Why Democrats lost

[ProSense]

They ran away from the President and Democratic values. Being afraid to defend Obamacare and taking pot shots at Obama was not a winning formula.

Take a look, and especially look at Kentucky. The Clinton/Grimes machine couldn't pull it out.

SENATE

Arkansas -- Democratic Sen. Mary Pryor looks to be heading to a double-digit loss to Rep. Tom Cotton.

Colorado -- Democratic Sen. Mark Udall was supposed to have a winning strategy to emulate, working off the playbook that propelled to Sen. Michael Bennet to an unexpected 2010 win and Democrats were exporting to other states. But Republican Cory Gardner beat Udall handily.

Georgia -- One possible bright spot for Democrats was Michelle Nunn beating David Perdue to steal a Republican seat. But rather than even force a runoff in January by keeping Perdue under 50 percent, Nunn lost fairly easily.

Kentucky -- No bigger prize than toppling Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell. Democrats also had a top recruit in Alison Lundergan Grimes and spent a lot of money to beat McConnell. But he triumphed handily.

Iowa -- Like Colorado, a lightly blue state with a purportedly strong Democratic ground game -- and Republican Joni Ernst cruised to a win over Bruce Braley.

North Carolina -- Of all the toss-up races, Democrats seemed to be feeling the best about North Carolina and Democratic Sen. Kay Hagan. But Republican Thom Tillis won out in a state that went for Obama in 2008.

Virginia -- Nobody saw a close race here. Republican candidate Ed Gillespie pulled spending for his own campaign briefly in the final weeks of the campaign. But Democratic Sen. Mark Warner barely managed to eke out a win in a race that had observers in disbelief for most of the night.

GOVERNORS

Florida -- Polling showed the race neck-and-neck, and Democrats were gleeful at the prospect of knocking off Rick Scott. In the end, he edged out a win over Democratic candidate and former Republican governor Charlie Crist.

Illinois -- Few more reliably Democratic states than Illinois. But unpopular Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn fell to Republican Bruce Rauner.

Kansas -- Ultra-conservative Gov. Sam Brownback was a favorite target for Democrats and they had a good candidate in state Sen. Paul Davis, who was polling well. But in the end, Kansas's red tint won out.

Maryland -- Like Illinois, a Democratic stalwart flips to Republican, with Democrat Anthony Brown losing to Republican Larry Hogan.

Massachusetts -- The Illinois and Maryland recipe here, too. Democratic Martha Coakley loses a statewide race -- again -- this time to Republican Charlie Baker.

Wisconsin -- Even more than Brownback or Scott, Republican Gov. Scott Walker -- a presumed 2016 presidential aspirant -- would have been a prize for Democrats. Mary Burke, at times, looked primed to give him a run for his money. But on Election Night, the outcome was never in doubt: Walker wins.

Vermont -- This race had attracted attention only for the beards of some of its more obscure candidates. But Democratic Gov. Peter Shumlin, chair of the Democratic Governors Association, couldn't earn enough votes to win the seat outright. Instead, the decision will go to the state legislature.


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/how-bad-was-it-for-democrats

Enjoy the next four years.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. I agree with half of that.

They did lose because they ran away from Democratic values.

[rhett o rick]

73. I agree. They ran the wrong way. Yesterday was a big victory for the Conservatives.

Now the Ruling Oligarchs' Free Trade Agreements should sail thru the Senate. The Conservatives' dreams have come thru.

[hifiguy]

135. A big, long chunk of the road to feudalism got paved last night.

And the POTUS will "cooperate" to not appear being "divisive."

"I'm not dead yet...."
"Shut up, you will be soon enough!"

[rhett o rick]

138. Speaking of feudalism have you seen this:

http://thefifteensteps.com/

Mark Rahner had the author, Dennis Marker, on his radio show: https://www.facebook.com/markrahnershow

[hifiguy]

139. Thank you for that link, sir!

[radhika]

83. Obama has also run away from (populist) Democratic values...

One sad capitulation step at a time. Starting with killing the Public Option in a deal with Pharma.

He has been losing small-d Progressive since shortly after inauguraion. Add to that his surveillance/drone/secrecy aspects to his ongoing corporatist approach and tepid stands on immigration...ta da!

IMHO, the national Dems lost fair-and-square, on their OWN demerits.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

106. No! He was given a house and senate full of Blue Dog Democrats and Republicans

He has to govern and work within the confines of what he's been handed. The Democratic Party is ideologically diverse! There were members who were never going to allow a public option or universal health care.

Many of us spent weeks calling blue dog senators--Kay Hagan, Mark Pryor--begging them to support a public option. No blue dog would. That's a fact.

Blaming Obama is still allowing Republicans off the hook. It allows these Blue Dog Democrats off the hook.

There's one thing that I do blame Obama for: taking immigration off the table. He may have turned away Hispanics from the polls when he decided to do this.

That's really the only thing that I blame him DIRECTLY for!

[rhett o rick]

140. The Blue Dogs didnt force him to support the Trans Pacific Partnership. They didn't force him

to appoint Arnie Duncan or Gen Clapper, Gen Alexander, Brennan, etc.

[RKP5637]

2. Exactly! And as I said a number of times earlier, their strategies made the democratic party look

weak, ineffective and incapable of choosing a president. What a horrible message to send, vote for me, because I'm running away from the president I elected and everything the democratic party has tried to accomplish. In my book, there were fake democrats.

[LeftInTX]

131. They failed to connect the dots that many white Americans voted for Obama twice

Even though his approval ratings are low, they were also fairly low before the 2012 election. I think they might have read too much into his approval ratings. I think this was a huge mistake.

The message just wasn't positive. Many ended up as "status quo" candidates.

[RKP5637]

133. It really po'ed me. I voted for Obama, twice. NO president is perfect and NO president has

total control of the country. Some things he does because otherwise nothing would be accomplished.

[ucrdem]

3. That was probably part of it.

But these numbers seem really out of whack in comparison to the last polls. Exit polls I haven't found but there were several stories last night observing higher-than-expected turnout. Early voting was healthy too. So I have to wonder.

Great to see you here ProSense!

[pipoman]

8. Dems need to quit paying attention to the polls

They're bullshit and have affected voter turnout. ..exit polling is the worst and it almost always wrong...

