General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWe need a new Democratic Party, that much is clear
Last edited Wed Nov 5, 2014, 01:10 PM - Edit history (1)
The current one sucks so terribly that we got our asses flambéed and handed back to us by a confederation obviously composed of lunatics, idiots, and rogues.
Lincoln fired his losing generals until he got some that got the job done. When will we rank-and-file Democrats do the same?
This is war.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
maced666
(771 posts)Lost...
You can rebuild and start a new war. Couple years...
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)
daleanime
(17,796 posts)
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Any pol who refuses to represent the Working Class needs to be kicked out of the Democratic Party starting now.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)
monmouth4
(10,670 posts)
Response to monmouth4 (Reply #2)
Post removed
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)They tried and failed miserably by running as Repuke-lite. Their time is done. They have done enough damage to the REAL Democratic Parth of FDR, HST, JFK and LBJ, who STOOD for something.
zentrum
(9,870 posts)
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)Am I correct that being a Democrat should be an exclusive privilege enjoyed only by a small number of true progressives?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I mean, the Third Way/DLC are not shy at all about their agenda, you can find it right on their website. They ARE a Third Party, with their own money, their own right wing agenda, so what are they doing LEADING OUR PARTY?
And why has it been tolerated for so long? Anyone care to enlighten me about that?
I know what being a Democrat means, and it sure isn't what the Third Way/DLC are all about. So yes, they need to get out of our party NOW. They just lost Dems another election and it will continue unless they and their Wall St. funding are gone back to where they belong, the Party they just handed this election to.
DonCoquixote
(13,949 posts)If the GOP can play split personality and make a Tea party, we can play that trick. That way, we can play good cop bad cop as well, telling mitch "hey, I could help you, but you have to udnerstand, the Coffe Kaltch is putting pressure on me." 
BarackTheVote
(938 posts)There is not enough contrast between Third Way Democrats and GOP Republicans (even Teaparty Republicans in some case). For an opposition party to succeeds it needs to actually, you know, OPPOSE.
Response to FrodosPet (Reply #204)
Ed Suspicious This message was self-deleted by its author.
Marr
(20,317 posts)But they should not be running the party.
Jamastiene
(38,206 posts)apt to join a true liberal party than one that advocates for kissing Republican ass as a strategy. Either stand for something or you will fall for anything. Why agree with Republicans so much and not just go ahead on over to the Republican Party? I don't get that Third Way mentality of insisting on staying in the Democratic Party when in reality, it is just about winning, with no actual values to stand on. If that is all you want, go join the Republican Party. They win a lot. They also march in lockstep like many Third Wayers want. It would make it better for everyone involved.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)plus their kids and friends who couldn't vote. Obama voters wanted complete repudiation of the Bush Republican party. Instead they got "bipartisanship" and appeasement. If the DC dems can stand up to hate radio instead of trying to not get hit too hard, those people will be back.
merrily
(45,251 posts)
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)Odin2005
(53,521 posts)
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)All I hear from them is "Waaaaaaaaaaa! Waaaaaaaaaaa! Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!" No effort, no voting, no nothing. Just babies whining.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Because the voters serve the politicians, not the other way around...
Marr
(20,317 posts)If you lose an election, you employed a losing strategy. It's that simple.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts). . . to support McConnell, that shouldn't have had ANY affect on the outcome of the Senate race in that state!!!
Pholus
(4,062 posts)It isn't always about the money dropped.
Brown had 4X the cash and a huge structural advantage. It should have been a cakewalk.
Those advantages were wasted on a useless series of culture war style ads on TV.
Now we got a clown with a vague plan to save 1.75 billion dollars by "eliminating waste" of some unspecified kind or other.
Marr
(20,317 posts)Again, if you lose an election, you employed a losing strategy.
I agree that funding is huge problem, but the question then is, 'what do you we do about it'? Just steering on down the middle of the road and losing forever with a great excuse isn't an option.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)They might even come back if the party actually represents them.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts). . office the very first time?
Are you going to make the Democratic tent smaller, just to fit your political views?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)those folks who used to work in factories or teach in schools, those young folks starting families while repaying student debt, elderly people who rely on Social Security and all the others who aren't millionaires (I call us the working class; some might say middle class) out to vote.
That is an enormous failure.
The problem therefore is that the Third Way, Blue Dog Democrats cannot bring out the core Democratic Party voters in mid-term elections.
Happened in 2010. Happened now in 2014.
We who want a Party that represents the people working minimum wage, struggling to teach in our underfunded schools, trying to educate their children on limited budgets, working two jobs because neither job is full-time, trying to pay their bills, struggling to keep house and home and family together, exhausted every night but facing a full day's worth of housework, laundry, paying bills after they get the kids to bed, etc.
Is that too much to ask?
Because if it is then those we are asking are in the wrong business. We want a Party that really works for ordinary people, for those of us on Social Security and Medicare as well as for those who drive trucks, mop floors, answer phones, etc.
The results of this election prove that Third Way candidates cannot bring out the voters I am describing. They can't do it because they don't represent the interests of those voters.
What we are advocating is extending the Democratic tent to include all these excluded people.
And one of the major things we need to do is to challenge current working conditions not just minimum wage but fairness for working people in the workplace and in life.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)So, you can't blame it all on 3rd-way candidates!
But, it was a nice attempt on your part.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)I went to our local Democratic club meeting last night. It was part wake and part business. However there was a young man speaking there who is way inside the party and he started explaining whom was being moved in position by the party to run in 2016 in California. On his chess board the pieces of Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsome are being positioned to step in and run for senator Diane Feistein's seat. I pricked my ears at this. Could it be that DiFi is retiring? I could certainly get behind Harris.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Feinstein needs to go. Way too chummy with the Military/Intelligence/Industrial Complex.
proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)Lt. Governor: No endorsement
We’ve got history with the current Lt Gav-ernor. (Four years ago, we endorsed him in the June primary, but then we switched to “no endorsement” in November after he made some stupid “no new taxes ever” statement.) Lately, Gavin and his developer friends have been busy suing San Francisco over 2013’s Prop B. You know, the Waterfront Height Limit Proposition we endorsed, that was overwhelmingly approved by voters in the last election? Lame.
Attorney General: Kamala Harris
Harris is a Democrat and the incumbent. She’s been tough on transnational gangs, and in the fight for marriage equality she was a total badass: she forced several bigoted Republican County Clerks to issue marriage licenses after Prop 8 was overturned. When the banks settled with the states on foreclosure fraud, Kamala held out to get more money for California. However since then, we haven’t seen any follow through on prosecuting any of the bankers or cracking down on other predatory lending. And she’s not 100% aligned with League values: she’s opposed to legalizing marijuana, and just days after SF’s City Attorney sued landlords who evicted tenants to run Airbnb hotels, Harris held a fundraiser at Airbnb, co-hosted by Uber and others. /headdesk/
rtracey
(2,062 posts)and Harry Reid
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)Demeter
(85,373 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)lurched to the right will be solidly back in the zone again.
Open primaries would be a good start.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)Lotta good it's done us, especially lately. The Party hacks just shove their Mary Burkes down our throats anyway.
merrily
(45,251 posts)
TBF
(35,987 posts)out the infiltrators (third way). The problem is that they - the street - are paying for the campaigns.
