010 (and might stay home in 2014)?

Imagine the difference if their message of protest was "The Democrats are moving us in the right direction, though not far enough for me. But we could get farther by electing more progressive candidates"; rather than, "Democrats are just republican lite so there is no need to vote."

[treestar]

94. + eleventy gazillion!

Imagine how far we could have come! Positivity really does work. There are many things Obama could sign with a 2014 elected Democratic Congress and the only way to get there is to be positive.

[1StrongBlackMan]

104. That clearly is not the intended effect ...

of many here.

[cheapdate]

129. You speak the truth.

Cynicism and disengagement empowers the status quo.

[1StrongBlackMan]

130. In the best case ...

Cynicism and disengagement empowers the status quo.

In the worst case, they actively aid the gop (and libertarians).

[RBInMaine]

86. Partly true, but still, TOO MANY Dems stayed home in TOO MANY places. And that can't happen.

[OKNancy]

25. "the perfect is the enemy of the good"

I really think some people here are so totally naive about politics. I'm glad DUers don't represent the majority of the Democratic party.

[1StrongBlackMan]

57. +1 eom.

[Marr]

68. That is a loser's mindset.

I'm sick of hearing how we need to eat garbage because it's all we're going to get. That is a message for weak sheep.

[OKNancy]

73. you don't live in a red state I bet

because as far as I'm concerned a blue dog would be a thousand times better than someone like Inhoff, Coburn and Bridenstein.

[JI7]

121. i think many think posting on DU and other places on the internet is activism

[pocoloco]

81. That is complete bullshit!!

Democrats leaders that don't fight tooth and nail for Democratic values cannot expect
votes! The voters can't be blamed!

Do the Dem leaders not believe the agenda they support would be good for the country?
IF they did, wouldn't they grow some balls and a backbone and fight for it just as hard and as fierce
as the repugs fight for their complete idiotic BS.

Way too many self-important assholes in this country blaming the Dem voters!

[Thinkingabout]

119. K & R JNelson

It is true, unless we at least vote against the candidates the GOP is throwing our way, their candidates will be elected and they will try to pass more laws we are going to be happy to live with. Another thought, it normally takes less time to vote than it takes to shop for groceries, purchase tags for our vehicles, renew our drivers licenses and more. Though these items are important so is voting.

[DCBob]

3. Totally agree with Plouffe..

November could be bad if Dems don't show up to vote.

[polichick]

5. Of course there's a turnout issue - what does this party stand for anymore?

[fredamae]

6. Well, then-"Third Way Dave"

Dems better get with the Dem Wing of the Party--cuz I ain't coming any further to the Right just so Wall Street Loving Corp Neo-Libs can win --- again.

[polichick]

8. Yep - they'd better have their "come to Jesus" moment fast...

because even those of us who have worked for the party for decades will be no-shows if they serve up another Third Way "Dem."

[Tom Ripley]

36. +1000

[treestar]

38. They are better than Wall Street and War Loving Republicans.

People just have to go to the polls, that's all. Get them to go. If it's not about issues, then it's about convincing people it is their civic duty and they shouldn't stay home just because they aren't terribly excited. And very few voters talk in terms of Wall Street Corporate Third Way, etc.

[Doctor_J]

42. Why, because they're Wall Street and War Loving Dems?

The droves who turned out in 2008 were planning on seeing CHANGE. They were either lied to, or the DC Dems were unable to deliver that change. That's why they didn't vote in 2010. If the party apparatchik wants turnout, they should either run away from 3rd-way republican light policies, and stick with it, or just admit they're nearly the same and hope for the best. Lying and obfuscating won't do the job.

[treestar]

92. then they were morons

there was CHANGE. Major change. And they should just vote. If they wanted CHANGE like a new system of government, they were being idiotic.

[1StrongBlackMan]

61. Would you repeat this ...

And very few voters talk in terms of Wall Street Corporate Third Way, etc.

Please!

