Let's acknowledge that Republicans did a better job

[Dem4Life1102]

registering new voters than Democrats this year.

https://time.com/5901862/republicans-voter-registration-swing-states/

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/20/democrats-advantage-over-republicans-among-florida-registered-voters-has-shrunk-since-2016/

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/republicans-bright-spot-voter-registration-push-73708311

This is the biggest reason that Democrats didn't do better in more down ballot races than anticipated. It is probably also why some of the polling was off. Polling firms don't always capture newly registered voters as well as they do voters from previous elections.

Combine that with many Never Trump Republicans who didn't vote for Trump but still voted straight Republican in all down ballot races, it explains why Democrats didn't do as well as everyone thought they would.

[SharonClark]

1. The gop registered people at mega churches and gun shows.

They know where their people hang out.

[Shermann]

13. Were they registering people at MAGA rallies?

Large rallies were an advantage they had, although the judgement shown there was highly suspect.

[Me.]

2. Why?

haven't we had enough talk for a while about what the Dems did wrong? You think they don't know?

[Ferrets are Cool]

4. This

[brooklynite]

6. So, we should only discuss what Democrats do well?

Personally, I think learning from mistakes helps us in the future.

[Dem4Life1102]

9. Thanks

That was my point.

[Me.]

10. So You Think Dems Don't Know

and aren't trying to do better? I have more faith in them in that regard and would think you might too considering the close contacts you say you have with them.

[LanternWaste]

44. You then think this discussion unique and unprecedented on DU?

Personally, I think reading numerous threads on this very topic over the past month renders this particular thread a rather tired beating of a long-dead horse, if not self-flagellation.

[brooklynite]

48. And you have the opportunity to not read them.

[LanternWaste]

49. That seems wholly irrelevant.

I enjoy reading objective analyses rather than editorials.

All answers are responses, not all responses are answers.

Yours was but merely a response.

[George II]

3. We did great in registering new voters, MUCH better than republicans, and we didn't do....

....all that badly in "down ballot races".

I went through this elsewhere, and I guess will have to do so again, and again, and again.

We won the Presidency
We gained in the Senate (maybe even a 50/50 split)
We lost 1/4 of the seats we gained in 2018 - still ahead by 3/4 (won 40 in 2018, lost 10 in 2020)
We gained majorities in a number of state legislature houses - a majority in BOTH houses in 10 more states than 2016

I'm not going to acknowledge that republicans did a better job, because they didn't.

Please stop all this gloom and doom!!

[Ferrets are Cool]

5. Thank you

[Me.]

7. Geez

You'd think we could have a minute to breathe. Thank you for that summary.

[George II]

12. I forgot to add that Biden flipped two states that would have been unheard of several years ago:

Arizona and Georgia, and regained three that we lost in 2016 - Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

[BumRushDaShow]

59. We also made sure that none of our swing states with (D) Governors, has a GOP super-majority!

[Dem4Life1102]

11. What doom and gloom?

I never said that Democrats did badly, just that they didn't do as well as expected.

[LisaL]

17. Expectations were set too high.

The idea that high voter turnout favors democrats isn't always correct either.
It certainly wasn't correct in this election. Republicans turned out "bigly." I guess they really love Trump.

[Dem4Life1102]

24. Very true

And many ignored what was really happening on the ground.

[LanternWaste]

52. Who specifically ignored what was "really happening"?

And please, cite your sources.

[Dem4Life1102]

55. Read the links in my OP

Here’s another good one. https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/elections/fl-ne-2020-election-why-democrats-lost-florida-20201106-mhivn43rmbhhlbrrgfqdbdg43y-story.html

[George II]

26. That too isn't correct. In 2016 51.1% voted for Clinton, in 2020 52.0% voted for Biden.....

A higher % of voters went for the Democratic candidate this year than four years ago.

[spooky3]

29. I suspect that LisaL is referring to the #s of

Republicans who turned out compared to their numbers in 2016. But you are right if the question is “did Republicans do a better job of turning out than did Democrats?”

[George II]

32. Another way of looking at it is this:

52.8% of the voters in 2016 voted against Clinton
48.8% of the voters in 2020 voted against Biden

But there are so many factors to consider when analyzing this election vs. the previous election. The bottom line is that turnout was much higher than in 2016 and a higher % voted for our candidate.