Because both parties are funded by big business of one sort or another the differences are strictly cosmetic (cultural). Last night the conservative culture - guns, churches, camo etc won.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)It's almost as if they don't care if they lose -- and they don't. The .001% will rewards them either way.
moonbeam23
(413 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)TBF
(35,987 posts)
quakerboy
(14,780 posts)Rather than a collusion.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Lying
Sociopaths
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Sort of a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" kind of fight.
TBF
(35,987 posts)nt
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Given the extended track record of Democratic impotence, I find it hard to attribute to incompetence and easier to attribute to collusion.
"Give us subpoena power!" they said, right before the 2006 midterms. We gave them subpoena power, and they chose not to use it. "We need to keep our powder dry", after all.
Obama was elected on a wave of popular support for his liberal platform, then did an abrupt about-face upon taking office.
Republicans were reeling from losses in 2012, yet were allowed to regroup and recover. Democrats should have smashed them in the mouth, but instead (again) reached across the aisle to give them a hand up.
TBF
(35,987 posts)as opposed to a leader as we see in some countries. I don't believe in shadow governments or the like - but I do believe that with capitalism there are some very wealthy folks pulling the strings and you oppose them at your peril.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Odin2005
(53,521 posts)As well as the entertainment industry.
TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)TBF
(35,987 posts)campaign - co-precinct chair for precinct 58 here in Brazoria County.
So you can keep your snark to yourself. 
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I've stood on street corners and handed out information for organizations like the ACLU and the Democratic Party. Find someone with a really friendly smile who is a dedicated Democrat, and you will reach many voters. Little old ladies like me are really good at this because we are obviously not a threat.
It's hard work but it is rewarding when your candidate wins or you gain friends for a worthy cause.
Unfortunately, I'm involved in family issues right now and cannot do it.
I really believe that we need to have a loving, kind society that upholds our families, that embraces our children and grandchildren, that is not too busy or too greedy or too needing all kinds of superfluous things to take a moment to listen to someone who has a story to tell or something to say from their heart.
If you want the kind of society that I want -- and it isn't so much about money as about respecting each person for who they are -- then you are a real Democrat and you have a lot to learn from and to teach and to share and to gain from other people who want what you want.
I do sincerely believe that most Americans want to live in a supportive, kind, helpful society. I do believe tha most Americans are loving and creative. I do believe that most Americans deserve a better life than they now have.
And we can build the big tent and the society we want, but we cannot do it if we are driven by people who think that huge salaries make them more worthwhile than the man or woman who cleans their offices at night.
So that's my blueprint for Democrats winning future elections. It's pretty touchy-feely and very big and broad. It isn't a matter of capitalism v. socialism or Christianity v. some other religion or red states v. blue states. It is a matter of valuing the gifts that each of us has. It's a matter of being able to smile at a person, look into their eyes and learn what there is in that person that is loving, that aspires to be better, to share more, to help more, to be more in society than that person thinks he is.
As Democrats we have moved a long way from my view of what we should be.
I think I read everything that I could get my hands on that was written or spoken by Eleanor Roosevelt. I suppose she was my super-hero when I was young. We need to return to her concept of the Democratic Party. And the first step is to validate the union movement which, when healthy, brings all the people that I have described above up and encourages them to want to do something to improve their lives. If they believe that voting Democratic will improve their lives, they will go to the polls. If we who are active Democrats do not persuade them that they will be part of something bigger than themselves, that they will be able to share their ideas and aspirations when they vote for Democrats, then we have failed.
And when I say that I am talking to the Blue Dog, Third Way, corporate Democrats. If you don't respect and love and want to help those who clean your floors and serve your food in restaurants and babysit your kids and cross the border for a better life, then get out of our party. You are not Democrats.
TBF
(35,987 posts)and we will need you for the rebuilding. After we get rid of capitalism.
And I do mean that sincerely. We are dealing with two parties bought and paid for by folks who have managed to accumulate way too much $$$ for themselves while they literally leave others to starve in the street. Did you read the story about the pastors in Florida who were arrested while trying to feed people? That is where we're at. These are not people who are going to listen to reason. These are folks we need to fight head on and defeat.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Mitch O'Farrell) floated a proposed ordinance to ban feeding the homeless in public. The fringe left and progressive religious denominations mobilized and have, for the moment, caused the tabling of the ordinance.
Keep in mind these were Dem councilmembers making this proposal, supposedly at the behest of business owners in their districts.
And it's not as if they came up with any sweeping proposals to address the issues of homelessness here. Instead, it was more, "You can't feed the homeless out in public view. Sure, if you can find a facility to do it in indoors you can. But not where the public can see it and have their Hollywood and downtown experiences sullied by it."
TBF
(35,987 posts)of folks and blaming them individually for things that are often out of their control - it's the republican 101. The dem compliance is mind-boggling.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)It is asinine that dissatisfaction with the Dems would result in wins for repubs. We need more options than either or.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)The problem with building a third party is that they don't usually have any power or influence in Washington.
Bryant
Bragi
(7,650 posts)Canada currently has three parties splitting the votes of the 6 out of 10 of us who lean center/center-left.
The result of this split is that right-wing conservatives get to govern with less than 40 per cent support.
Be careful what you wish for.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)fighting each other they were listening to OUR message: Get the vote out.
DocMac
(1,628 posts)If they have infested your state, vote against them. It's not like you will get any benefit from them being there, on the contrary. When will we learn?
leftieNanner
(16,132 posts)Paul LePage won again because of a third party candidate.
Bohunk68
(1,447 posts)Our candidate was gay and I can tell you that homophobia is alive and well in the US regardless of the gains we have made through the courts. In my district in Upstate NY, we had an openly gay candidate in Sean Eldredge and he lost 1-3 to the shit Teabagger. I have been having a running battle on fb all day with an acquaintance who said that Sean should go back to his husband and get his carpetbag out of NY. I called her homophobia shit and asked her if she said that males who were married to females should be told similar. I then was told that I was being too sensitive. So, she not only did a homophobic-xenophobic statement, but compounded it by patronizing me. Another thing that I noted was that the local Dem party didn't do shit, no phone banks, nothing, nada, zilch. As an election inspector, while the turnout was very good with no lulls during the voting hours (6am to 9pm), there were darn few people under 34 that voted, very few.
leftieNanner
(16,132 posts)I'm 61, grew up and spent most of my adult life in San Francisco. I thought we were done with the homophobia. Done with the abortion issue. Done with the contraception issue. Damn! Can't believe we're fighting these all over again. I don't get it.
merrily
(45,251 posts)right? Yes, I realize you'd be back to two parties, but gee whiz.
Bernie Sanders used to beat candidates from both parties when he was Mayor of Burlington. Then, Republicans and Democrats unified and ran a single candidate against him
He still won.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)vi5
(13,305 posts)Geez, I wonder what message our very serious leaders are going to take away from that.
Goodbye Public education. It was nice knowin' ya!