[Doctor_J]

11. When the Republican is able to hang "they want to cut Social Security" over the Dem

we are indeed in deep shit. I would like to thank the Turd Way dems for completely destroying the party I have voted for since 1978.

[napkinz]

13. "This is a screaming siren ..."

[jsr]

14. Motivate supporters? Nah, just beat them into submission.

Beat them harder.

[blackspade]

19. It's because Sink was a terrible candidate

She is third way Democrat which means she is out of touch with the bulk of the Democratic constituency.
I mean, why would you run a campaign based on criticism of Obamacare?
Just fucking stupid.

[Oilwellian]

23. And, let's resurrect the Catfood Commission

That will bring Democrats and Independents out in droves! They really think we're that stupid.

[totodeinhere]

50. So because she was a terrible candidate we are going to stay away from the polls and

allow right wing idiots, who vote in greater numbers than we do, the chance to elect a right wing ideologue who is infinitely worse than Sink. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

[blackspade]

110. Maybe that means the we should start running good candidates?

Then folks wouldn't stay home?
Instead the hand picked candidate stinks and you think that folks should show up to vote anyway?
How does that make any sense?

[totodeinhere]

112. Yes, people should vote anyway. Always vote. It's your civic duty.

And as far as "good" candidates go, good is in the eye of the beholder and one person's "good" candidate may not be someone else's.

[blackspade]

113. So your saying that Democrats should get out and elect crappy...

Candidates just because?
How will that change how the party nominates candidates if we vote for whoever they pick for us?

[totodeinhere]

115. No, I didn't say that. By all means we should work for candidates of our choice.

But in addition to that it is our civic responsibility to vote. If neither major candidate turns out to be to our liking, then we face a difficult situation. But not voting is not the answer especially when we know that the other side will be running their own aggressive get out the vote campaign.

[1StrongBlackMan]

63. Agreed ...

I don't think there will be many Democrats adopting that strategy for 2014.

[Bluenorthwest]

20. Dave whines about 2010 but Oregon set turn out records in 2010

California went totally Blue, both States elected Democratic governors who were not incumbents but had been governor in previous years. CA, OR, WA, and other States faced influx of dirty out of State money on the GOP side, vastly wealthy opponents like Meg 'not the governor' Whitman and plenty of dirty tricks. But we won. Why? Or candidates and issues were not Third Way Republican simulacrums, our States make effort to expand voter access and ease of vote casting.
So entire regions seem to do ok with motivating people to vote. But Dave and his lot will not look to those places, they will look at Alex Sink and declare that she, as the loser, is the only person who could possibly win next time, Sink and other off putting moderate semi Dems who repel voters by being negative and conservative.

[BrotherIvan]

83. ^^This!^^

California turned so blue, the sky was jealous. If the party wants to run shitty candidates and supports those who can't even muster up a halfway-sounding Democratic message, then they are going to lose elections. This whinging that R-lite is how candidates must get money from the Chamber of Commerce in order to be competitive is utter bullshit. Berating voters in advance of an election for being lazy, good-for-nothings is the worst possible strategy.

Take Massachusetts. Martha Coakley, moderate, loses to pinup Brown who also claims to be "moderate" or (falsely) "nearly independent." There was no clear difference so then it came down to likability. Next time around, fire-breathing liberal Elizabeth Warren runs and hands Brown his ass. I assume she didn't get a lot of funding from Wall St or the COC, but she got amazing word of mouth and became a national figure.

Here are three simple steps:

1) Define your position
2) Make a stand
3) Fight

Bonus points for : Telling the truth, not making backroom deals, or screwing those who voted you in the back upon election.

[bahrbearian]

22. Calling Howard Dean

[Savannahmann]

24. The problem is giving the people something to vote for.

Giving the people something to vote against is using a cudgel. Vote for me or else this guy will win and that would be bad. You don't stand for anything under that scenario.