[ucrdem]

13. Turnout was good. Lots of this

from all over the country:

Bad News For McConnell: Heavy Turnout Reported In Kentucky Urban Areas Likely For Grimes

By: Sarah Jones
Tuesday, November, 4th, 2014

Democrats seem intent on not repeating the stay home fail of 2010.

Kentucky politics expert Joe Sonka of Insider Louisville reported hearing that turnout has already hit 20% in some Louisville precincts.

Louisville and Lexington are likely Democratic areas where Democratic Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes will need huge turnout in order to have a chance at ousting incumbent Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/11/04/turnout-hit-20-democratic-kentucky-area.html

So what happened?

[n2doc]

27. The t-baggers came out to vote. Democrats stayed home. n/t

[ucrdem]

31. GOP kept T-bag candidates out of the races

or so we're told. It's part of today's miraculous-victory-from-behind meme. There's always an explanation, but never a plausible one.

[n2doc]

34. Like Ernst and Gardner and Tillis?

Ya Sure, Ya Betcha.

The best response came from Charles P Pierce last night:

Last, and I hate to break this to Tom Brokaw, and to Kasie Hunt, who talked about how the Republicans know they have to "govern," but this election couldn't have been less of a repudiation of the Tea Party. As the cable shows signed off last night, it was dawning even on the most conventional pundits that the Republicans had not elected an escadrille of Republican archangels to descend upon Capitol Hill. It was more like a murder of angry crows. Joni Ernst is not a moderate. David Perdue is not a moderate. Thom Tillis is not a moderate. Cory Gardner -- who spiced up his victory by calling himself "the tip of the spear" -- is not a moderate. Tom Cotton is not a moderate. And these were the people who flipped the Senate to the Republicans. In the reliably Republican states, Ben Sasse in Nebraska is not a moderate. Several of these people -- most notably, Sasse and Ernst -- won Republican primaries specifically as Tea Partiers, defeating establishment candidates. The Republicans did not defeat the Tea Party. The Tea Party's ideas animated what happened on Tuesday night. What the Republicans managed to do was to teach the Tea Party to wear shoes, mind its language, and use the proper knife while amputating the social safety net. They did nothing except send the Tea Party to finishing school.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/Election_Night_2014

[ucrdem]

41. Exit polling:

2014 is nearly identical to 2012, much better than 2010. But that's not what the results show.

[n2doc]

44. I personally don't believe exit polls anymore.

Not after 2004. Maybe there is another reason for the difference. Maybe the 'independents' all voted t-bagger. Lots of reports of people turning out, but those same reports had those turning out as older white voters.

[emulatorloo]

55. Yes, Ted Cruz has lots of new allies now.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

112. And the problem with Brokaw's analysis is that the Republicans DO NOT have to govern.

Americans make it quite abundantly clear that only the Democrats are expected to govern, and when they do, Americans hold them and only them accountable, while Republicans get to sit back and pop open bottles of champagne.

This is why I get so frustrated with Democrats blaming Obama. He is FORCED to govern with the colleagues he has.

FDR, LBJ--they had more liberal Democrats and some Republicans willing to work with them.

Reagan in 1986--Democrats were willing to work hand in hand with him, even though they took the Senate by overwhelming margins.

Clinton? Even when the Republicans took the House in 1994 and voted against his stimulus, increased their numbers in 1996 and then lost ground in the Senate, they too, realized the err of their ways and worked with Clinton.

Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.? No chance. On the most significant issues, Republicans have outright refused to work with this president; they have blocked him, mocked him, then blamed him after sabotaging his agenda. And the Blue Dog Democrats that sided with those Republicans? Many of them lost in 2010, 2012, and we probably finished them off last night in 2014, which may be the only piece of good news.

Bottom line:

Democrats, stop comparing Obama to FDR, JFK, LBJ, and Clinton--those presidents enjoyed winning coalitions where there were many more liberal Democrats, liberal and moderate or pragmatic Republicans willing to work with Democrats. Obama has enjoyed NONE of that! I've explained this over and over again. No other president has been mistreated in this way. No other one.

[1StrongBlackMan]

119. Tea partiers and Republican Establishment critics adopted a ...

"Do No Harm" stance; whereas, Democratic critics did what we do.

[Gothmog]

141. Turnout was down for Democrats in Texas

Voter turnout in Texas was 38% in 2010 and was down to 33% in 2014 with the decline coming solely from Democratic voters. The voter id law worked well for the GOP

[ucrdem]

149. Voter obstruction and voter turnout aren't the same thing.

Unfortunately, they're usually reported as though they were, once election night is over, and voting rates are adjusted to match officially reported outcomes. But nationally the numbers of early and election-day voters reported yesterday were high. If many of those votes weren't counted, that's a different matter, even if the media is now reporting the low turnout they spent months predicting.

Sorry if that came out sounding complicated . . .

[HereSince1628]

4. In WI Mary Burke DID NOT run away from Obama or the Clintons.

Your explanation doesn't fit WI.

And Wisconsin just endorsed what may be the strongest Koch/tea-party candidate for the presidency.

[ProSense]

9. Two things

that cannot be overlooked: 1) bad candidates and 2) the overall environment created by timidity.

[HereSince1628]

19. One thing that can't be overlooked in politics it's always blame the other guys

The sentiment is in WI just like everywhere else.

What's different is that the R/teahadists channel it. The simple meme is that the problem is 'I'm overtaxed and you give my money to lazy people'. The only open seat in WI went solidly for a campaign based on that meme.

Here, the dems are still trying to sidle up to their natural enemy people who want to promote "me" over "us". Pretty obviously the oligarchs and their corporations, but also the racists who blame lazy minorities.

And Mary Burke was seen as a 3rd way corporatist type who wouldn't be attacking oligarchic over-reach or corporate manipulation of government. She never really overcame being seen as another someone who wasn't "as bad as". One of her last acts as school board member prior to the election was voting to support a raise in teacher pay, but against the budget that would raise taxes to make that raise possible. She represented a party distinction without a difference.

The "not as bad as" approach had failed here at least twice in 4 years and now a 6th time. And it is damn well plain that twice WI dems REALLY knew how bad Walker is.