Vinca
(53,555 posts)Hassan, Shaheen, Kuster and the state/locals. (And I get a whole lot of pleasure in knowing the teabagger I had a confrontation with yesterday lost on all fronts.)
vi5
(13,305 posts)I'm in NJ I had no choice but to vote for Booker.
Don't like the guy, but the alternative was worse.
How long until the Democratic party makes that our official motto?
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)He's really a DINO.
I voted for the Green Party candidate, Howie Hawkins, who IS, in fact, Liberal.
vi5
(13,305 posts)I loathe Cuomo and I'm not a Booker fan at all (although at least he seems like a more pleasant guy).
My point was that 2 of the biggest Wall Street, coporatist, anti-Public ed, anti-labor Dems won. And it's very likely our Democratic leadership will look at the wreckage today and determine that our candidates need tob e more like them.
derby378
(30,262 posts)We've gotta start at the top.
Howard Dean was excellent - and look how he was treated. I am so sick and tired of the party shooting itself in the foot.
I live in Kansas, and every single person I voted for lost. It's going to take a long, long time to get over this one.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)...us.
They won't (and demonstrably didn't) fight the GOPers, and they have NO intention of fighting corporate power. They only get a tilt in the kilt at the prospect of hippie/lefty punching to prove their bona fides before the corporate state.
And they WILL fight us.
BuelahWitch
(9,083 posts)DocMac
(1,628 posts)
Joe Shlabotnik
(5,604 posts)A few hundred or thousand peaceful protestors were no direct threat to the establishment. But the idea , growing in popularity that "another way is possible", scared the elites shitless. Only state sanctioned thought and discourse is allowed. Any threat against the status quo will nipped in the bud.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)We were demonized as "lunatics", "crackpots" and "dirty hippies", as is anyone who dares to go outside the boundaries of thought the Ruling Class allows.
vlakitti
(401 posts)Seriously, thanks for introducing the hegemony concept here. It would make a good text and argument for the next period we're facing.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts) shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)‘Wherever there is an ascendant class, a large portion of the morality emanates from its class interests and its class feelings of superiority.’
john stuart mill
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)We need to show the Ruling Class that WE THE PEOPLE mean business and that they must choose between reform or their heads.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)one to see that happens. However, IIRC, she was elected, so I don't know that he would override that.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Imagine if the electorate in off-year elections looked like the electorate in presidential ones.
This isn't a leadership issue, it's a failure to vote issue.
Replacing the people at the top is not going to change that dynamic.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)our base's turnout problem is a known and regular thing That mean both parties plan for it.
It doesn't show up so much in House races because of gerrymandering, but it certainly plays a part in the Senate. In order to stay in the Senate, Senators need to win with the Republican electorate (off years) as well as Democratic electorate (Presidential years).
Essentially it means that we're guaranteed to almost never have two good cycles in a row. Which is an almost insurmountable obstacle to legislation.
This is why Republicans want to make it difficult to vote--to prevent less motivated voters from showing up. Because our voters are almost always less motivated than theirs are.
Why did we get so much stuff passed in 2008-2010? Because we benefited from the political fallout from Bush's disaster.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)thing.
The Republican base gets pissed off at their establishment just as much as we get at ours. But they turn out to vote no matter what, and that affects policy.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)politically, Democrats and Republicans are in trench warfare.
We are locked out of Congress due to turnout and districting. They are locked out of the presidency due to demographics.
Their base is dependent upon pissed off old white people who always vote because it gives them a chance to stick it to people of color and liberals. Our base is dependent upon young people and people of color who go into political hibernation every other election cycle.
There are very few persuadeable voters. Everything is a matter of turnout.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)
steve2470
(37,481 posts)If we don't win elections, then we end up commiserating with each other. They vote far more than we do, in general. Call them lots of unkind things, but they VOTE. Granted, the church/Rush Limbaugh/Kochs/fear of the black guy and gun confiscation and teh gays are the motivators, but they freaking vote.
You nailed it. Yes, we need to move more leftward and have better candidates, but we need to freaking VOTE in all elections.
merrily
(45,251 posts)We did vote and we all should be doing a hell of a lot more than voting. But we are not the majority of Americans. Apart from making sure Manny doesn't post another OP like this
how are you going to convince more people to vote if you don't pass legislation that inspires them to make sure you stay in control?
Blaming voters and those who don't vote has been a pastime for a long time. Has it improved anything? If not, let's try something new.
steve2470
(37,481 posts)At least we'd win elections. We wouldn't have fascist Republicans to deal with. YMMV. I'm sure we disagree.
merrily
(45,251 posts)No one said you shouldn't vote.
Today is the first day of "between elections." How do you propose to change the party (and/or improve turnout next time for the same ole, same ole).
merrily
(45,251 posts)running on issues that appeal to everyone or a systematic top down plan for registering more voters (RIP ACORN) or a hundred other ways they could improve turnout?
And if Dem turnout on off years is so bad, why have I been told every election how superior the Dem GOTV game is? Schumer said it on one of the Sunday shows a few weeks ago--that we should add several points to Dems in polls just because the GOTV is that good.
Besides, I don't know if I agree with the flip flop being the route to election. In Massachusetts yesterday, as best I could tell, results just about lined up with TV ad buys. Off year or not. Maybe that's even worse news for us since Republicans outspent us by so much this time. Also, if there are more of us and the Presidential turnout is so great, we should never lose a Presidential.
Another thing: vote suppression was rampant this time. Remember all those IRS hearings? I watched some on C-Span. The organizations complaining about IRS treatment were GOTV republican organizations. They testified about all they were doing to educate voters, register them, etc. They testified about weekly nationwide phone calls to share experiences and tips, etc.
Democrats heard this testimony. What counter measures have they been working on since?
Blaming voters doesn't work. Time to come up with some strategies that might.
Jamastiene
(38,206 posts)Gee, you have not figured out why that is yet? It wouldn't hurt to take the time to reflect on how shouting down liberals is probably not the best way to get votes in the GOTV efforts, because if the way liberals have been talked down to on DU and belittled on DU is any indication of what the door to door GOTV efforts were, then I can see why many people were less motivated to vote. Those of us on DU will vote despite what Third Wayers always belittle us with and all the verbal abuse, but door to door average people were probably just glad when half of the Third Wayers finally left their homes, if they acted the same toward them. No one likes to be belittled. Period. That is NOT the way to get votes. Having no actual values to stand on, always moving the goal posts more and more to the right, and belittling people has not proven to be an effective strategy to motivate our voters. Can you honestly not see why that is? Really?
vi5
(13,305 posts)and legwork rather than just sending out hysterical e-mails soliciting money every 10 minutes, we do pretty good in elections.
Fight every race at every level.
Use some of that money to get people to the polls. Use some of that money to get people to get whatever ID's they need to vote with these new idiotic voter ID laws.
Those types of things are leadership decisions.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Howard Dean didn't produce 2006 and 2008. The backlash against Bush did.
vi5
(13,305 posts)Or 2010. Not at all like I did in previous election seasons. All I saw were the e-mails.
I didn't get any calls. I didn't get any mailers. i didn't see any registration efforts. I didn't see any buses or people driving others to the polls. Yes, obviously this is anecdotal but it sure says something to me.
And if there was a good GOTV effort we might have done better.