The Rethugs are smart enough to do both. First, they bother to read the polls. They understand that the biggest issue in the minds of people is employment and jobs. So they promise to defeat the "Job killing Obamacare" and the "Job Killing Defense Cuts" and on and on it goes. While at the same time the Democratic Party is selling the idea that the current employment where 55 million citizens are unemployed, and uncounted because they are not "actively seeking employment" and because of that apparently don't count.

Look at the Minimum Wage fight. The CBO comes out and says roughly half a million jobs will be lost. The Republicans promise to fight the job killing minimum wage hike. The Democrats say that they don't believe those numbers, and even if those jobs were lost the people would probably be better off unemployed.

We have started treating unemployment in far too cavalier manner. There was a time when Democrats could be counted on to talk about those who have slipped through the cracks, and what we needed to do to help them. There was a time when Democrats argued numbers demonstrating that a Democratic Administration was better than a Republican because of the unemployment numbers and the workforce numbers. Now, we shrug and look at the 55 million unemployed and say sucks to be you and we're not going to count you anymore because you're hurting our propaganda numbers.

We even present the most asinine of all arguments. We say that thanks to the healthcare law (ACA or Obamacare) people are no longer stuck in a bad job. That was phase two, I think it was phase two. We started out talking about "funemployment".

When people point out that trade bills like NAFTA have hurt the manufacturing industry we're told that manufacturing in the US just isn't possible anymore. That we are told that by Democrats is infuriating. We're told by Democrats on this board that America is devolving into a service industry economy and manufacturing just isn't possible because you can't manufacture in the US and be competitive.

I say baloney. I say that Toyota, Volkswagen, BMW, Honda, Kia, and many others manage to manufacture in the US and remain competitive. So what are they doing right versus what we are doing wrong? Why can't we learn from our competition instead of merely denigrating them?

So what do we need to do? First, look at the damned polls and see what the people care about. If we ignore those issues, we can't expect the people to vote for us while the Rethugs are paying at least lip service to the issues. Second, stop ignoring 1/6th of the population. If we can offer them nothing, they they and their families are not motivated to vote for us. Waving your hands shouting that things would be worse under the Rethugs while you are ignoring 55 million unemployed is a recipe for disaster. Those people will listen to you and then grumble about how they had a job under Bush. We have to propose plans, we have to at least recognize that those people exist, and tell them we care and are working on it.

Because elected office is a service industry. If you don't provide service to the customer, in this case the voter, they will take their business, or vote, somewhere else.

The biggest problem with the meme that the current economy is the "new normal" is this. It requires people to be satisfied with the idea of I got mine, fuck those of you who don't get it. I'm lucky enough, or smart enough, or whatever justification they use. That sense of I got mine greed is the defining characteristic of a voter, but not a Democratic Voter. We are making more Rethug voters all the time while we try and sell the idea that the economy is doing great, things couldn't be better. Yes, that makes us look good on the nightly news, but it creates an image in the minds of the people that drives them away from us.

Fuck you, I got mine. That can't be the new normal. Because if it is, we are doomed as a political party. It is time, well past time that we started to think strategically instead of tactically. The difference is simple. Tactical is how you get through the day, how you win this one little skirmish. Strategic is how you win the entire war. If we really want to destroy the Rethugs once and for all, we have to stop feeding the voters to them, losing the strategic war while winning the tactical victory.

[treestar]

28. Why do people need to be "given" something to vote for?

It's your civic duty, if you sit back on it, you'll be "given" even less, so what is the point? Quit expecting perfection and "inspiration" - voting is just something one should normally do.

[Savannahmann]

32. OK, but who do you vote for?

As we learned in the Florida Special election, the people did vote, and they voted FOR the Rethug. So congradulations to those voters for carrying out their civic duty right?

And when this November, a majority of voters vote FOR Rethugs and Democrats lose control of the Senate, what will we say then? Congradulations to the voters for carrying out their civic duty?