In politics, winning campaigns paint the opponent as someone unworthy of voter support, a person linked to ideas deserving the blame, you can coopt an idea or two, but you really can't mount campaign after campaign where candidates try to emulate the thing that they should be blaming.

[nil desperandum]

85. Carville

I thought much of what happened had more to do with people voting as Carville noted in '92 with their pocketbooks (it's the economy stupid--as he said then).

It seemed to me that the defections were mostly independents and middle Democrats who were small property or small business owners who felt the current expansion is a benefit to the top tier only. It's the same group that bailed out on Bush Sr in 1992 for Clinton and stayed with Clinton in 1996 because the economy was running extremely well.

Idealism is great for internet boards, but the average individuals vote their own current perception of their economic prospects first and ideals second.

I don't see any republican mandate here, just a refutation of current events. I suspect the republicans see a different reality and that will cause them some issue in 2016 as the electorate will swing right back if nothing changes. I don't see republicans actually governing over the next two years, just more ineffective and useless legislation.

YMMV of course, and it probably should.

[Cary]

5. The radical left is self destructive

The radical right is too, but curiously the radical right is more functional. But I don't give the radical much credit for scuttling us. The radical left was actually quiet.

Say we lost because we didn't vote. We knew this would happen. We, all lefties, didn't turn out and we thus further enabled "conservative" fascism. They will move, as fascists do, to consolidate their gains while we dither.

"Conservatives" are insane, but methodical and incremental. By contrast we are rational and sane but a mess.

[bklyncowgirl]

7. "I belong to no organized political party, I'm a Democrat." Still true after all these years.

[Cary]

14. You have to understand that "conservatives" are fascists

And all fascists, regardless of the flavor, unite under a hatred of some loosely defined, largely mythological enemy. And too fascists are the purveyor of "the big lie."

It is a much easier row for "conservatives" to hoe as they are wholly unconstrained by most realities.

[bklyncowgirl]

20. And they generally like to follow orders.

Conservatives have tunnel vision. They are perfectly comfortable limiting their information input to "trusted" sources and obeying the orders of those above them. I do have to admire their ability to pick a strategy and stick to it; gain control of state houses, gerrymander districts, apply a shock collar to any candidate who doesn't stick to the message (at least this year).

Trying to get liberals to do anything in a coordinated manner is like herding cats. Yes, when disaster strikes we can pull together like we did in 2006 and 2008 but there's always those distracting shiny objects waiting to tempt us.

[OrwellwasRight]

64. What radical left?

Who in any race was talking about 90% tax brackets? About universal, publicly-supported, free healthcare and childcare and college? About reining in corporate political spending? About eliminating tax breaks and tax loopholes for corporations and the upper class? About reforming our war-first foreign policy? About actually closing the School of the Americas and Guantanamo Bay? About repealing the USA PATRIOT Act? About withdrawing from the WTO? About creating a job for every worker who wants one? About making a real investment in our infrastructure for the future--meaning 100s of billions? About fixing our broken bankruptcy, patent, copyright, and anti-trust laws that all favor huge corporations over average people?

Oh that's right, NO ONE. There was no 'radical left' in this election. That was the problem.

But bring on the blame. Let's instead get down the business of creating more tax breaks for carried interest and similar third way bullshit. That'll garner votes. Not.

[madmom]

68. this ^ ...

the milquetoast dem party lost, the rabid repugs didn't win!

[Cary]

88. Yeppers...

I love it when a largely undesirable segment calls me names and refuses to see what we all have in common for the purpose of, uh, ...

What exactly is your purpose for calling Democrats names?

[Cary]

87. Which part of my comment didn't you understand?

Try to focus on this part: "But I don't give the radical much credit for scuttling us. The radical left was actually quiet."

I don't blame the radical left. No. It's far worse than that, and that's the radical left's real problem. People, in general, don't respect the radical left. The radical left is and pretty much always has been the least desirable component of the political spectrum.

I don't respect the radical left because I find the radical left to be obnoxious and irresponsible. That in and of itself is of little consequence, except insofar as my opinion is fairly representative. It would behoove the radical left to get a grip on why people who share my perspective perceive them in that way. Understanding such things is part of being an adult.

Notice the word "understanding." That is not the same as the word "agree."

[leftstreet]

96. How can people 'disrespect the radical left' when there isn't one?

How can a nonexistent component of the US political spectrum cause such havoc?

[Cary]

102. Radical leftists play into the "conservative" strategy of spreading discord and discontent

You can see it right here at DU.

Or not. It's hard to see things when one is in denial.

[Tsiyu]

114. Let's have a witch hunt

What should we do with these malevolent radical leftists?

Damn them with their concern for the environment, womens' rights, increase in the social safety net, investment in affordable housing! Damn them for hating the for profit pirson state, for speaking out on behalf of the least of these.

GAG ME!

Should we crucify them? Troll them? They need to get off a site called UNDERGROUND and crawl back into the REAL underground! We don't need their scruffy kind!

OUT DAMN SPOT!


YOU are frickin' hilarious.


Carry on, Guvnah....

[Cary]

122. Did I suggest any such thing?

No. Of course I didn't.

See how radical leftism is? Are radical lefties capable of introspection? Are radical leftists capable of understanding that there are shared views, and there are differences, and that the way to form a functional coalition is to coalesce under those shared views? Is the sarcasm and hyperbole necessary? Really?

I don't want a witch hunt. I don't want an I told you so. All I want is to defeat "conservatives" and to enact what actually is our mutual agenda and look at how you respond. And you wonder why I regard the radical left as being obnoxious and irresponsible?

This isn't a joke. This isn't funny. The oligarchs are at war with us and they've managed to complete the largest transfer of wealth in history from the American middle class to the top 1 %, and mostly to the top .1%. Do you like concentration of wealth? If so put a whole lot of energy into attacking people like me, because unlike radical leftists I am functional and I do make a real difference.

Stop attacking people like me and start working with us. Your future depends on it.

[deurbano]

130. Back at you: "Stop attacking people like me and start working with us. Your future depends on it."

[Tsiyu]

142. Thank you

40 million people who do not vote would vote Democratic if they could be reached.

The Centrist, moderate way is NOT reaching them.

The definition of craycray is to keep doing the the same thing and expect a different result.