No, different leadership isn't going to be a magic bullet, but anyone who thinks the current people in charge are working their asses off in the areas that count is just naive.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)more volunteers.
JustAnotherGen
(37,771 posts)We were out in the 7th. Did we miss you?
MineralMan
(150,879 posts)I know, because I was the one doing it. In that precinct, every Democrat won by at least 60% of the vote. Were you out canvassing? It can be done by a single individual. We also had people driving voters to the polls and much more. GOTV efforts depend on individual people. Someone actually has to do it.
merrily
(45,251 posts)and wait for volunteers. (By you, I mean people within the party responsible for this kind of thing, not you personally).
merrily
(45,251 posts)
Howard Dean didn't produce 2006 and 2008. The backlash against Bush did.
Is that why Dean got fired and replaced with a Tim Kaine, who was also a sitting Governor for the first year of his DNC job? And, like Dean, Kaine and Wasserman also had nothing to do with turnout?
So, 2010 and yesterday were backlash against Obama? That's it?
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Mainly due to Colorado's investment in voter registration drives (state level, it's not party level).
The problem is people don't really care about voting when people say things like "we need a new party."
merrily
(45,251 posts)The problem is people don't really care about voting when people say things like "we need a new party."
I call bs on that.
Besides, you all have been doing that for years, too, and it hasn't improved anything. Try to get that blaming voters solves nothing and probably does damage. So, if you want to continue solving nothing and risking making them worse, keep proffering rationalizatons for people who get paid handsomely to worry about things like GOTV and to get inspiring legislation passed and keep blaming voters for things like posting a political opinion on a political message board.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)There are more registered Democrats than Republicans in Colorado.
merrily
(45,251 posts)The party that claims GOTV is its be all and end all does not deal with voter registration is because voter registration is not a party issue? Laughable.
Then again, how ridiculous and suicidal was it for Democrats to race to kill ACORN, esp. without replacing it?
Good luck with increasing Dem votes next election if you are not willing to admit anything or consider any change, even on the hands off voter registration policy.
I didn't think it could get worse than Tuesday, but with "responses" like this, the next election could well be worse.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)2016 will be about "being down on ourselves" and "wanting better." That's Hillary Clinton's narrative.
It will be about celebrating, not denying, the achievements of the Democrats. And for all the naysayers denouncing things like Obamcare, it will be rebuffed by people saying it's a good thing. In that vein Clinton's campaign will be more progressive than any that has preceded it.
2014 is an anomaly. Just you wait and see.
merrily
(45,251 posts)joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Congrats. Watch and see. It's going to blow minds. Especially with Obama asking his Republican congress for war powers. What a weak Presidency...
Autumn
(48,867 posts)That was supposed to be a fricking secret. 
"The problem is people don't really care about voting when people say things like "we need a new party." that's kind of sad josh
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)The youth were disillusioned. Just like in 2010.
Autumn
(48,867 posts)Gardner sounded sane and at time one would have sworn he was a bit of a liberal. The person hood amendment was shot down and a person who sponsored a person hood bill was elected. Now that didn't happen because people here on DU and others say that we need a new party, that happened because of citizens United. The only person speaking about that is an Independent. The Democrats are silent. You validate it by blaming DUers other than the ones who have done this. The Democratic leadership needs to step up or step aside. If the youth of Colorado are disillusioned, just like in 2010 then it's time to realize just why they are disillusioned. That's not our fault. That lies squarely on the shoulders of the leaders of the party. I know several Hispanics here in Colorado who wouldn't vote because of broken promises. I don't blame them. They, nor anyone else owes their vote to the Democratic party. 
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)It still boils down to the youth vote.
Autumn
(48,867 posts)If you don't they will stay home, except for us old people. I sometimes think I vote out of habit.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts) Autumn
(48,867 posts)we dislike or like. It does nothing to our politicians, it does nothing to depress the vote. It's a discussion board for like minded people to discuss political and other issues. It's just that not all of us like the way our party is going and others do. So we discuss it. if you want to post how great the party is that's a good thing go for it, if someone else doesn't like something they can post about it. I vote, I'll bash, complain about them or praise them whenever I want to and I'm sure other Democrats here feel the same. It's our right.
There are people here I disagree with, I stay out of their threads. People I like I post in their threads.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Because they have confidence in their political choices?
Face it. Democrats have a bad name because of the continual bashing of them. Left, right, whatever.
Democrats rely on the youth vote, which aren't reliable. The Republicans rely on the older vote, which is going to vote regardless. It really is that simple. It's unfortunate that we have to wait a generation for those older voters to simply die off to actually enact change, which is why I don't see substantive change until 2020 at the minimum, more like 2024. It's disappointing, but that's how it is, to me.
To me voting is a vanity thing, GOTV, activism, campaigning, those are things that matter. And like 2010, the Democrats and activist left failed. But since this seems to be a reoccuring theme, perhaps the activist left failed long before that, in the years leading up to the election with the "discussion" that ultimately led to the conclusion that Democrats are no better than Republicans. This is why we have, say, Colorado voting down anti-abortion legislation, while voting in a lying Republican (top ten pro-lifer), or why we have Alaska voting in a Republican after passing marijuana legalization.
Hey, why not vote for the Republican if they're no different, right?
Autumn
(48,867 posts)voters who are struggling on all fronts no reason to get out there and vote. Vote for me cause I'm not as bad the other guy doesn't work for that young person struggling to support themselves or a kid on 7 bucks an hour. Rents are too fucking high, bosses are fucking assholes, drug tests on a legal drug limit them and young people can't get a living wage.
Democrats have no business relying on a block of voters when they ignore the problems in those voters lives until they need their vote. But they did.
Democrats had no business relying on the Hispanic vote after breaking their promise. But they did.
Republicans and Democrats are different, but they share some traits anymore. That's why many are concerned about the direction Democratic party is moving
Activists didn't fail, they worked their asses off, the Democratic leadership failed. You and I won't agree on that so this is a discussion that is going no where. So we all regroup here and wait for the next election hopefully things will change.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)And tell me Democrats are a "bad name."
Activist failed to GOTV. The youth didn't vote, therefore GOTV failed, primarily by not accepting that Democrats are better than Republicans.
Autumn
(48,867 posts)I merely reposted it. In those two years we are waiting I will be hoping and working, trying to get the Democratic leadership to make some changes to draw in those young voters who are hanging in the wind.
Because "accepting that Democrats are better than Republicans." just IS NOT a reason for them to vote.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)It's purely because of Dem bashing. Wait two years and that Dem bashing will have little effect. They can be third way, blue dog, whatever, Democrats are going to take back both the House and Senate in 2016. Because the narrative of the party isn't going to be self-deprecating. Democrats will own themselves, own their ideas, own the whole she-bang.
It will be.
Glad I don't live in the "now" and can look forward to the amazingness that is the coming elections.
Autumn
(48,867 posts)Then one ought to listen instead of getting offended. Have a good day.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)The last time I went to vote, the gal at the polling station said I didn't look like my ID, and the gal next to her looked at me like she was going to demand I shit my birth certificate on the spot!!
So, now I vote by absentee ballot, by mail, before election day.