[LeftInTX]

45. The president was not the only race on the ballot!

In my Republican precinct, Biden won by 3 votes.
Down ballot it flipped back to GOP: 54%

A significant amt of Republicans voted against Trump, but remained Republican for other races.

[George II]

56. I understand that, but in Texas the House was 83-67 for the republicans, it's now 83-67 again...

...after the 2020 election - no change. The Senate was 19-12 for the republicans, it's now 18-13, a gain of one seat for Democrats.

This is in a deep red state with a republican governor, two republican senators, and a majority of republican Representatives, and yet Democrats GAINED ground (not much, but better than losing ground)

My point is that many are trying to say that we did poorly on November 3, yet in just about every area we did well and in those areas where we didn't it's not nearly as bad as being claimed.

[LeftInTX]

57. The senate seat that we picked up was previously Democratic

The Democrat won his reelection in 2016 at 55% His seat became vacant when he went to prison in 2018.

Long story on that one...but in 2018 Dem senator ended up in prison and the governor staged the special election so a Republican would win. The governor could have combined the SE with the general, but he planned it 6 weeks b4 the general.

[Drunken Irishman]

28. It was the opposite of 2004.

That was another year turnout was going to help Democrats because people couldn't fathom Bush actually doing well.

Turnout in 2004 was the highest it had been since 1968! Clearly that meant Democrats were going to win!

Yeah, no.

2020 was 2004 with Trump. The fact is, people here underestimated how difficult it is to beat an incumbent. In reality, 2020 should have been 2012 for the GOP: hold the senate, lose the House, though make gains and keep the presidency. It wasn't. 2012 was a better year for Democrats than 2020 was for Republicans. Not only did the Democrats win the presidency, they made gains in the senate and have a real chance of winning it back in January.

[liskddksil]

34. There's a faction of posters here who tend to stick their fingers in their ears

and say "la la la" when ever anyone brings up anything counter to "ra ra ra". I posted articles as early as June that Democrats were having big problems with the Latino Vote in Florida and was called a "concern troll". Obviously these concerns were more than meritted. Now these same posters, are trying to convince everyone here that Dems had a great night, when in reality we beat Trump by the skin of our teeth, lost double-digit seats in the House, failed to win the Senate and got absolutely clobbered in State Legislative races. I'm beginning to question whether they even want liberals to be successful in the policy-arena or if they are just never-Trump Republicans, happy that Trump lost but also happy that we can't enact any meaningful policy changes of our own.

[NurseJackie]

39. Ridiculous! a "faction" ?? Seriously?? GMAFB!

There's a faction of posters here

Ridiculous! a "faction" ?? Seriously?? GMAFB!

I'm beginning to question whether they even want liberals to be successful in the policy-arena or if they are just never-Trump Republicans,

Smearing DUers who disagree with you by name-calling serves no good purpose. That's unnecessary and offensive. An apology is definitely in order.

[Cha]

64. THANK YOU!!!!

[Turin_C3PO]

42. Trump

lost by one of the biggest margins ever for a challenger vs. an incumbent. He was decisively defeated.

[Turin_C3PO]

43. Trump

lost by one of the biggest margins ever for a challenger vs. an incumbent. He was decisively defeated. We didn’t do badly. We might even win the Senate if people turnout.

[George II]

47. Did you seriously call some Democrats "never-trump republicans" and say that they're...

...."happy that we can't enact any meaningful policy changes of our own?"

That is insulting to the vast majority of Democrats, if not all of us!

As for your other points:

Biden won by the skin of his teeth? He had a resounding victory. If you look at the total population of the states he won, they represent 57.3% of the whole country, and he won 13 of the 20 most populace states.

We lost "double-digits seats in the House"? We WON at least 222 seats, perhaps one or more in addition, which is a clear majority of the seats in the House. Our total is down by 10, which is a mere 2% of all the seats in the House but still a majority, and we lost only one-quarter of the number of seats we gained in 2016.

We "failed to win the Senate"? We've gained at least one seat, putting us that much closer to a majority and we quite possibly could win one or two more in January.