[OrwellwasRight]

121. I don't understnad OR agree with the statement that we are "self-destructive."

We aren't self-destructing -- we barely exist. Even if we were loud instead of "quiet," we would not have "scuttled" anything.

We are NOT the left's equivalent of "fascists." I hate the comparison that what passes for the "far left" in US politics bears any resemblance to the fascist far right. It does not and never has.

There is a HUGE difference between the right and the left.

False equivalencies of a "far left" that has been largely silenced, but is and has always been based on social justice and equality, and a far right that is racist, classist, sexist and empowered is a ridiculous third way meme that should not be repeated.

That was my point.

[Cary]

123. The far left bears little relationship to the far right

Simply join with the mainstream and stop making the perfect the enemy of the good. That's all. Vote Democratic. Talk up Democrats. Cease and desist from the debilitating rhetoric about how there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans.

There is a massive difference between Democrats and Republicans.

And if you can push far left policies through the Democratic Party, I'm all for it. But we have to defeat Republicans. If we fail at that our odds of survival as a species are nil.

[PassingFair]

127. Can you PLEASE describe a "far left policy" for me?

So I can understand you?

[OrwellwasRight]

134. Simply join with the mainstream?

Um, the beauty of a democracy is that no one "has" to join the mainstream.

I'm so sick and tired of the tired meme of "making the perfect the enemy of the good." Can you give me an example of where I've made the perfect the enemy of the good or are you reverting to anti-progressive, pro-Third Way talking points?

I've frankly only ever seen that phrase used to defend shit policies masquerading as good policies. No one ever has to use it to defend policies that are actually good as those policies speak for themselves.

Give me a good policy and I'll defend it.

And we will never defeat Republicans by trying to more like them. It hasn't worked since 1994, and it won't start working now. We will defeat Republicans by standing for something. Like economic justice, a fair economy, a just judicial system, and good education for all. When we start watering it down by offering people a hope of a chance of an opportunity for fairness, they know that is some bullshit and they walk away.

[Alittleliberal]

129. Ya let's keep hippie punching!

The "radical left" have always been a punching bag, yet we have gotten steady more progressive as a country over the years. We are obnoxious and irresponsible? That's because everyone else has been fucking the world up for the past 50 years.

[leftstreet]

89. +1

[m-lekktor]

74. The "radical left" has no political representation.

the radical right does.

[Cary]

90. Agreed

No why doesn't the radical left have representation? And what exactly do you make of a segment of the political spectrum that is always isolated and ignored?

[madmom]

110. What I make of it is the ptb is afraid to make a few waves. Do you think

people would vote against

.."90% tax brackets? About universal, publicly-supported, free healthcare and childcare and college? About reining in corporate political spending? About eliminating tax breaks and tax loopholes for corporations and the upper class? About reforming our war-first foreign policy? About actually closing the School of the Americas and Guantanamo Bay? About repealing the USA PATRIOT Act? About withdrawing from the WTO? About creating a job for every worker who wants one? About making a real investment in our infrastructure for the future--meaning 100s of billions? About fixing our broken bankruptcy, patent, copyright, and anti-trust laws that all favor huge corporations over average people? "

if they thought it had a chance of happening? As long as the current "leaders" are afraid to even talk about any of this stuff the "radical left" will never be a part of the program.

[adirondacker]

116. +1000!

The irony of this person calling these positions "radical" and "irresponsible" is mind numbing.

[ChiciB1]

93. I'm A Leftie... Got ALL The Lefties I Know Here I FL

to vote, so I can't buy that entirely! I even got young Repikes to vote Against Scott! I have suspicions here in FL, but Scott had money stacked up and went through ALL OF IT! Then dipped into his coffers for $20 MILLION more!

Broward County had a dust up from the get-go with machines, but will have to say I heard from MORE DEMOCRATS who said they wouldn't vote for an turn coat like Crist!

Who by-the-way DIDN't run away from Obama. He may not have propped him up, but he DIDN'T FART AROUND with some convoluted answer!

SO, ONCE AGAIN, WE EAT SHIT here in FL! I targeted Repukes to get them to vote... but HEY even here on DU saw Democrats putting Crist down when many of us may not have felt he was a prize, DID vote for him!

Democrats on Congress AND EVERYWHERE better Wake-UP! And, if there was ever a candidate more tied to Wall Street may I ask about Hillary??

I will vote if she's the pick, but sure don't want to do it!

[Spitfire of ATJ]

94. Actually, the term the DLC coined was "The Loony Left"....

Then they ran the likes of Harold Ford,...who became a favorite on "Meet The Press" as a "sensible choice" that NOBODY WANTS.

http://www3.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Meet+The+Press+KxMLJAWS7Tol.jpg

[FSogol]

6. Welcome back ProSense. n/t

[joshcryer]

10. Welcome back.

[Puglover]

11. I pretty much agree.

However I think no matter the accomplishments of President Obama and the Democrats right wingers are knuckledragging racists full of hate and short on IQ.

The Dems could have delivered the world wrapped in caramel IE Kentucky and the morons will vote Repuke. Every. Time.

[boston bean]

12. I read right here on DU that is was because of single female voters.

Single female voters demanded too much of the Dems time and attention and Dems only catered to them and work for their vote. To hell with all the single, married, etc male voters (Dems don't care about the men)..... That is what I read right here on DU.

Me, I think it's a bunch of MRA bullshit, but others seem to think it has some merit.

[Cary]

15. Come on

We cannot scapegoat single females. That's ridiculous and just mean spirited.

[boston bean]

17. Well, I feel like you, but others here apparently do not.

This place is like MRA central sometimes.

[Bluenorthwest]

37. So far on DU I've been told it was single women, LGBT people, liberals and the youth voters

that defeated Democrats in the States where they lost. Those people of course refuse to address the places where Democrats won.
Oregon passed an ERA for our State Constitution. Also reelected Democratic Senator, Governor and the 4 out of 5 Democratic House Seats. Also, we legalized cannabis for recreational use. Oddly, no one credits the women, gay people and liberals for that, nor do the youth get any props....

[JustAnotherGen]

62. I saw that post

So all I could think was - great - take away women's right to vote . . .

So many MRAs in America - so many ass wipes! I always envision them looking like Jonah Hill - that makes it better.