Because it is true, I don't look like that guy on my ID anymore.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)It's actually disappointing because Colorado makes vote-by-mail so easy and trivial, it seems as if the youth didn't even bother. It's so easy. No effort required. None. And I mean that, you have to check your mail, you can carry your ballot to the mailbox when you do. All you gotta do is fill it out. A straight D ballot (or I if there's no D running) means that it takes 2 minutes to fill it out. It's sad.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)take money away from GOTV
ReRe
(12,182 posts)Australia? That requires it's citizens to vote? But they have a Parliament. 
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)it would motivate them to vote?
You know, a DEMOCRAT that stands up for working americans?
HAHAHAHAHAHA yeah they all all to busy sucking on wall streets teats to give two shits about anyone trying to survive in this Randian paradise we find ourselves in.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)show them how damn wrong it is to let them have any political power.
I and my family are sick and tired of paying the price again and again for idiots who don't realize how dangerous these baggers are!
onecaliberal
(36,594 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)damning video of Romney's fundraiser.
Voters do get disappointed and lots of voters, on this board and elsewhere have expressed the view that they are not excited about Democrats anymore. Articles saying the same thing abound. Why continue to deny it?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)High interest on one side will spark interest on the other side.
2008 felt more important than 2012 did.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Saying that both parties are the same.
People started believing it, and I think that is why the turnout was so low.
America paid a heavy price for Democracy yesterday.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Dem turnout went down in 2012, not because Dem voters were disappointed, but because their crystal ball showed them Republican turnout was going to low, too. Good one!
Legalequilibrium78
(103 posts)most as exhibited here, frankly don't have any alternative solutions. Other than whine, and or point out how unliberal the majority of the Democratic politicians who ran and lost and the ones that won. If have the people here worked on making sure that people do get out to vote for Democrats then yeah okay, I can buy the frustrations here. But really now, most of the posts and topics posted on this site are complaints and whining about how Pres.Obama is a sell out and or wrong he is on many if not all the issues the left cares about.
Most of the complaints here does not address the bread and butter issues that affects the lives of most average Americans. Issues where even if the avg. Joe leans conservative he knows that the Democratic party is offering something pertinent to his financial situation - lack thereof i.e. no jobs, poverty wage, etc. Most of the posts truly reflects the demographics of this site; which are mostly white, university educated, high paying jobs. So issues like privacy, NSA, gay marriage, environmental protection, war against ISIS, have a more sophisticated and I am sorry to say this elitist ways on viewing these particular issues. These issues are important but privacy shit are not a primary concern for people with families who are struggling to pay with their bills due to lack of adequate or decent jobs.
These people would rather work, than accept money or hand out from the gov't. they take pride in their ability to rely upon themselves, their hardwork and sweat. These people are not looking to be pampered or be taken care of by the gov't. they simply want a gov't. that is responsive to their needs. I think most of us Democrats have lost sight of this, as we have made ourselves so busy fighting an ideological fight against the Repubs that we let ideology trump pragmatic solutions to complex issues. If the solutions do not fit with the supposed liberal ideology then it must be discarded and be ignored.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)You just don't listen
merrily
(45,251 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Caused by leaders that pretend the Democratic party is right wing. As long as the party keeps it up, this will keep happening.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)People won't vote if it doesn't affect their lives. Which at this point it doesn't for almost everyone.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The Democratic party more or less does as good a job as I can imagine anyone doing of representing this country's version of the left.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)The median American is all over the map
OrwellwasRight
(5,310 posts)the Median American is NOT a centrist. And the Democrats should stop playing to the non-existent center. Stand up for something, make it clear that you are standing up, not running away, and the votes and the enthusiasm will follow.
http://www.timesargus.com/article/20141104/OPINION04/711049960
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)The Powers That Be favor fracking. The Obama Admin favors fracking. The Conservative Agenda favors fracking. H. Clinton favors fracking. The people are the ones apparently are wrong.
Now that we have a Conservative controlled Congress, stand by for fracking.
merrily
(45,251 posts)poll liberal by around 70% of respondents IF:
you do not put a label on the question, Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative, etc.
and
a ton of money has not already been spent to propagandize them
That has been demonstrated over and over.
Yesterday, in every state on which minimum wage was a ballot initiative, it passed handily.
What if, instead of a 2000 page bill, Obamacare had been Medicare for all, and had gone into effect in 2010,? What if Democrats had passed EFCA and raised the minimum wage. What if, instead of bailing out and immunizing banks, Democrats had dealt with the foreclosure crisis from the perspective of Main Street? Would the 2010 election have gone better or worse for Democrats? Would yesterday? Do you know how many years people voted Democrat based on Social Security and support of unions alone?
merrily
(45,251 posts)Forever, I guess. The incentives to repeat it endlessly are huge.
Response to Recursion (Reply #14)
blkmusclmachine This message was self-deleted by its author.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)It's important that the Democratic Party continues to ignore the 50% of the electorate who don't bother to vote because neither party offers them squat.
nc4bo
(17,651 posts)Cliff. Next right step we simply fall off the flat Earth.
It's all savageable but we're going to have to surrender the 3rd way to do it.
Stepping more and more to the right, not sticking to the principles that made the Democratic party great is the win.
OrwellwasRight
(5,310 posts) merrily
(45,251 posts)But, now that Manny started this thread putting down the Party as it now stands, he's single-handedly killed the possibility of any Democrat's winning in 2016. Maybe ever.
(If you need a sarcasm sign for this post, I don't know what to say.)
OrwellwasRight
(5,310 posts)Last edited Fri Nov 7, 2014, 06:47 PM - Edit history (1)
Let's blame Manny now for all future Democratic losses!! 
merrily
(45,251 posts)The power of negative posts by liberal DUers is so vast, positive posts cannot overcome it. Neither can billions of dollars and months Democrats and their strategists devote to campaigns, nor the job performance of Democrats in office. It's just unimaginable political power that nothing currently known to humankind can possibly overcome.
Abandon hope, all ye who enter here.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
OrwellwasRight
(5,310 posts)
Hugin
(37,616 posts)Which is hard to do these days.
I say, go for it Democrats!
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)Dems. Anyone who wants to see positive changes in the party, or wants to see the continuation of Dean's 50-state strategy, should definitely join up.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)From Comment on Alternet:
All of PDA Board Members won.
Actually, it is only a bad day for conservaDems; progressives did quite well. It was a complete sweep for PDA endorsed candidates and a worse than expected day for Democrats overall. Representatives Ellison, Grijalva, Conyers, Lee, and McGovern and House Representatives: Grayson, Schakowsky, Pocan, Ted Lieu and Bonnie Watson Coleman won!
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)I've been frustrated with some of their endorsements, but overall I'm happy that they're around and fairly functional.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)all I can say is my local chapter is run by some really rude and ignorant people. There's a few people still left but no growth. I think the DFA movement can join with the Progressive Change movement and others and combine their strength and they could become a significant player.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)to have a good local chapter that's pretty active. The e-mail is pretty useful, though, on way or another. I think DFA, WFP, PDA, and DSA (among other groups) can all be effective vehicles to help bring about change. There's no reason why progressives shouldn't be working through progressive organizations.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)The Ruling Oligarchs have their claws into the leaders of the Democratic Party.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)I think that Democratic Parties in States that keep losing should consider, at long fucking last, looking at States where Democrats win and consider patterning after the victors....