I'm saying that we should work hard to earn that vote. I'm saying that Democrats should stand for something and stop worrying about the daily news cycle more than the long term strategic battle we face. I'm saying that we should stop ignoring things that don't make us look wonderful, and start working on things that need to be fixed.

You are saying that we win if people just go out and vote. Well the people went out and voted, Republican. This November, there is a very good chance that they'll go out and vote Republican. I want them to vote Democratic, but at least they voted right?

[treestar]

34. The Democrats do stand for something

If it's not liberal enough for a voter, at least it's somewhat liberal.

And it may no longer be the case that everyone who doesn't vote would have voted for the Democrat, so there's that.

[Le Taz Hot]

40. And you wonder why people don't show up.

Last edited Sat Mar 15, 2014, 11:37 AM - Edit history (1)

Look at the contempt you carry for voters. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party establishment holds the same contempt. Then they wonder why people don't show up. It's a case of, "The beatings will continue until morale improves."

You guys want to blame everyone else; the voters, the MSM, the Republicans, anyone and everyone but the entity that is responsible: The Democratic Party itself.

[bemildred]

44. +1. nt

[obxhead]

45. Thank you.

I'm tired of being told to accept the most extreme right "Democrats" simply because, well they have a "D" next to their name.

Fuck that shit, it's done just as much to tank this country as Republicans have.

[totodeinhere]

59. Nobody is telling you to accept right wing Democrats. But voting is a civic duty. We

can all make our own decisions about how to handle a situation in which neither major party candidate is acceptable, but staying away from the polls is not an intelligent option.

[totodeinhere]

54. Any Democrat who doesn't show up to vote has nobody to blame but him or herself.

And if God forbid we lose the 2014 election I will be saying the same thing then.

[Le Taz Hot]

56. I can see that my point just

flew over your head. You're doing EXACTLY what I just described. It couldn't have been scripted better.

[iemitsu]

69. If we lose the upcoming election it will be largely the result

of gerrymandering and voter ID laws.
We worry about getting voters to the polls while our system focuses on how to avoid counting all the votes.
Not only does the Democratic Party need to offer the citizen something to vote for but they need to engage in efforts to publicize and confront the truly undemocratic policies and procedures that thwart any efforts to make positive change.
I too see voting as a civic duty but our system does not provide many avenues for one to voice his or her opinions when a candidate misrepresents him or herself, or says on thing then does the other.
Voting for the lesser of two evils is a very unsatisfactory rallying call, and it has been the only thing we have gotten from the democrats for way too long.

[totodeinhere]

98. Gerrymandering has been around for a long time and has been practiced by both parties. I

am not defending the practice but it is what it is and we have to deal with it. And after all, why were the Republicans able to do so much gerrymandering? It's because of Republican victories in the 2010 midterms which gave them control of so many state legislatures. So now we are stuck with those gerrymandered districts for ten years unless we can get the courts to intervene. That's one reason why midterm elections are so important and as long as a higher percentage of the right wing base votes in midterms we will be in trouble.

[treestar]

97. Amen.

For crying out loud. Republicans win because they treat it that way. They may even whine that the Republicans elected aren't conservative enough, but at least they don't stand in the way of progress towards their goals due to that. Talk about self defeating BS - DU has been full of this foot-shooting mentality for the past 5 years!

[justabob]

58. was just thinking that....

The beatings will continue until morale improves.... that is absolutely what I hear in all the posts bitching about shitty lazy voters not doing their civic duty.

[Le Taz Hot]

62. "improves!"

That's the word I couldn't remember. Changed my post.

Yeah, "Shut up and vote" has worked so well in the past.

[treestar]

96. Oh baloney. You have to beat the Republicans

If that isn't your first consideration, how do you expect to make any progress? You're the one beating the Democrats so morale doesn't improve. And what do you get in return? Republican victories.

[RBInMaine]

88. In 2010 there was a new health law, fair pay law, stimulus, auto bailout...and too many STILL stayed

home. WTF???? That was BULLSHIT.