[TacoD]

117. I read Netflix and video games are to blame. (nt)

[demwing]

16. "Enjoy the next four years"? I cleared my Ignore list for this day

But I always had faith in your ability to be among the first to fight your way back into the box. Thanks for not disappointing!

[corkhead]

18. LOL

[demwing]

22. Actually, ever letting the OP off of that list was a big deal

lasted about a day

[Cha]

26. Sorry.. I should have just kept out of it. It just made me mad.. but, then you were obviously

mad too. Turning on each other! I think I'm to delete.

[demwing]

124. Cha, much respect. Sorry for aggravating you on this day. /nt

[Cha]

125. Backatcha, demwing..

and, no worries!

[KittyWampus]

70. Well, any DU'er posting an immature comment about their ignore list is pathetic.

It used to not be tolerated.

Says more about the person making the comment about their ignore list than anything else.

[demwing]

109. I love you too

[snooper2]

36. cool story!

[Rex]

23. Yep, that is what I said and got yelled at for saying it!

They were FOOLISH to run away from this POTUS and it hurt ALL of us.

[Cha]

24. The next four years will be excruciating for Dems in states that elected gop governors, PS..

It's terrible for them.

[Tatiana]

25. Quinn in IL and Burke in WI absolutely embraced the President! And look what happened!

This midterm was a referendum on the President. Period.

Dems lost because the voters in this midterm, for the most part, wanted the person who was not in line with the President.

It doesn't help us to insist the President is vastly popular. He was, but now he isn't. Most teachers I know are furious for his support of education reform, including Race to the Top (Bottom). I think people went in the booth and voted for the person that didn't support the President, whoever that happened to be. Dumb? Yes! But that's what they did because we didn't really give them a good reason to vote for us.

[ProSense]

28. "It doesn't help us to insist the President is vastly popular. He was, but now he isn't. "

I didn't insist. In fact, the President's popularity has nothing to do with it. It's about unity and standing for something.

I saw Corey Booker say just that yesterday. He sounded like an ultra-progressive. Trying to game voters with a cat-and-mouse game about who should support the President or sound like a Democrat doesn't work.

When Bush was at his most unpopular, Republicans didn't mention him, but they didn't take shots at him. In fact, they found a way to embrace everything Bush (and Republicans stood for) without running away.

Timidity doesn't work, and it screws it up for those trying to stand for something.

[Tatiana]

32. Midterms are often a referendum on the Presidency, so I think Presidential popularity matters.

And I meant general "you," not you specifically.

I don't think we lost these elections because candidates didn't embrace the President. Republican strategy included linking Democratic candidates to Obama. They knew this would motivate people to vote against Democrats.

I do, however, believe that it would have helped if Democrats had actually stood for something (besides being in the pocket of Obama). It would have helped if they had advocated for ACA and maybe offered ideas to make it better. Or talked about the economic policies they support.

[brer cat]

99. "unity and standing for something"

Right on, ProSense.

I have missed you.

[Cha]

33. Oh yes.. blame Obama.. he doesn't do enough for this country. My sister is a teacher and she

loves the President. Obama campaigned with Tom Wolf and he won.. what's your story on that? And, President Obama endorsed Gina Raimondo in Rhode Island and she was elected the First woman governor and first Dem since '92..

TheObamaDiary.com @TheObamaDiary
Follow
MT @RussOnPolitics History made in Rhode Island. Gina Raimondo elected governor. First woman gov & first Dem since 92
9:36 PM - 4 Nov 2014

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025763339

Obama campaigned with Gov Malloy in Connecticut and he looks like he's winning.. so yeah, not everybody buys into blaming it all on Obama.

Smart people know exactly why they vote Democratic.. those who get sucked in by fear and hate.. not so much.

[Tatiana]

43. Your sister is a public education teacher and supports this President's education policies?

Really? Because they are not best practice for children and, if she works in the public sector, these policies could cause her to lose her job while leading to increased class sizes.

It would really help us if we focused more on policies and finding candidates that embody them.

I'm not placing all the blame on Obama. But he holds a share in this loss.

[jtuck004]

49. "we didn't really give them a good reason to vote for us." < Deserves repeating. n/t

[NCTraveler]

29. Obama did a radio ad for Crist.

Michelle and Biden showed up in person. A number of Democratic candidates lost who had Obama as part of their campaign. Your association works except for when it doesn't work.

[ProSense]

30. Crist is not a good example

A lot of Democratic voters weren't sold on Crist...even here.

[freshwest]

39. I've missed your voice, ProSense.

[NCTraveler]

51. BTW

Welcome back.

[Cha]

35. It worked for these Govs..

Obama campaigned with Tom Wolf and he won..

And, President Obama endorsed Gina Raimondo in Rhode Island and she was elected the First woman governor and first Dem since '92..

TheObamaDiary.com @TheObamaDiary
Follow
MT @RussOnPolitics History made in Rhode Island. Gina Raimondo elected governor. First woman gov & first Dem since 92
9:36 PM - 4 Nov 2014

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025763339

Obama campaigned with Gov Malloy in Connecticut and he looks like he's winning..

[NCTraveler]

48. That is kind of my point.

This assumption works when it works, and doesn't when it doesn't.

[Alittleliberal]

128. Well then you missed the point of the OP

PS isn't saying that every single race would have gone our way if the president campaigned for more candidates. Just that we wouldn't have gotten crushed like we did.

[B Calm]

58. and he would had lost by and even bigger margin if he hadn't!

[NCTraveler]

60. Could be. nt.

[Xyzse]

38. Nice to see you again.

I'm still sad about MD.

No, you're right it isn't a winning formula.
I'll just leave it at that for now.

[beerandjesus]

40. Good to see you back....

...of all the DUers I routinely disagree with, you're the one I enjoy being pissed off by the most. That probably sounds snarky and sarcastic, but I mean it sincerely--and as a compliment. Not even a back-handed one.

This time, though, I agree with you 100%. I've had LOTS of issues with Obama, but by running from him, the Democrats only play into the Republicans' hands. Q.E.D.

[B Calm]

42. For all those who thought when your wishy-washy candidate was running away

from Obama was a good strategy, you have to admit that you were wrong and lets learn from our mistakes.