Finally, "got absolutely clobbered in State Legislative races"? Prior to this election the republicans controlled 63 of the 98 partisan chambers in the states (Nebraska has a "unicameral" legislature and does not recognize party affiliation), Democrats controlled 35. After this election republicans controlled only 57 (-6) and Democrats were up to 41 (+6). If that's being "absolutely clobbered" then I'll take getting absolutely clobbered every election.

[sheshe2]

76. +1000!

[George II]

77. ..

[sheshe2]

78. You did good.

[radius777]

63. Agree. The Dem base needs better outreach

and mobilization. We can't take groups for granted, look at what happened with Latinos in some key areas.

'Defund the police' and 'socialism' didn't kill us - it was our failure to counteract GOP framing of those issues that killed us, especially on social media. Even Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL), a centrist latina who lost her swing seat said this. She said the GOP has always used the 'socialist' line of attack but it 'worked' this time because it was more customized to each community, and we had no proper counter response to it. Many Dem strategists and organizers on the ground also agreed witth this assessment.

[NurseJackie]

65. Please.

We can't take groups for granted, look at what happened with Latinos in some key areas.

Please.

'Defund the police' and 'socialism' didn't kill us -

Yes it did.

it was our failure to counteract GOP framing of those issues that killed us,

If you're explaining and defining, you're losing.

we had no proper counter response to it.

Here's an idea: stop embracing the term "socialist". In this country, with regard to American voters... trying to salvage the word is a fool's errand... a lost cause. So are the cutsie ways of attempting to repackage it (ie: "Democratic-Socialist" etc.)

especially on social media.

Nonsense!

[radius777]

67. The white establishment wants to throw BLM/AOC under the bus.

It wouldn't matter what slogan we used - look at the outrage against Kaepernick just for silently kneeling.

The GOP has a much more extreme base, yet doesn't apologize for them, so voters tend to view the party as 'stronger'.

We as a party must explain tough issues to voters if we are to make any real progress on important issues.

Rep. Murcasel-Powell, who is a centrist Latina from Florida, did not take the bait and blame AOC or BLM - unlike Spanberger, Slotnick et al who seem to blame the Squad for their own failures and uninspired messaging.

[NurseJackie]

68. Spare me.

It wouldn't matter what slogan we used - look at the outrage against Kaepernick just for silently kneeling.

Of course it does. Anyone who argues otherwise is simply too proud to admit when they're wrong, or they're just too emotional to look at things rationally and admit when something doesn't work (even when the evidence to support it is clear).

The white establishment wants to throw BLM/AOC under the bus.

Joe Biden is "white establishment". Nancy Pelosi is "white establishment". I think one needs to be careful when they start bandying about broad-brush terms like that. The ones that end up being alienated could very well have been friends and allies.

The GOP has a much more extreme base, yet doesn't apologize for them, so voters tend to view the party as 'stronger'.

Here we go again... more of the "Democrats are weak" bullshit. The GOP isn't saying that... it's the fringe elements within our own party that keep that nonsense alive.

We as a party must explain tough issues to voters if we are to make any real progress on important issues.

If "socialism" is the hill people want to choose to die on, then that's their choice. It's a lost cause and those who embrace the term or who spend their entire careers trying to explain it are causing more harm than good.

Rep. Murcasel-Powell, who is a centrist Latina from Florida, did not take the bait and blame AOC or BLM

Oh brother! "Take the bait..." ??? Spare me. What a cynical thing to say. Nobody is baiting anyone.

[Cha]

69. Stop Insulting DU members just bc

they don't agree with you.

[NurseJackie]

71. When it devolves to personal insults and smears...

... it's a good indicator that the poster is becoming frustrated because of having to argue from a position of weakness. As insulting as people can sometimes be, I try to keep it in perspective. When I see it, I know that they know they've lost the argument.

[Cha]

72. Exactly.. that's the way it is.

[AmericanCanuck]

85. Actually, the analysis is clear

We lost Florida because of the socialism espoused by some. Plain and simple.

[GoCubsGo]

22. Yep, and nobody is accounting for all of the ratfuckery, either.

How many new Democratic registrations never made it to the books, because the Republicans who run the local voting office tossed them, or changed their affiliations? That happened, right along with all the other forms of voter suppression and other cheating.

[spooky3]

25. Thank you! Why not make this an OP so we can bookmark

and refer back to it easily?