Yesterday, we reelected Merkley, DeFazio, Governor Kitzhaber and we passed a State ERA and we legalized marijuana. If I don't look East, things look creamy delicious.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Different states have different cultures and demographics.
In Kansas, for example, the median voter would rather see his/her own children go malnourished and uneducated than raise taxes on rich people. That's their culture.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)cultures and demographics' it says the Democratic Party needs to be replaced. Universally. Perhaps our culture is winning elections and perhaps that should catch on a bit.
I have been all over this country. I know what it is all like. I also know that many other States continue with long lines and IDs and voter suppression. I know that they will not do a thing about it nor even think about it until moments before the next election, then they will speak of their election systems as if they were handed down from Sinai unchangeable.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)and part of culture is voting and civic participation.
and part of that is making the vote accessible, and so on
whathehell
(30,394 posts)
malthaussen
(18,477 posts)So the fact that Corbett was beaten doesn't really say much, does it?
-- Mal
whathehell
(30,394 posts)
Feel better now?
KPN
(17,201 posts)I voted Green Party rather than Peter D this year. Peter's great, but the D Party nationally is pitiful. I have finally succumbed to the notion that it can't be changed from within. It is hopeless as long as money decides who wins and who loses. Time to fight for change from outside. The D Party will not change from within.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)You write: " I have finally succumbed to the notion that it can't be changed from within. It is hopeless as long as money decides who wins and who loses. Time to fight for change from outside." (emphasis added)
The Green Party is always heavily outspent. At least in Democratic primaries, there are races where good progressives can keep the spending competitive or even have an advantage.
We all know that money has too much influence. But how does stomping off to the Green Party change that fact?
If your favorite progressive can overcome the right wing's moneylords and win election as a Green, then he or she can win the primary and the election as a Democrat. The major difference is that working within the Democratic Party means you don't incur the automatic opposition of millions of voters who don't pay a lot of attention to politics but who identify as Democrats and who will routinely vote for the candidate with that label.
ladjf
(17,320 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)try to blame the voters AGAIN. That's like a fighter after failing to put up a real fight, blaming the audience.
I am so angry I cannot express it. Angry at the political operatives who have running around the country since 2008 telling Dems they HAVE TO COMPROMISE. Of course that suited Wall St and worked exactly as it was supposed to, it caused voters, especially the young and Independents to lose the necessary enthusiasm that is required to get them to work as they did in 2008, to WIN.
I sure hope I don't run into anyone who dares to try to deliver that FAILED MESSAGE AGAIN. The Dem Leadership lost this election, AND the election in 2010 and then deliberately take the wrong message from those losses..
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Put the blame where it belongs...on the leadership.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)... cause that'll help fix things.
brentspeak
(18,290 posts)Tossing them to the side -- immediately.
Time for talk is over; time for taking back the party from the 3rd Way is now. No discussion is needed.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Got a list of the scary "bad Dems"??
Part of DU has been threatening to get rid of the bad Dems for years now.
What's going to change?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)back to the party they belong to. And then ignore those who are deliberately trying to prevent REAL DEMOCRATS from winning elections by claiming the lie that 'this is a Conservative country' when every poll shows that is NOT the case at all. Suppressing enthusiasm, backing right leaning Third Way infiltrators.
WALL ST. WON this election with the help of their emissaries who did nothing BUT suppress the necessary enthusiasm that WON, ON A PROGRESSIVE PLATFORM in 2008. Enough!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)But my sense is, you were less concerned about THAT, than protecting your "principles".
Right?
I have no principles. I voted for Kay Hagan, and encouraged others in NC to do the same.
Yes, father I confess, I voted for the lesser of two evils, a moderate dem versus a right wing whack job.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)fracking, the XL Pipeline, don't see it the same as you. Those among us that are ok with the Changed CPI and drone killings don't see this as a disaster. Yesterday was a big victory for the Conservative Agenda.
Are you mocking my "principles"? Really? Do we have different principles? Or maybe you, like H. Clinton, have flexible principles.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)... so far, right?
Maybe a few more years if ranting will do the trick.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Democrats, or just post on the internet slamming and blocking those who are working for the Democratic Party and NOT for Wall St 'candidates' funded by Wall St? It certainly would help to get rid of them if we didn't have to fight, not only Wall St, but those in our party who are supporting them, no?
Otoh, you haven't really said how YOU feel about these 'bad Democrats' so it's possible you are happy with the way things are. But I'll let you speak for yourself on that.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)The good dem bad dem debate is a giant fucking waste of time.
The reason this is true is that the states are very different. Especially for Dems.
The GOP is fairly homogenous. Rural folks. Whites. Generally older.
The Democratic Party is everyone else. And we are dispersed in pockets around the country, more urban.
As a result a good dem in CA is not a good Dem in NC.
Kay Hagan was too moderate for CA, and painted as too liberal for NC.
Some of you don't get this. You think you can run any "good dem" (using your standard of good) and they'll win anywhere.
It's simply not true.
So, as you purge the bad Dems, which you can't actually do, good luck.
Oh ... I moved to NC in 91, and watched it vote for Dole, and Bush. It was bright fucking red.
It's closer to purple now. But it is not yet a place where what you consider a good liberal can really win big.
So hey, kick ME out of your religion, Opps, party.
How you going to do that exactly? I don't plan to leave. And, I'll support the dem with the best shot at beating the whack job Tillis next time around.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)from their own party.
If you think we don't know that there are a few parts of the country where a Hillary eg, can't win, then you are imagining things.
Explain this, if you can. NJ is a BLUE STATE. There are way, way more Dem voters there than Republican.
BUT, in the NJ Governor's race a few years ago, the Dem Leadership betrayed the Progressive Dem who challenged the moron, and EXTREMELY VULNERABLE CHRIS CHRISTIE, and over 60 NJ Dems ENDORSED HIM, leaving the Dem without any support in a BLUE STATE from her own party.
And the Leadership starved her for money, handing the election to Christie, who they all apparently ADORED, even here on DU we were told how 'moderate' he was, he 'hugged Obama'!
Now why would the Dem leadership abandon a potential WINNER in a BLUE STATE in favor of a REPUBLICAN who was in DEEP TROUBLE due to the way he had handled Hurricane Sandy?? Can YOU explain that?
Speaking of people not understanding 'the way things are'.
And NJ isn't the ONLY example of Dems falling all over themselves for Republicans.
So forget the Red States, we will accept a few more Conservative Dems from red states. HOWEVER, once the party helps get them elected, they should expect to vote WITH DEMS or lose in the next election. But that isn't what happens, is it?? We are told our Party has no control over its own Party Members!!
Something is going on here, and many people have figured out what it is. So an end has come to the old talking points we have tolerated for the past decade or so. And that is where the hope lies, we can no longer be fooled, and young people especially know the score, which is why they are staying home for now.