I agree with you. We need exciting candidates that offer a reason to vote, but people ALSO need to get up off their lazy asses and get the hell to the polls. Sitting home and bitching is CHILDISH BULLSHIT.

[Savannahmann]

103. A couple problems with your statements.

First, more people voted in 2010 than voted in 2006. Nearly five million more people voted in 2010 than in 2006 when we took back the House and Senate. So merely getting off their asses doesn't seem to be helping because the Republican voters got off their asses even more. The point is that it is not just turnout. Getting bodies into the polling place is not the end all be all answer.

Now, we could have a long discussion about the mistakes made in 2010, but I think we now know that turnout alone is not what is harming Democrats at the voting booths. I think we can say that the message of the party is somewhat week.

Speaking of all those legislative accomplishments. We twisted the arms of the representatives in red states and conservative districts to support it, and they did finally, and many lost their seats in the bargain. We can cavalierly say that who cares if it is a moderate democrat or a rethug, they vote the same. It's been written on this very site more times than I can hope to count. I think we see now that committee chairmanships, and the speakers position matter far more than we thought.

We have to serve the people we are asking to vote for us. We have to show Democrats really care, and the way to get those who vote to cast their ballot for us we have to fight for them. The job of elected official is called public service. If the public doesn't think you are serving their needs and desires, you can't expect them to support you. This is where polling, district wide, state wide, and national is worth it's weight in gold. Polling indicates that the biggest issue is jobs/economy and we are doing nothing. Oh every once in a while President Obama will "Pivot to the economy" and deliver a speech. Yet he hasn't offered any grand plans or programs.

Before you object that the Rethugs would never let it go through Congress remember Ronald Reagan. Congress told him that the tax cuts he wanted was dead on arrival. Reagan didn't argue with Congress, he made a national address from the oval office and Congress was flooded with phone calls. The representatives realizing the people wanted those tax cuts voted for them, and then like true politicians denounced that which they had voted for.

President Obama has tried that a couple times, but it hasn't worked. Because he's tried them on subjects that people were not fired up about. President Obama has to present a plan, and then let the press have it, and then a few days later go to the public. Then the election this November is about our agenda, and what we are for instead of what we are against. Because to the average person who doesn't follow all the twists and turns of the issues the Democratic Party seems to be in favor of winning elections, and opposed to losing them.

[RBInMaine]

123. He has pushed higher minimum wage and signed executive orders for it. He is pushing the income

inequality issue. He and Dems are pushing hard for Medicaid Expansion and unemployment insurance.

I agree they need to get somewhat clearer, LOUDER, and UNITED around this key set of issues at EVERY level. Remember, Obama is pushing the STATES to push hard at the STATE level which is where the action really is in the midterms. Fine though to have more of a national lead on the issues. It's early yet.

[totodeinhere]

51. +1

[Le Taz Hot]

37. This is an excellent post.

Worthy of a separate OP.

[Savannahmann]

46. It has been, several times.

It's a song I've sung so often you would think it was in the Top 40.

[Garion_55]

29. Medical Pot is on the floridia ballot

dont worry the dems and leftists are going to show up.

you want the public to show up in off year elections? legal pot ballot initiatives. there ya go.

[NightWatcher]

30. a repuke won in a repuke district, shocking I tells ya

Sink was a horrible candidate as well.

Jolly will have to run again this November to hold on to the seat.

[Savannahmann]

33. President Obama won that district twice.

So the people in the district were willing to vote Democratic. By any definition it was a swing district.

[treestar]

39. Again, the presidency is not the only thing

It doesn't automatically follow that their off year election isn't its own election with its own issues.

Just because they wanted Obama to be President doesn't allow us to assume they want the Democratic Representative Candidate to win. The people who turned out to vote for Obama but don't bother to turn out for Sink are the types who are the problem. Maybe the BOG is correct then and trashing Obama does not help.

