Lack of Voter Turnout Isn’t the Problem

[rhett o rick]

Lack of votes in and of itself is not our problem.

In 2000 when the Republicans and SCOTUS stole the election, lack of votes wasn’t the problem.
In gerrymandered districts, more votes won’t change the outcomes. For example, if a district is 90% Democrats and the Democrats always win; more votes won’t change a thing. In a district that is split 60% Republican and 40% Democrats, and the Republicans win 60 – 40, more votes would not change the results.

The problem is the lack of Progressive Votes.

Our voting system is set up to disenfranchise and discourage Progressive Democrats from voting and/or render Democratic votes meaningless.

A bad analogy would be to assume our voting system is one big giant DieBold voting machine. No matter who you want to win, the results are what the Oligarchs want. Shoving more votes into the machine won’t change what comes out the other side.

So what are the real problems?

The basic problem is that we get too few Progressive votes.

And one big reason is that our voting system is corrupted. Until that’s fixed, getting more people to vote won’t solve our problem.

Also, the voters are mislead by the Corp-Media. We must figure out how to counter that. If we don’t fix this, the “more votes” we get may be for Conservatives.

Another reason we don’t get more Progressive votes is that we have too few Progressive candidates at the national level and the candidates we have won’t speak out against Conservatism loud enough to convince the public that there is a different between the parties.

If you want to get more Progressive Democrats to vote, work on solving the above problems. Simply complaining about lack of turnout is counter productive.

[TheNutcracker]

1. If the country needs Florida, then turnout matters.

Besides, even if they are electronically stealing elections, like credit cards, new movies from Sony, etc., we must still show up and vote. If you don't vote, then the special interests don't even have to speak to you. That leaves even more money in their pockets for elections.

If you vote, they must speak to your concerns, and that costs money. If most people voted, they would not be able to "flip the vote".

Voting should be on a special day, as it was in the past. Now with early voting, vote by mail, etc. the process is strung out over a month, beginning when they mail the ballots out. It's hard to see in the open, where the tide is leaning, when it is so spread out.

We need 100% voting.

And lack of Democratic turnout, is why Florida continues to lose in all midterms. This has just all been flushed out.

[rhett o rick]

3. Of course we want 100% Progressive turnout. Wishing for it

isn't enough. We must figure out why more people don't vote progressively. One reason is that we don't have candidates that speak to progressive issues. Many settle for selling themselves as not as bad as the Republicans. Not enough to stir people to vote progressively.

We need to counter the conservative propaganda. We need to make sure that progressive votes count as such.

100% turn out won't help a thing if both candidates represent the Oligarchy. It won't mean a thing if the election is stolen.

[Cosmic Kitten]

4. We need to counter the conservative/Oligarchy propaganda.

America is waiting for a message of some sort or another.

[Chathamization]

9. So where were people when Rush Holt or Donald Berwick were running? Most didn't bother showing up at

all. The problem with the idea that people aren't voting because there aren't progressive candidates is that people also aren't voting when there are progressive candidates. Not only do they not get votes, but I've seen people who say they want more progressive candidates act like the ones who run don't exist or that voting for them doesn't matter (I've seen that sentiment numerous times). Progressive turnout is a major problem. As is getting people to at least spend an hour looking at the positions of various candidates and voting for said positions, instead of voting on the feeling the candidate gives them (or often just picking a random name).

[rhett o rick]

10. Great question. We need to find out the why people don't turn out and fix it.

There are a number of possibilities that I have mentioned above.

[sabrina 1]

8. Why are Progressives NOT voting? We know voting is necessary, we also know that there are not

Progressive votes. Just telling voters to 'vote or the greater evil will win' hasn't worked lately. It hasn't worked because when Progressives DID show up to vote even when they had to hold their noses, things did not improve, promises weren't kept, they were not given choices of Progressives to vote FOR. So now many of them don't vote.

So we know what is necessary, how do you suggest we make it happen?

[sabrina 1]

21. Why are Democrats not turning out? They turned out in 2008.

Was that because Bush was so bad people were motivated to vote, or was it because the Democrats were delivering the kind of message that voters want?

We can say 'everyone should vote or we will lose' over and over again, we know that, but voters vote when they have something to vote FOR.

So, maybe if at least in this group, we could stop admonishing people for not voting or for how they vote and start WINNING them over.

How do we do that? THAT is the question we are trying to answer here.

'Blaming the Voters' when they are not being given something to vote for, they are tired of voting AGAINST something, is a waste of time and will only lead to more people not voting.

We DO need full participation in the electoral process.

FDR got elected four times because he addressed the people's concerns, and then he DELIVERED for the people.

We need candidates who are genuine, sincere and deeply concerned about this country and its people.

When we find them, we need to find a way to help them defeat the MONEY that will be spent trying to defeat them.

Education of the voters on the issues and the voting records of candidates and who is receiving Corporate money. In every state, every college and anywhere we can.

At the bottom of the list of how to get those who have given up back into the process, should be 'BLAMING THE VOTERS' imho.

[Cosmic Kitten]

2. Yes, The deeper problem is Elected Dems enabling the problems

When Democrats had control over some of these issues
they did little, nothing, or enabled the growth of these
voting/election problems.

The Democratic leadership has neglected the voters
interests countless times which is how the 3rd-Way
gained it's controlling interest within the party.
Which is why we have these problems.

Are there any Congress Critters doing anything
to address these voting/election problems?
IS there any momentum to change the status qou?
Which Dems are pushing for voter participation?

The "establishment" benefits from low voter turnout.
Who in Congress is working to improve voter participation?
Where are the Public's Allies in Congress?

[swilton]

5. To play devil's advocate

Let's assume that voter turn out was the problem.