You do as you please, I hope you will be happy with the new Dem Party, or I should say, the OLD FDR Dem Party, because that is what the voters said today, 'we want the Old Dem Party back'.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to high. The Conservatives say not to be impatient just turn the temp to simmer. The Left tells the frog to jump out. As we have seen here, some frogs choose to go with the simmer because it's better than the high temp and not so radical as jumping out.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)I think the focusing on that distinction is a waste of time and counter productive.
So I'm fairly certain we'll continue to focus on it.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I noticed the Conservatives, after the big win, are out to gloat here. Throwing it into the faces of the non-Conservatives.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)The baptist ministers I encountered as a teen were way better than you at claiming their moral superiority.
Like them, you seem to be one who hoped for a dem defeat, so your own moral superiority would stand out.
I care far more about the damage a GOP majority can do and that the top priority should have been stopping that from happening.
Apparently, your top priority is to sit "on high" chastising the sinners.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Do you have proof of that?
Because you wouldn't want people to think you're just disrupting by making up nasty crap about people who simply cherish Democratic principles.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)You stopped making predictions because they require a firm position.
So does hitting the alert button.
Which is why you won't do it, right?
Don't you have some principles to defend?
After all, those abstract principles are far more important than the actual real world damage a GOP majority might do.
You want to call me a disrupter, Cardinal Manny?
Go ahead ... Just make sure you use the right persona.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I believe he begged the question if running candidates with democratic principles was more important than voting for a poser of democratic principles.
Can you tell the difference between what we have and what we should insist on?
I just got through reading about some lobbyist who becomes the head of a state Democratic party and who runs candidates that vote along with Republicans. I wish we'd compare someone like that to a Howard Dean's and his 50 state strategy to win back the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party"?
The head of the FL Democratic party helped as a lobbyist scrub a bunch of black voters off the FL voter rolls. Florida just caved in to fascism more via the last GOTV, which my sister worked her ass off to assist with, locally in Pinellas County. Florida just gave a real boot to the Republicans and re-elected Rick Scott. What kind of Democratic candidate make it in Florida? The kind who work with Republicans.
What is wrong with examining and then demanding that we no longer allow that kind of thing to continue? Your input is the same as Manny's here. The solution is to invite real thought, not the alert button.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)... or Manny?
Was Kay Hagan a poser? Should I have stayed home this year and not voted for her? Not encouraged others to vote for her?
Am I a poser for having done so?
Are we now better off with Thom Tillis replacing her?
Let's examine that.
Skittles
(170,203 posts)it's pitiful but there it is
Skittles
(170,203 posts) 
Ineeda
(3,626 posts)I'm enraged and ready to give up. We compromise up the wahoo and lose anyway. It's way past time to play by the same rules as the RWNJs. And don't anyone DARE say, "oh, but we're better than that" (even though we are) because being 'better' has ruined us. Doing the right thing is never wrong, but we've got to do it using some of the same tactics and strategies. And no, I don't mean cheating and lying. I mean ferociously standing by our principles.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)When was the last time we saw Dems put up a real fight? When in recent years, have seen the Dem Leadership get their own party members who continually cave to the Right, to get the message 'you vote WITH your party on this issue OR YOU GET NO COMMITTEE Chairs, you get NO SUPPORT from this party in your next election'. Like LBJ or FDR were able to do? I can't think of one time on an important issue seeing that kind of 'You are a Dem, you either vote WITH Dems or you get nothing from this party'. Not once.
THIS is what I hear: 'Look, the Dems couldn't have succeeded because the Blue Dogs/Third Way/DLCers would not go along'. So when voters took that message to heart and threw out the Blue Dogs, the message changed to 'WE NEEDED THEM'. BS, that's all we get, and Wall St wins, every time because we do not have FIGHTERS on our team.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)and won going away.
We started to lose elections as soon as we decided we'd rather try to reach out to Republicans rather than follow through on those principles.
Rex
(65,616 posts)They got their ass handed to them last night and just like GOPukers (funny that) NEVER take any responsibility for their own actions.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)with each passing year. We went along with their 'strategy' and lost. So yes, they got their asses, and ours unfortunately, handed to them AGAIN. So they can try as hard as they want, but they will NOT get away with blaming the voters this time.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025767160
Autumn
(48,867 posts)No arguments, no hidden posts. We won't change our minds and they won't change their minds. Not responding to them would eliminate a lot of problems. If one wants a simple hi and a wave would do. No reading, no replying and best of all no arguing. We all know which posters we are aligned with and who we can have a discussion with.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... serious people, Manny.
blackcrowflies
(207 posts)NOT Hillary in 2016.
area51
(12,590 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)[URL=
.html][IMG]
[/IMG][/URL] [URL=
.html][IMG]
[/IMG][/URL]
Zorra
(27,670 posts)
Tatiana
(14,167 posts)I'm still stunned. They elected a man who profited off of other's misery, who is uber wealthy, and who could care less about average non-millionaire Illinois resident.
The only thing I can come up with is that Quinn was so unlikable and voters were so disappointed with Obama that they picked "the other guy" who just happened to be Rauner.
Yes. We need to start from the bottom up and rebuild the Democratic Party. The entity that is limping along right now will be the death of us all.
840high
(17,196 posts)TRoN33
(769 posts)1. Fire DNC head because she is the one who told Democrats to run away from Obama
2. Block anti-Obama Democrats from entering the party
3. Vote out Pelosi and Reid
4. Get behind Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders (my own senator) for 2016 Presidential election
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)The usual suspects will work. Hippies, liberals, progressives, students.........
Response to Fuddnik (Reply #43)
1StrongBlackMan This message was self-deleted by its author.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)When you take a drumming by your opponent, and after said drumming still call the opposition lunatics, idiots and rogues, it becomes clear you don't understand your opposition. I think the Democratic Party is well aware of the coordination the Republicans have. Republicans are also well aware of our ground game. When will rank and filers realize we are not dealing with "lunatics, idiots, and rogues." Sure, they have some serious idiots, but their party over all has game. That could be no more clear.
I fully agree with your first and last remarks. We need new party leadership and this is war. If you, who I know is very well educated in politics, thinks our opposition are lunatics, idiots, and rogues, we are in trouble. Our opposition is intelligent and formidable. Our game plan should take that into account and our goal should be nothing short of slaughter.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)and the rogues are very smart indeed.
So, we basically agree.
freebrew
(1,917 posts)but there's too much division in the party. Just look around DU, for every issue someone raises here, there's another DUer with an opposite take on it. They're not just trolls, there are some extreme viewpoints here and I know these things are costing elections.
I'm afraid people that really have the answers are not wealthy enough with $$ or influence to get anything done.
We really need a long term plan to bring our party back to ALL of the people.
swilton
(5,069 posts)or a third party that moves the current system to the left.
Clintonistas, the DLC, thirdwayers have ruined what I thought the Democratic Party stood for. Foreign-policy, catering to Wall Street, environmental destruction - this Administration is 8 more years of Bush w/o being held accountable.
But watch the non-voters become the scapegoats for this debacle.
Moostache
(11,094 posts)Over?
Nothing is over until WE decide it is...
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
(Germans?)
((Forget it, he's rolling...))
With all due respect to the late Mr. Belushi, I really do feel like its over right now.