Before the election I was hoping that I was wrong and told myself I would be the first to admit it the day after the election. We're all the same page here and want to see democrats win. If we don't learn something here, we're not going anywhere!

[SunSeeker]

45. Running away from the ACA instead of dispelling GOP lies was a loser.

Grimes let McConnell paint Kynect as something other than the ACA, a mere "website."

The other problem is that the people the ACA really helped didn't appear to vote.

[Cha]

47. Exactly, SunSeeker.. unfathomable!

[B Calm]

50. Grimes turned her back on 679,370 democratic voters in Kentucky

who voted for Obama and then expected them all to show up on election day.

[Bluenorthwest]

71. You know, that really is not an excuse I can buy. LGBT voters have had every single Democratic

Presidential candidate stand there and clearly state opposition to our own rights and then we vote for them anyway. And we make progress by doing so. Do you think it is big fun to vote for someone who has just said that they don't think you should have equal rights? And that God agrees with them?
I think what Grimes did was stupid and fairly shitty. But voters who can't play some politics along with a candidate are also stupid and fairly shitty. And as a person who has had every single nominee directly insult my community, I think 'she wouldn't say she voted for Obama' is a fairly thin reason for taking offense. She was an Obama delegate. Do the math.
If LGBT dollars had used those standards toward Obama in 2008, he might not have won the nomination. Think about it. He was speaking against our rights, yet we supported him. Then he 'evolved'. Then people say 'such swift progress, like magic' then they say 'I won't vote for someone who does not fully pull my string for me'.
Just saying. Sometimes you have to put up with some bullshit. Such as 'God is in the mix, one man, one woman, Sanctity' and you trust your gut. You do not demand pandering. You elect candidates, exert political power and make change.
It must be amazing to live in a world where not saying you voted for Obama is the worst political speech you have to put up with. Such privilege. Hillary Clinton, 17 years of preaching against marriage equality. Elizabeth Warren, former Ronald Reagan Republican who supported anti gay policies for decades. Joe Biden, a guy who shouted out his agreement with Palin that equality was against God during his debate 'I oppose it and so does Senator Obama!'. That's what I'm looking at for 2016. All choices which have openly opposed my best interests. Some who have later 'evolved' but only after they got what they wanted from us. First we had to vote for them anyway.

[certainot]

46. dems/liberals/left lost because they still ignore the right's best weapon

THE FUCKING RADIO

[Bluenorthwest]

52. Here in Oregon Democrats won. Obama has not shown up here to do a public event since 2008

when more than 70,000 in Portland gave him his largest crowd of the election. Not sure if the two things are related in any way. He'd have been very welcome to attend. I think our Democrats are too liberal for his tastes. Which is why they win, of course. Maybe that's the key here.....

[malthaussen]

53. Been awhile since I've seen one of your posts.

Welcome back.

-- Mal

[panader0]

54. Good to see you back

[SHRED]

56. Non Voters

http://www.people-press.org/2014/10/31/the-party-of-nonvoters-2/

[sheshe2]

57. Up late and running late for work.

I only have time to say welcome back, you have been missed ProSense.

[Dawgs]

59. "Welcome back"???

LOL!!

[MADem]

61. Hey, how you been?

I've MISSED you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Iliyah]

72. I wore my "I voted" all day here in California

Glad to hear from you! No worries, Dems are a ok. My hubby is upset about Hagan tho, she made sure that the "Montford Marines" were finally noticed!

Cheers, lets see the party of bullshit try and govern.

[TBF]

63. The third way returns to blame the left -

as always. Money trumps everything.

[MissDeeds]

84. +1 n/t

[Marr]

148. Yep. Nice timing.

[DesertDiamond]

65. The root reason is voter suppression. But a loud and clear message of an agenda for the people

would have saved us. That's why the Republicans weren't able to cheat us out of a win for President Obama. Because he gave us a clear message of changes that would benefit the people that was so powerful that the MSM couldn't ignore it.

[maced666]

67. Anthony Brown is on your list-he didnt run from Obama

In fact Obama stumped for him. and he still lost. In a BLUE state.

[brentspeak]

69. Ah, propaganda returns to lecture the rest of us n/t

[cali]

75. uh, Shumlin sure as shit didn't run from the President. At all. You have no clue what you're

going on about. as per usual, your adoration gets in the way of cogent thought.

[ProSense]

80. Hi, how are you?

Some politicians who embraced the President won last night, but that doesn't capture the full point.

See my post 9.

Have a nice day.

[Hissyspit]

76. Study: Citizens United elected more Republicans

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/08/28/study-citizens-united-elected-more-republicans/

Study: Citizens United elected more Republicans

By Reid Wilson
August 28, 2014

The 2010 Supreme Court decision that helped usher in a new era of political spending gave Republicans a measurable advantage on Election Day, according to a new study.

The advantage isn’t large, but it is statistically significant: The researchers found the ruling, in Citizens United v. FEC, was associated with a six percentage-point increase in the likelihood that a Republican candidate would win a state legislative race.

And in six of the most affected states — Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio and Tennessee — the probability that a Republican would be elected to a state legislative seat increased by 10 percentage points or more.

In five other states — Colorado, Iowa, Texas, Wisconsin and Wyoming — Republican candidates were seven percentage points more likely to win.

Republican election probability spiked in states like North Carolina, Michigan and Minnesota. Click for a larger version.

- snip -

Before the ruling, labor unions were more freely able to spend on campaigns and elections. But by freeing corporations to spend their own money, the study found, “Citizens United has, on balance, increased the political influence of corporations relative to that of unions.”

- snip -

In the 22 states where independent expenditures were suddenly allowed, Republicans took advantage. The Republican State Leadership Committee raised about $30 million in 2010 through its RedMap program, targeting states such as Colorado, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin. The RSLC spent about $1 million each in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania, all of which swung to Republican control after 2010.

Other conservative groups, organized under section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code, spent heavily in North Carolina, Montana, Colorado and Tennessee, all states where Republicans made gains. The bulk of those groups raised funds from corporations and other politically active groups, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The researchers also found evidence that the ruling led to an increase in the number of Republicans who ran for reelection, and a decrease in the number of Democrats who ran for office, especially in state House races. One Democratic candidate dropped out of about every 10th race in states affected by Citizens United, the researchers found.

