The non-voting constituency....

[Dookus]

I've seen any number of assertions here that the centrist, swing voters are not the constituency to try to grab. It's all the people who DON'T vote and are turned off to politics who are the real prize.

A few thoughts:

First, I don't know of any data to indicate that the politics of these people is substantially different than those of the voting public. Are there really tens of millions of people who are passionate about Free Trade issues or single-payer health who don't vote?

Second, in my life, I can think of more than couple candidates who ran on this same premise. John Anderson, Jerry Brown, Ralph Nader, Ross Perot and a few more on the right. None of these people were able to "motivate" these lost voters in any appreciable sense. Yes, some alienated voters DO respond to certain candidates, but do they do so in any substantial way?

Discuss.

[TacticalPeek]

1. Perhaps the nonvoters will not be brought to the polls by

'appealing' to them, but by ORGANIZING them.

[Dookus]

2. and

you think that hasn't been tried before?

[lcordero]

3. A few of my thoughts

I've been eligible to vote for almost 12 years. In those 12 years, I have seen gaining the potential to get worse and worse. I don't see a point to voting if my life can get worse under either party, as a matter of fact, I will not waste my time to travel a block and a half to turn in a ballot which is part of a stupid charade.

[Dookus]

4. So...

you don't vote?

[LeahMira]

14. Duck!!!

I've been eligible to vote for almost 12 years. In those 12 years, I have seen gaining the potential to get worse and worse. I don't see a point to voting if my life can get worse under either party, as a matter of fact, I will not waste my time to travel a block and a half to turn in a ballot which is part of a stupid charade.

Thanks for your honesty. I hope folks don't pile on you, because your voice needs to be heard.

Are there any Democratic candidates now who could persuade you to venture out on election day? Which ones, and for what reasons? Or, if none, can you say what sort of person would motivate you?

I felt the same way in 2000, and the right and responsibility and privilege of voting is so in me almost as part of my blood that I knew not voting would make me feel as uncomfortable as the first time I deliberately and willfully missed Sunday Mass. In the end, I voted for Nader, but only because my state was already solid for Gore.

I really would like to hear more of your thoughts on this.

[no name no slogan]

5. What about Wellstone and Kucinich?

These two have both won, REPEATEDLY, by appealing to disenfranchised/disaffected voters who previously have not voted, mainly because they don't see any difference between the Dem and the GOPer. Why vote for a fake Repub, when you can vote for the real thing?

The "mythical" center is really only 10% of eligible voters, of which maybe 5-8% vote in each big election. Currently, there's almost 50% of voters who are so turned off to electoral politics that they don't vote anymore.

So, do we really want to sell out our values to appeal to that 5%, or would we be better off trying to get a little over 1/10th of the disaffected voters to vote for our candidates?

The fishing's always easier where there's more fish to catch. :)

[Dookus]

6. I'm talking about a Presidential election....

yes, I know 50% of the potential electorate don't vote. My point was that I don't believe they're all leftists who are disenchanted with the lack of really leftist candidates. I suspect if everybody were FORCED to vote, the political divide in the country wouldn't be substantially different than it is today. It might be a little more to the left, though.

In that light, are we really "selling out our values"? Seems to me we're simply trying to appeal to the most voters.

And, as I said, lots of other candidates have tried this before, with little success.

Do you have stats on how many people voted for Kucinich or Wellstone who had never voted before? And wouldn't some right-wingers be able to make the same claim?

[Dookus]

7. And I just saw today's Zogby poll...

in which Kucinich is polling at 1%.

[no name no slogan]

12. But look at who gets polled

Check out who the respondents are: typically they are those who self-identify as either 1) registered democracts or 2) previous voters who voted democratic. It's a bit like only polling Republicans and asking them how popular the Shrub is.

The vast majority of the people drawn to Kucinich are not the party hacks associated with the other campaigns. Check out the leadership-- how many of those have worked with other candidates/campaigns before? Most of Kucinich's supporters are brand new to electoral politics and have not voted before, or have not voted in so many years they've dropped off the radar of the "conventional wisdom".

At my first Kucinich meetup a couple of months ago, we had over 50 people. Of those, only one other person (besides myself) had ever been to their precinct caucus before. That number itself speaks volumes of where his support is coming from.

They are peace activists, civil rights activists, fair trade activists, labor activists-- most of whom have not voted in a presidential election because there hasn't been a candidate who shares their views. But now they have one. And you can bet they're going to be showing up at Democratic Party caucuses this year and voting in Democratic Primaries.

[LeahMira]

15. Not always.

Check out who the respondents are: typically they are those who self-identify as either 1) registered
democracts or 2) previous voters who voted democratic. It's a bit like only polling Republicans and asking
them how popular the Shrub is.

Sometimes they poll likely voters of both parties, etc. but still they do target those who are interested one way or the other.

50% is a helluva lot of people turned off. I sometimes wonder how many more are going to be turned off after 2000, when their votes obviously weren't counted and it came out that there are so many "irregularities" in many states other than Florida.

[ThomWV]

8. Hmmmmm

Well, this little discussion has renewed my belief that I'm doing what I should in the promiss I made to myself. It was this; I would find a person who would otherwise not vote in the next election and I would see to it that they registered and that they went to the polling place in the next election. I will personally drive them there on that day, as well as volunteer at the Democratic party at the country level to transport anyone else who wishes to vote. My wife and son have vowed to do the same. At this point each of us has our person named, have told our person what we intend to do, and in fact my wife has her pet person registered.

All we have to do is get 'em to the polls, the chimp will hang himself.

Thom

[Dookus]

9. good for you!

I have two people I've warned that I'll MAKE them vote.

[KCDem]

11. that's awesome, thom

if everyone here did that, it would make quite a difference!

[KaraokeKarlton]

10. Oh, you're talking about all the people Dean is attracting

This is why I keep telling people that as long as the Democrats vote for Dean in the general election, there is no way in hell Bush can win. Dean has fired up people who don't normally vote or who have become disillusioned with politics at an unprecedented number. These folks aren't just going to vote in the general election, but they can't wait to vote in the primaries, either. It's a whole new base now.

[no name no slogan]

13. I think Dean gets more of the "Radical Middle" than the lefties

No offense, because I agree with what you are saying, but IMHO the people attracted to the Dean campaign tend to be the "radical middle" that supported Ross Perot in '92 and Jesse Ventura in Minnesota in '98.

Either way, the more we get on board by November 2004 the better. But I'm still firmly of the belief that if voters are given a CLEAR CHOICE between the Shrub and the Anti-Shrub they WILL vote, and not stay at home.