[pandr32]

31. Agreed!

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

70. We won a majority in BOTH houses in 10 more states than 2016?

Wow, I didn't know that. That's very encouraging.

Thanks!

[George II]

73. Yes. The details:

2016

Democratic majority in both houses in 10 states
republican majority in both houses in 30 states
Split (one each) in 9 states

29 Democratic majorities, 69 republican majorities

2018

Democratic majority in both houses in 15 states
republican majority in both houses in 29 states
Split (one each) in 5 states

35 Democratic majorities, 63 republican majorities

2020

Democratic majority in both houses in 20 states
republican majority in both houses in 28 states
Split (one each) in 1 state

41 Democratic majorities, 57 republican majorities

Net change of 12 majorities gained in 12 houses since 2016.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

84. ty!

[calguy]

8. I'm not at enthusiastic about our results

In what should have been a republican bloodbath, except for a narrow presidential win, we got our asses beat in many areas.
I'm saying a narrow presidential win because even though the popular vote margin nationally is impressive, if less than 50,000 votes in three states would have went to trump, we wouldn't have won the presidency.

The good news is we have the bully pulpit for the next fours years to set the narratives going forward.
The bad news is if we don't change the way we appeal to independent voters or if we fail to more effectively get our base to the polls, we won't be seeing any major wins in the future.

[Ninga]

14. As I understand it, after the 2016 election thGOP didn't abandon their field offices in each state.

They stayed and were well funded to pay staff, and continued to register voters.

In Ohio, the Democratic Party was not a force in urban communities as evidenced by historic low turnout in Cleveland’s Cuyahoga County.

[LisaL]

15. Not sure what you are talking about.

Cuyahoga county had 71 % voter turnout (not historically low). All counties in OH had higher voter turnout than in 2016.

"Counties with over 80% of voter turnout included Delaware, Geauga, Lake, Medina, Mercer, Putnam, Union and Warren. Cuyahoga County witnessed a 71% voter turnout."
https://www.cleveland.com/open/2020/11/frank-larose-certifies-ohios-2020-election-results-awarding-states-18-electoral-college-votes-to-donald-trump.html

[Ninga]

18. Sorry. Didn't make myself clear. The counties cited in your post all went trump.. As noted, their

turnout was %80 or more.

Cuyahoga County at 71% is much lower than counties voting trump.

[LisaL]

19. But 71 % voter turnout is not a historic low for Cuyahoga county.

Cuyahoga's turnout in 2020 was higher than Cuyahoga's turnout in 2016.

[Ninga]

21. Ok. Bad choice of words on my part. Compared to,counties who voted trump, Cuyahoga County

was very low, (not historically low). What I tried to shed light on was that the GOP stayed in states and registered voters.

[LisaL]

16. All counties in OH (including Cuyahoga) had higher voter turnout than in 2016.

Biden got mote votes than Hillary. The problem is, Trump got more votes than he got in 2016 also. So high turnout doesn't necessarily translate into Democrats winning. Republicans turned out in droves.

"All 88 counties had a higher turnout than 2016. In fact, eight exceeded 80%. Northwest Ohio's Putnam County led the pack at 84.1%, followed by Delaware County with 83.8%."

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/elections/presidential/2020/11/27/voting-numbers-set-2020-election-apart-ohio-as-secretary-of-state-frank-larose-certifies-results/6419685002/

[George II]

41. A smaller % of the voters who turned out voted for trump this year than in 2016: 54.1% vs. 54.5%.

[spooky3]

46. There you go again--presenting data and facts! Nt

[George II]

50. Sorry, just call me the Sheldon Cooper of Democratic Underground!!!

[spooky3]

54. :-)

[NurseJackie]

62. Bazinga!

[BumRushDaShow]

61. There is pervasive narrative being put out there that is targeting cities to demoralize them

so that they will eventually say "why bother?". It's negative reinforcement in order to make their narratives a "self-fulfilling prophesy".

Just as you are noting the misinformation and spin about Cleveland (and Cuyahoga County), I ranted about the identical same that had been done regarding Philadelphia's turnout this morning - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=14636171

We have to be on the lookout for and stop accepting the "framing" of data.