[former9thward]

78. It was not a R district.

37% R and 35% D is not a R district. Sink, "a horrible candidate" won the district 4 years ago when she ran for governor.

[L0oniX]

43. I held my nose and voted for Sink ...don't blame me.

[Doctor_J]

47. everyone here votes straight D every possible time

SO I am not really sure who the scolds are screaming at. I wonder if Plouffe was consulted before the president declared he would consider the chained CPI. If so, Plouffe can thank himself for some of the loss of turnout.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

49. "Not as bad" has lost its appeal.

[pragmatic_dem]

52. They can always sell naming rights to the Democratic Party, maybe to Facebook or Monsanto...

you know, its all in the marketing and branding.

[DirkGently]

55. Or maybe a corporatist fan of "entitlement reform"

...who already lost a governor's race to a Tea Party Medicare Fraudster should stop running (as a Democrat)?

[SoCalDem]

60. We have a voter education problem

Too many "casual voters" do not fully understand that it's the "off-cycle" elections that cause the most damage.

Just ask any of the people you know who are only moderately interested in politics a few questions:...(and of course, then enlighten them)


What difference does it make to them when local/state officials are elected to office?

Who in congress gets to decide who gets investigated to death?

Who in the senate gets to set the rules about which things even get brought up for a vote?

[steve2470]

65. Sink did not pay enough attention to the all-important senior vote

Especially in off-year elections, seniors are a hugely important voting bloc. My understanding is that Sink was not supportive enough of the ACA, Social Security and Medicare. Yes, there are other interests that a candidate must pay attention to, but in Florida the senior vote is really crucial. If she had firmly backed the ACA, Social Security in its present form and Medicare in its present form, I think she would have done better. She might have still lost (since it's been a Republican-held district for many years), but at least she would have done better.

[RBInMaine]

89. The bigger problem was not getting enough YOUNG people and MINORITIES out to vote.

THESE are the critical D voting blocks that sit out too much in off cycle elections. Young people, especially young single women, and minority voters, especially young minority voters.

Had these INFREQUENT voters been heavily targeted with issues of interest to them, they would have gone a LONG way to helping to make the difference.

Plouffe is right to learn something from this, but it isn't time to panic by any means. It was one election with one lame candidate in one special off cycle election in a red leaning district.

[steve2470]

91. yes we need to GOTV with those blocs also nt

[JoeyT]

66. Maybe the party should stop

having candidates drop out in the primary so they can run third-way losers that are stupid enough to talk about cutting Social Security in fucking FLORIDA of all places. Of course the candidate didn't have to drop out, they could've faced all the power the national party could bring to bear against her, been drug through the mud for weeks, and had party hacks screaming that we lost because liberals didn't STFU and do as they're told.

Edited to add: Of course they're going to scream that anyway. It's all they appear to be capable of. They scream about how awful the left is so much you'd be forgiven for thinking you were talking to Rush Limbaugh's parrot. But don't you imply they aren't progressives!

[socialist_n_TN]

67. One reason for the lack of turnout is that there is less and less......

of a difference between the "evil and the lesser of two evils". As long as the Democratic Corporatists toe the neo-liberal agenda, there IS no difference between the candidates, at least economically. And even on social issues, southern Dems aren't THAT different from the Republicans.

The inspirational power of "We're not as bad as the other guy" is getting less and less as the positions get closer.

[flamingdem]

70. Your attitude and analysis is part of the problem

There is a big difference between the parties, and as long as it's cool to be a faux socialist or libertarian we'll suffer losses to the repukes.

[Doctor_J]

71. In the FL debacle, the Republican was able to label the Dem as "social security cutter"

THAT's the problem.

[flamingdem]

72. But is that why they won? Or was it the turnout n/t

[Doctor_J]

76. The lack of turnout was because the person with a (D) next to her name on the ballot

is on the record as wanting to cut social security. Who the hell is going to show up to vote for someone like that???.