MORE AT LINK

[SidDithers]

77. Welcome back, Pro...nt

Sid

[4lbs]

78. At least here in California, nearly every Democrat up for re-election won.

90% of the Democrats running won, according to sos.ca.gov


So I'm good here. Those in other states that went Repuke, I feel for you.

[dawg]

79. Grimes looked especially foolish to me.

I didn't post anything about that before the election because I was still hoping she had a chance. But you can't act like you're ashamed of being a Democrat and still expect people to vote for you.

I have lots of problems with President Obama. But I'm proud I voted for him over McCain and Romney, and wouldn't hesitate to say so.

[hrmjustin]

81. Welcome back!

[whereisjustice]

82. You mean it wasn't income disparity, NSA spying on our children, bank fraud and general

incompetence of leadership as we saw from CDC Director Tom Frieden?

And it wasn't the President's refusal to hold those in power accountable?

And "fresh ideas" like cutting social security didn't have anything to do with it?

And health care reform that left the majority of middle class workers in the dirt with no relief from price gouging didn't have anything to do with it?

Who knew.

[karynnj]

86. Great to see you back - and I agree

It is so interesting to see the minimum wage bills pass even in red states. It was also interesting to see in the one debate that McConnell praised the Kentucky WEB SITE of ACA and to pretend that nothing would change it if he repealed ACA. It was then frustrating to see Grimes, not only refuse to say if she voted for Obama, but to completely IGNORE the blatant lie on Ky Connect. She might still have lost - Ky is very red and it helps to have the majority leader from your state, but why not lose on VALUES.

This reminds me of the fact that even with intense lobbying by Durbin and Kerry, the 2010 Senate refused to vote before the election on eliminating the tax cuts for the top 2% - something that had been Democratic policy for at least 5 years. 2010 was hard, but why not make the election a referendum on values - especially ones that actually had majority support.

The next 2 years will be awful -- and I hope the Democrats will band together to prevent the worst things that could happen. Bipartisanship does not mean we enact everything the right demands.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

91. Check out how many of these "Democrats" ran like they were "as good as" Republicans.

[blues lover]

92. WHY WE LOST

I think one thing that hasn't been addressed is the fact that I was getting over a hundred separate emails every day for weeks asking for money while Democratic candidates were running away from Democratic positions. Maybe it would be a good idea to get out of the effing office and engage voters. Stand your ground and don't back down in the face of these quasi-fascists. Less corporate weenies and more fire breathers. Where in Hell are our shock troops? The folks who actually have some answers for those dreaded rhetorical questions. Listen more to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and spend more time investigating some of these credible allegations of electoral fraud and voter suppression. Otherwise we may as well give up and hunker down for the rise of the new corporate state.

[ReRe]

95. 1st, welcome back...

... 2nd, that they could not stick to the Democratic Party burned the hell out of me. You have no idea how hard it was for me to sit through that so-called debate between Grimes and McConnell. My heart sunk right through the concrete base of my home. She wouldn't defend Obamacare, which was helping a half million Kentuckians who were previously uninsured! Why couldn't she admit she voted for PO? WTF was up with that?

Look it... isn't it a given that when elections come along, we all come together as one big party of Democrats? What happened to sticking together in the same Party?

Why do some Democrats have to dance to the Republican score? Republicans put out their propaganda, and before long it's like it's a reality! No it isn't! Just because the Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell with his abiding filibusters, set out 6 years ago to put this President down, first to deny him a second term. And when that didn't work, to just hammer on against him. PO is not unpopular. Republicans were the ones who were unpopular! How popular was the Congress? What was it before the elections? 13%? And PO's was at 40%?

I'm outta' here.

[Kablooie]

97. Or perhaps it was because Obama is in the last 2 years of an 8 year presidency.

historically every president loses Congress at that point.

[ieoeja]

98. "Illinois -- Few more reliably Democratic states than Illinois"? In what universe?

Illinois had two Democratic sentors for only one term before reverting to the usual 1 Democrat, 1 Republican split.

Illinois has had very few Democratic governors. They did hold the office for the past 12 years. But several Republican governors had to go to jail to get there in the first place.

And Quinn was an accidental governor. When a crook snuck through the primary to become the Lt Governor candidate for Democrats, the party booted him and decided they needed somebody squeaky clean to air out the mess.

Quinn was a "good government" advocate who only got into politics when the pols sarcastically argued "why don't you run for office yourself". The professional politicians in both parties hated the man. But you don't come any cleaner, so he was the perfect man for a worthless office.

Then Blagojevich tried getting in on the game in Springfield. Problem was, as already stated, Illinois had always been run by Republicans. There were no Democratic money men in Springfield. So Blago hired Republican money men! They didn't get accidentally caught. They pretty much fell over themselves trying to get caught so they could point the finger at Blagojevich.

So Quinn was promoted. Nobody expected him to win election once he ran on his own. But it was 2010, the year of the Teabagger. Even Illinois, the last stronghold of sane Republicans, put up a Teabagger for Governor. That is the only reason Quinn was able to win office in his own right.

Also, Quinn was a lousy politician. When Quinn raised state income taxes from 3% to 5%, how many times did he point out that, of the 42 states that had a state income tax, Illinois' 3% was the drop dead lowest in the entire nation? Answer: zero. How could he *not* make that fucking point?!? And 5% is still below the national average.

Fucking Walker claimed he was going to steal jobs from Illinois because of that tax raise. Wisconsin's top tax rate is still higher than Illinois! But that didn't stop him making that outlandish claim. And in the last four years I have not heard a single Democrat point out that very simple and easy to verify fact. Not one!

Probably worst of all, Quinn was a damned good governor who shored up pensions and balanced the budget. And if there is one thing we know about politics, people hate good governance. They want a balanced budget with more services and lower taxes. If they have to lose on of those three, they will surrender the balanced budget every time.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

100. And still, even after this historic loss, we have Democrats here on DU blaming Obama

They continue to buy into the corporate media narrative that it is all Obama's fault.

Well, keep on with that winning strategy, Democrats.

If you don't stand by your president who had a good record to tout, then voters won't stand by the Democrats, either.