[stillcool]

20. let's not...

instead let's acknowledge reality. Where we are, where we want to be, and how we can get there. I really don't give a flying eff about the Republican Cult Party. They are of no use.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

23. We protected our country from the deadly immediate threat and clear and present

danger of Trumpler.

We can sort the rest out after we recover from the great battle to save democracy.

[liskddksil]

37. Unfortunately, going to be very hard to do that with how badly we suffered down-ballot nt

[George II]

60. Again, we did not suffer down-ballot. We made significant gains in the states.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

74. We kicked Trump to the curb. We. Are. Mighty.

Without having to deal with fascist loser Trump, or some other wannabe fascist dictator in 2022, we can put all of our money and energy into winning down ballot races.

Our future is bright. If we win both seats in GA, folks will get the major stimulus help they desperately need. We're gonna get the Trump Virus under control by 2022.

Despite Trump's vengeful efforts to sabotage and destroy our country during transition, we will manage to get great things done for all the people of the United States during the next two years.. 22 Republican Senate seats are up for grabs in 2022, vs only 12 Democratic seats.

The future's so bright I gotta wear shades.

[lark]

27. Fake registrations?

I read somewhere that repugs added 3 million voters on last day, more than the entire year. I think those were fakes, no proof, but it's just very suspicious that all of a sudden there's such an interest when there wasn't before.

[NurseJackie]

30. Ho-hum.

[NurseJackie]

38. LOL!

Ahh the usual suspects attacking...

Ridiculous. Nobody is doing that.

[ismnotwasm]

33. Let's not.

[liskddksil]

35. Yes, lets. See post #34 nt

[hedda_foil]

40. For on e they were honest. They said they were registering new Trump voters and they did.

[uponit7771]

51. HELL NO !!! That does not excuse horrid down ballot polling, people ***STOP GUESSING!!!***. If ...

... registration was a gating issue then down ballot polling would have picked up on something vs guessing if registration or a slogan or a term being the issue of the day.

There's no other country putting up with data this bad for this long tilted towards one political party.

Stop the guessing, bad polling will get us these bad results period

[Dem4Life1102]

53. Not guessing at all

If you know anything about how the polling firms operate, newly registered voters are usually undercounted.

[uponit7771]

79. They're weighted in the polls too if you understand how polling science works

This is a either water is wet or it's dry type of equation; no other country goes through polling this inaccurate for this long tilted towards one party.

every reason why you think the polling could be off has been accounted for and no one here is novel when it comes to the variance in polling.

the polling companies owe us an accounting of why the down ballot polling was so inaccurate this year and in 16.

[Dem4Life1102]

80. Believe what you want to believe

But you’re not going to sway me regarding what I know to be facts.

[uponit7771]

81. I'll believe reality; no other developed country has this inaccurate polling period end of story

[Dem4Life1102]

82. Whatever you say.

[uponit7771]

86. I'll "say" the facts you can accept them or not.

[Dem4Life1102]

87. You stated no facts

Just nebulous conspiracy theories with no evidence to support them.

[uponit7771]

88. So you can prove other developed countries have polling this bad for this long with results going ..

... mostly to one part?

No, you can't ... you'll dismiss this sub thread now.

[Dem4Life1102]

89. I never said they did

You’re the one making claims. The burden of proof is on you.

[LanternWaste]

90. You've made at minimum, seven claims on this thread alone...

and failed to provide any objective evidence at all to support them.

Are you holding others to a higher standard than you hold yourself to?

[Dem4Life1102]

91. No you're the one making claims

and you’ve not provided any evidence to support any of them.

[SlogginThroughIt]

58. We played by the pandemics rules.

They did not. The results of this election are likely not indicative of future results.

We could have infected more people by not following guidelines. We are better than that. We will be just fine and I am not going to feed into the dems in disarray bullshit.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

75. I think this is mostly it TBH

I feel like all bets are off during an Election year where there is a pandemic and you have one political party still trying to make it harder for people to vote safely. I reckon some folks ultimately stayed home out of safety reasons, esp. in those states where Republicans successfully challenged/prevented expansions to absentee voting.

[SlogginThroughIt]

83. Yep. The big this was we didn't door knock.

They did.

[DEM1955]

66. The most important thing...

was winning the presidency, we got that. The best is yet ahead. Sunny days!