Let's also assume that we have a magic wand and we fixed that to high voter turn out.

High voter turn-out doesn't amount to a hill of beans if the only candidates running are corporatist, pro-Wall Street, pro-defense - nothing changes.

[rhett o rick]

6. Exactly. There are a number of things we need to correct to get the election

results we want. Voter turn out is only one and it would take care of itself to a large degree if we solved the other problems.

[Cosmic Kitten]

7. Where is the "vision" of what will replace what is broken?

It seems a reinvention of sorts is what's necessary?

[salib]

11. This sounds a great deal like Paul Weyrich and the goo goo syndrome.

https://m.

.

I am convinced that we have been so co-opted by this us and them, WE must win, at all costs attitude, so much so that we have lost the message. How can we motivate the vast numbers who do not vote when we mostly care about voting by fellow progressives.

To me the goal is improving the lot for all. Everyone deserves expression. The goal includes everyone voting.

The goal is not simply "our side winning", especially when it means that we minimize the importance of participation by everyone and not just the chosen progressives.

If we are honestly trying to do something for everyone, then we should fundamentally want everyone to participate.

[KoKo]

12. We do want everyone to vote....so let us tackle WHY people don't vote....

Gerrymandering of Districts, Corporate Money picking and choosing who runs. Both Parties now controlled by the Big Money flooding in from Citizens United Decision and those elected beholden to those who gave them the money for the TV Ads and mail and phone campaign messages.

The average person who has an interest in politics and making a change has to win backing of big donors who will demand loyalty to their views. The average American doesn't have a chance against the system we have now because small donors are really blocked out of influence. You could say that it's always been this way to a certain extent (that Candidates need Big Money to win) and that doesn't answer WHY the U.S. has such low voter turnouts...but, it is far worse today because both the Republican and Democratic Parties no longer need "The Common People" to sustain them financially.''

Bill Moyers has addressed the issue of Big Money flooding the parties and making all the decisions about Platform and Candidates for years with guests on his show and with his own reporting. He's old enough to remember when the "Party System" was more important for the people than it is today.

Gerrymandering, Corporate Money, Think Tank Influence, the Military Industrial, Corporate owned Media Complex are destroying the chance for the Common People to have a voice. The average "non-political" voter can sense that...and they think...."Why bother...nothing's going to change because no one wants to hear what I think."

----------------

Here's Moyer's latest show posted in DU Video's....but, he has so many more at his website and the You Tube site for "Moyers & Company."

Moyers & Company: Democrats, Not Just Republicans, Are Bowing Down to Wall Street


http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017232004

[Cosmic Kitten]

13. Where is the INSPIRATIONAL... go vote, damn it!

The idea or sentiment in...

Why bother...nothing's going to change because no one wants to hear what I think.

HAS to be addressed!
That sort of disenfranchised apathy is the problem.

Voting is not glamorous, or exciting.
It NEEDS to be!

Populists need to re-invent what voting is about
and how it needs to be done.
Have block or tailgate picnics,
Push employers for extra time off on election day (6 hour day)
Giving employees "voting time" is Patriotic!
Organize neighborhood child care so parents can go vote.
This could be a Populist message to "rally the troops".
And frankly, the current political rallies are BLAH.

Vote and make sure everyone votes.
People need to WANT to vote for a candidate
Political campaign messaging SUCKS, possibly intentionally
because it depresses voters AND turnout.
No corporation sell their products the way candidates sell themselves!?

[jeepers]

14. Simple as that?

So where is the part where the elected politico has to try to do what he promises to do in his campaign? All well and fine to remind the people that they need to be responsible and accountable and vote, but where is the quid pro quo? How many times can voters be made fools of before they quit the game? The only prospect you have is more of the same.

[Cosmic Kitten]

15. No, not as simple as that.

Politicians are held accountable by a LARGE organized
block of voters that replace them as needed.
Elections are HOW politicians are held accountable

With a 40% to 60% of the eligible public voting,
and a 90% incumbency reelection rate
MORE voters can change things.

Politicians need to fear voters,
not voters fearing politicians

[jeepers]

16. In your experience is any of that true or are you wishing it were true

That large group of organized voters is an illusion, at best an inconvenience when DC chooses to ignore them.
That 40 to 60% of the public voting is a reality and has been for some time now as has been the incumbency rate.
The powers that control the politicians do not fear the voter.

[Cosmic Kitten]

17. Don't be so optimistic ;~/

Every election where good politicians win is an example.
Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren come to mind

No point asking for suggestions because
in this situation there is ALWAYS fault finding.

However, the Icelandic elections of 2009 kicked ass.

The powers that control the politicians do not fear the voter.

Doesn't matter if the Corporations don't fear voters
The politicians who don't perform lose their seat in Congress
and are less likely to get a cushy do nothing job (lobbyist)

[jeepers]

18. I suspect you are speakng sarcasm

An example of what dear Kitten, that there are well meaning people in the world? 99% of the people in this country have no say in how their country is run or how their money is spent. You are going to tell me that voting matters. We can choose good and principled people sure, but other than bucking our spirits try as they may what difference do they make?

You won't ask for suggestions, why? Are you fault finding thinking I am a nattering nabob of negativism? The Iceland reference escapes me.

So because of the pols positions and voting record he loses the election the money man just goes out and finds another pol who does his bidding and loses the election four years hence. Does the money man care? His agenda goes through regardless. I am not so sure that last statement isn't an air grab.

[Eleanors38]

19. We attack our analyses because we don't act.

Is there a growing Warren campaign presence?
How do we hook up with it?
Does anyone with better social media-phoo have a sense that lefty groups are coalescing around a Warren run? This is IMPORTANT for meaningful movement.

We need to act, and fast.

[Eleanors38]

20. I concur. nm