Seriously, the 3rd Way/DINOS/Fan Club is being deliberately obtuse on these matters.

[flamingdem]

77. The faux socialists and libertarian trenders are pretending that politics

is not an element in political campaigns.

[socialist_n_TN]

79. "Faux socialist" is an attempt at a PERSONAL insult......

Back off Jack.

[Cali_Democrat]

82. The verdict is in!

On Sat Mar 15, 2014, 09:50 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

The faux socialists and libertarian trenders are pretending that politics
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4668236

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Has directed this childish insult at socialist_n_TN several times in this thread, which is sadly typical of this poster's behavior.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Mar 15, 2014, 09:56 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Wish I could help. This is mild.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Read the TOS. Nothing against socialism but it's no excuse for flogging RW talking points. Leave it.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[flamingdem]

107. Thanks CD

For keeping us in the loop(y)

[pragmatic_dem]

74. What's the matter, Ralph Nader isn't around to blame this time? In the end it is Democratic Party

who is responsible for their own mistakes. If Democrats are not turning out or voting for Republicans, that is fault of Democratic Party, not voters.

Democratic Party has embraced a economically dependent model that relies on corporations to solve difficult social policy problems. At the same time they completely embraced the Bush Doctrine in matters of trade agreements, military policy and domestic surveillance.

These are the major issues of our time. Citizens can be forgiven for objecting to these wrong headed policies.

Democratic leadership cannot be forgiven for shoving them our throats and expecting us to cheer.

[RBInMaine]

90. Dems are ending the wars and cutting the Pentagon budget. The NSA stuff is being reformed right now.

There are MANY other issues too. You can't just focus on a few issues.

[pragmatic_dem]

102. You mean after after blowing another $500/600 billion (or more) in failed Afghanistan surge....

I guess Democratic leadership was for it before they were against it. The US death rate and spending rate during the Afghanistan "surge" exceeded the peaks during the Bush years.

The NSA "stuff" is not being reformed, in fact it was Pelosi who went around threatening junior members who want to end the spy programs, saying their committee memberships were at risk.

Background: On July 24, 2013, House of Reps Democratic “leader” Nancy Pelosi was THE key to pushing the excellent Amash-Conyers “Defund the NSA phone records collection” down to a narrow defeat. She also voted NO, one of only 2 congress members from the SF Bay Area delegation (Thompson was the other) to vote against this first “stop buying spying” legislation following Ed Snowden’s revelations. Pelosi is completely out of step with her SF constituents on this.

Justice Department is not prosecuting Wall Street criminals, another bubble is building. There has been no reform on this critical issue that continues to cause massive recession every 10 years or so, and contributes to growing income inequality.

Democrats have joined Republicans on legislation to double number of H1Bs in US as the real unemployment rate is near 14 to 15% and corporations making record profits.

We continue to ship about 800,000 to 1M jobs a year to Asia with no reform on tax breaks. Not even a concerted effort from bully pulpit to demand an end. Instead, Democratic Leadership wants us to embrace Trans-pacific Partnership, India/China is getting expensive so they want to move to Vietnam.

And as for health care, the middle class was left out. The poor now have support, if you are rich you always have had support. If you are in the middle and over income limits you will spend $16K or more per year for F4 on health plan. Before deductibles, and lifestyle penalties.

If you are speaking for Democratic Leadership and telling me that I need to be more conservative and accept Republican economic values as part of the "new" reality, we aren't going to have a very pleasant conversation.

[RBInMaine]

93. I agree the party and candidates need to excite their voters, BUT the voters also need to get up off

their lazy asses and VOTE and can't expect politics and politicians to be perfect for them, or they are going to sit home like tantrumming infants and WHINE and BITCH and PISS and MOAN. They have to be ADULTS and realize the world is NEVER perfect.