[Rex]

108. +1

There were a plethora of positive issues to run on! All thanks to Obama...and yet candidates fled from their leader. Makes me sick, I expect party leaders to stand together in solidarity. The GOP has been doing that for YEARS and it works like a charm!

People want to see their leaders working together, not running from each other!

Obama has the BEST record so far, the M$M fooled a lot of people into believing he is unpopular when that is nothing but a big LIE.

[Peacetrain]

101. I agree..

[Kelselsius]

103. The American dream is dead and it was an act of suicide.

The Democrats lost because apparently Americans want to live in a third world country with no labor laws or minimum wage or EPA or FDA or education beyond 6th grade.
The Democrats lost because apparently women want to be second class citizens with no rights.
The Democrats lost because apparently racism is more powerful than logic or reason.
But mostly, the Democrats lost because the Republicans did not underestimate the stupidity of the American voter.

[NYC_SKP]

104. ProSense!

OMG I'm glad you're back.

Excellent post, it's calming for me to see it broken down like this rather than the apocalypse that one senses from watching media reports.

[kairos12]

105. Circular Firing Squad

[aikoaiko]

107. A lot of this turned out just the way it was expected in a midterm

I would be happy to have Democrats run on a pro-Obama success message, but I don't see a lot of that happening in Red or reddish purple states. I can't say that it would have the seats we lost.

[MineralMan]

111. Glad to see you back.

I hope you stick around.

[DallasNE]

113. While I Didn't See The Magnitude Of The Loss

It was easy to see that the Democrats were going to have a bad night. The handwriting was on the wall when Grimes in Kentucky wouldn't answer the softball question of who she voted for in 2012 for President. Who were these advisors that told their candidates such crap. You can't run to not lose. You have to run to win and in race after race after race the Democrat ran to not lose so, naturally, they lost. And they lost so badly it makes 2016 a real uphill battle. Hillary doesn't excite Democrats as she is to the right of Obama.

[SmittynMo]

115. IMHO

Standing up and being heard: Dems made no noise at all. I heard nothing. It was deafening. What do they stand for? What do they support? What about the ACA? What about Obama? Any running politician knows to relate yourself with your party's president. We're all in this together, aren't we? It's common sense. Yet, I heard nothing. Obama has done a pretty good job getting us out of this mess, and I heard NOTHING!!! Hell, Grimes was against the ACA. And she didn't want his name associated with her at all. She obviously didn't vote for him. It was embarrassing how she presented herself in KY. There were others that were running too, claiming it wasn't about Obama. They treated him like dirt under the rug. Big mistake folks!!! So much for supporting your own party, eh? Every one of these idiots that shunned Obama deserved to lose.

Turnout: We probably wont know for a while what the total turnout was. One can then determine whether or not GOTV worked.

Statistical data regarding running president losses: It still amazes me how there is no support on mid terms of a lame duck president.

Approval rating: Bullshit. 40% with a lame duck president is not bad. Look at Bush.

Stupidity: If we find out that the turnout was low again, as with most mid terms, people have to be taught how important the mid terms are. This was a big one, almost as big as a presidential election, so attendance was crucial. Stupidity is not the answer.

Side note: I am still amazed that Walker, Scott, and Earnst won. My God, there are a lot of stupid people. I refuse to be one of them. Add McTurtle to the mix, and now it looks like we're in for a very rough ride ahead. I am sooooo bummed out.

[LeftInTX]

137. Turnout in Texas was at least 200,000 less than 2010

We loss the governor's race by a greater margin too.

4.97 million 2010
4.67 million 2014 (99% of precincts reporting so it will go up some, I'm guessing 50,000)

I totally agree with Obama's approval rating as a bunch of hogwash. Congress' approval is much lower. Congressional Republican approval is in is lower than Obama's yet they won. Duh. Sometimes these polls don't mean much.

[stupidicus]

118. the reasons are many and varied

but it's doubtful that voter ignorance of dem values or BHO's accomplishments are high on the list of "reasons". I suppose the "values" thing might have some merit given the way the thirdwayers that are off limits for criticism might have adulterated what they actually are, which is the gist of what we election-losing causers have been saying for years now. And given their knowledge of BHO's accomplishments, it's only logical to conclude that they were insufficient to warrant the necessary level of participation, no?

it is nice seeing you blame dems for their own demise as many of us long have though.

those dems musta suppressed the turnout even more than us du CRITICS, no? I guess they individually and collectively just weren't liberal/progressive enough, just as we critics/traitors/Paulbots have long charged.

thanks for helping us make that even more clear.

[mikehiggins]

120. Nice that nobody thinks racism was a cause

at least not by reading the comments and replies.

I agree that running from the President worked as well in 2014 as it did in 2000 but again, nobody seems to think the President's race had anything to do with lots of 'merricans shooting themselves, and the Government in the foot (or higher in the anatomy).

Obviously I disagree. Even allowing for the forty years or more of Right Wing lying we have gone through and the dumbing down of this nation it seems to me that many, many, many people were predisposed to hating (that is the word) President Obama because he ain't like us.

The 2016 campaign began months ago (no matter what the media says) and it is going to be ugly. So it goes. There is no guarantee that this Nation will even survive much longer, though it will likely outlast me, but like Pogo said, we have met the enemy and he is us. It has never been clearer, to me at least, that my dad was right all those years ago. You have to vote your own best interests. The problem is most US voters have no idea what that might be.

Gotta go. Game show is coming on.

[Hekate]

126. ProSense is back? Good to see you again.

[blue neen]

132. Yep. Tom Wolf had President Obama here last Sunday,

and he won big time.

Welcome back, ProSense.

[msanthrope]

136. Sister...welcome the fuck back. nt

[kentuck]

144. They were distracted and put on the defensive...

with charges of incompetence, IRS, Syria, Benghazi, ISIS, Ebola, etc and only in the last couple of weeks have the really good numbers in the economy been publicized. The Republicans put Obama on every ballot. They charged Democratic Senators that were running for re-election with voting for Obama 96%, 97%, 98% of the time. They never ran on anything else. It was a brilliant strategy and Democrats could not escape from the trap.

[Ricochet21]

145. WV Doesn't count?

It's a separate state now.

[Number23]

146. But I keep reading here it's because the president is a failure, a crypto-fascist Republican

and a conservative. Yes, that explains it far better than this.

Nice to see you again.