[pragmatic_dem]

120. The world isn't perfect, but it doesn't have to be this fucked up...

voters need to have the courage and vision to imagine something better than this shit and that Democratic Leadership is the problem here, not the people they are entrusted to represent.

It's like blaming the people who trust their money to a bank and then the bank uses it for mortgage fraud. The answer isn't to give the bank more of your money.

There is dissent. Either party has to change, or continue to gamble that they can continue to lock out a huge population of Democrats based on the assumption they have nowhere else to go.

From what I see, the Democratic party would rather lose than change.

[socialist_n_TN]

75. No YOUR analysis is part of the problem.....

And BTW, I'm no "faux socialist". I'm a dues paying member of a revolutionary socialist organization based on Marxist and Trotskyist principles and have been so for years.

Now as to your rebuttal, IF there was a "...big difference between the parties...", why do candidates like Sink, who ran on "bipartisanship" and a neo-liberal economic agenda lose? When does the responsibility fall to the PARTY for getting good candidates for office and not just Republican Lite candidates? The "Lite" part of triangulation worked for a while, but when it comes to the point where BOTH candidates support the failed policies of the past 30 years, the voters will go with the one who invokes passion.

Someone else said it best. It was something along the lines of "You know you're screwed when the REPUBLICAN candidate can attack the Democratic candidate for wanting to cut Social Security." THAT'S the point when the "lesser of two evils" becomes moot.

[RBInMaine]

95. I don't see many from your organization winning office. So you're just not going to vote? Hmmm...?

[QC]

99. Paul LePage is your governor, right?

[totodeinhere]

100. You can say that and your view is widely held at DU. And that's fine. The participants

in this forum are entitled to their opinions. But the average Democratic voter doesn't look at in terms of corporatists and neo-liberal agendas. That's why Hillary Clinton is such an overwhelming choice for the 2016 nomination according to recent polls.

So if Clinton is so popular how can Democrats be staying home from the polls because the party is too corporatist? Clinton is the ultimate corporatist and yet she is the overwhelming pick in recent polls.

[socialist_n_TN]

105. So I guess that ......

"Faux leftists, aka, Democratic Corporatists spouting the neo-liberal, right-wing agenda against the needs of the people" is OK to say now?

I don't really care because I don't alert, ALTHOUGH I did consider it with that particular poster. I'm glad somebody else alerted on it though because it was OBVIOUSLY a personal attack, as my political leanings are, not only well known, they're also in my user name.

[cap]

80. Jobs, jobs,and Good Jobs

Are the real issue.

ACA and raising the minimum wage are all great but people want to get out of McJobs and unemployment.

People have been patient way too long. Even a bump at Mcdonalds isn't going to turn the tide. They want to punish someone and that someone is going to be incumbent Democrats.

You can't scare a lot of folks into going to vote in an off year election. I was a canvasser in 2010 doing GOTV in hard core Democratic districts. Pointed out the dangers of a republican controlled state. People promised to come vote or drop off their stamped absentee ballot but they did not do it. We were vote counting so we knew what was happening especially with the absentee ballots. We were calling our people ad nauseum. Too many no shows and we conceded relatively early on.

Our people want good jobs. Period. Everything else is icing on the cake. Don't get me wrong.
I think ACA is necessary to help get the economy going and I'm all for the minimum wage increase.
But the gridlock is holding the economy down and in the swing districts people (for right or wrong reasons) are blaming the democrats.

[MindMover]

101. We should care what these supposedly Democratic candidates are running on ...

austerity, cutting SS, and fixing Obamacare are not talking points for Democratic candidates.

[warrprayer]

106. Screaming Sirens

Thank you David Plouffe!

[kentuck]

125. Sometimes when you are sick, you need more than an aspirin.

Our nation was sick in 2009. President Obama and the Democrats offered it an aspirin. Now, the illness is still there and the only doctor in the house is a Republican.

[blm]

128. Cancel Keystone deal made by youknowwho in 2010. Stop the dogandponyshow.

It's not flattering to anybody.