Democrats may have locked down the electoral map for the Presidency, but honestly what difference does that make when the best you can say about holding the White House is "At least we stopped them from having a rubber stamp for the GOP agenda..."?
The House is lost for a generation or more...if we don't take back the house by 2020, I will definitely die under a GOP House of Representatives, as will anyone over 40.
The Senate was of no help in passing legislation over the last 6 years anyway...they were also no help in getting judges or appointees through either...in fact, I do not expect any real change to occur in the next 24 months other than Obama's veto pen to get a work out.
There are no real progressive policies being pursued or even considered in the current climate. The Democratic Party has simply morphed into Eisenhower Republicans as the GOP keeps lurching further right. The fact that this country WILLINGLY signed up for it - and re-upped for Walker in WI, Skeletor in FL, and Asshat in MI simply shows me that this is no longer a country worth saving from itself. I am going underground in a big way....full on bunker mentality and I am going to watch this rat hole country burn itself to the ground in fits of pique and ill-advised hand outs to those with everything at the expense of those with nothing.
Good luck to those who counts Sisyphus among their role models...
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Here is the proof right there. ^^^^^^^
KPN
(17,201 posts)What makes you think O will use the veto often over the next 2 years? Hasn't his pragmatism disappointed Progressives a lot in the past 6 years? Why would he stop being pragmatic now?
While I hope you are right, I laid awake last night worried about my kids' future.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)
ProSense
(116,464 posts)At least they started.
Look at who lost.
The path to a new Democratic Party is that way>>>>candidates who stand up for Democratic values---red state or blue state; win, lose or draw.
JustAnotherGen
(37,771 posts)
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Lincoln fired his losing generals until he got some that got the job done. When will us rank-and-file Democrats do the same? "
We'll win in 2016.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)When they realize that they have been duped. The Republican cuts will sting.
phaedrus351
(3 posts)Okay, this morning the government is even more broken than it was. What now. Pretty sure the old model, Democrat/Republican, has sailed. This election was pretty much the eulogy. Not that we won’t keep rising up and waving the flag, pretending it’ll work this time, if we just keep voting and to about the same effect.
I ran 2 precincts for Move On with Kerry, stomped and basically gave up normal life 6 months. Do it for this, whatever we are now?
Tea party took over the Republicans, the Republicans took over the Democrats, and we stood around and rah rah-ed. Ralph explained this back in ’08 and before, and we’re still surprised. We’ve a “progressive” president that acts against whistleblowers and the press in a way that Nixon wouldn’t dare dream, puts people in charge of agencies straight from the industry they regulate (most distinct example, Comcast lobbyist as the head of FCC) and we’re Democrats. Really? How much worse would Romney have been? We might have built a working congress with him, Democrats might have had to become the opposition instead of the ‘likable’ Republicans.
We lost a long time before this election. ~John
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)"We’ve a “progressive” president that acts against whistleblowers and the press in a way that Nixon wouldn’t dare dream, puts people in charge of agencies straight from the industry they regulate (most distinct example, Comcast lobbyist as the head of FCC) and we’re Democrats. Really?"
I ask also, Really? Really?
Are people's identities so wrapped up in which team they're on, they missed that the team was playing for the other side? They don't care about actions, but only that their side wins.
sammy750
(165 posts)The nation is now where the voters want it to be. They are looking for a failed nation, bad economy, etc. The Democrats don't deserve to win or even lead. Wake up young voters and elect smart, intelligent law makers, not the radicals and extremist.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Its so much easier than focusing on "war" with the actual enemy.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Why rock the boat? Things have gone so well for the last two decades, what the #%^* do these people want?
Regards,
TWM
snooper2
(30,151 posts)
randr
(12,633 posts)Democrats need to make their own "contract with America" stating precisely what their objectives are, what they think are our most pressing issues, and how they plan to deal with them.
ReRe
(12,182 posts)Everybody get in the fucking Party they belong in, for dog's sake. A boot to the butt of all the Turd Wayers, Grand Bargainer, DLCers, DINOs!
rtracey
(2,062 posts)When the democrats regain the senate, we need to NOT have Harry Reid as Majority leader.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(133,927 posts)I'm not defending Reid rather I'm curious who you'd select.
rtracey
(2,062 posts)There is a need for a more progressive, younger leader. I am not sure at this time, but I think our party needs younger reps to begin taking over for the next generation of voters. This next generation, which I believe did not vote last night, sadly my 20 y.o. daughter was one...(away at school)...is more progressive in their causes....Harry Reid was way to "generous" with the Right...
beerandjesus
(1,301 posts)My money's on Martha Coakley.
*sigh*
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)
JohnnyRingo
(20,636 posts)From Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck to Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly- the most trusted names in Tea Party ideals- we've seen inspiration for angry voters to show up in droves to vote against the "Obama agenda". Your solution consistantly seems to be to give those pundits more ammunition to use against us.
I'm not saying democrats should move to the right, far from it, but if anyone thinks using the terms "liberal" or "socialist" gets the vast middle out to the polls in their favor, they're sadly mistaken. Most Americans, the ones who don't cram cable news on a daily basis, just want politicians that they see will do no harm. Conservatives have positioned themselves into that role quite nicely through their media outlets.
What you're doing is rousing the spirits of people who will always vote a straight democratic ticket anyway. If you want to win more elections, find a way to inspire the politically disinterested. I don't know how to do that, but steadfast liberal values are seen by the middle as more repulsive than saying one wants to return the country to a imaginary time when conservatism ruled the land.
Our problem as democrats isn't that we aren't far enough to the left, it's a matter of PR. There are far more potential democratic voters in the United States than republicans, we just don't vote. Find a way to motivate those otherwise indifferent souls to the voting booth and we'll see a replay of 2008 every time.
Remember, Obama didn't run as a liberal, he only offered hope and change to a downtrodden middle America. It was Fox News that painted him and his party as extreme socialists then and continue to do so today.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)A majority of voters consistently say they are for these values.
It would be nice if the Democrats occasionally stood up for them.
JohnnyRingo
(20,636 posts)...that show Americans share individual "liberal values". If you asked the man on the street if he believes in feeding the poor, he'll respond that he indeed does, but if you reword it as distributing tax money in food stamps, the response is entirely different, and you know it.
Ask anyone if we should do something about homeless people, and they're all for it, but once the phrase "rent subsidies" is coined, they suddenly shrink from their compassionate intent. Representing these carefully worded polls on values as universal acceptance of liberalism is misleading at best.
Understand that I'm a liberal myself, but I know it doesn't sell to the voting majority. I know this first hand from friends and relatives. Despite that, I reside in a NE Ohio democratic union stronghold where our (moderate) congressman, Tim Ryan, handily won his 7th term yesterday. Kasich barely held his own here in the 17th. Democrats here normally win by a consistent two to one margin.
Perhaps you come from a more liberal district than myself. Maybe your local voting populace nicely mirrors the demographics of DU, and that's great, but that's not real world politics. As I see it, Manny and other liberal ideologues here are running a Sno Cone stand in the middle of the Mohave Desert, and according to the kicks and recs received, it appears he's managing it quite well. The problem is that he and others think their business model that works so well on the locals will be as much a hit in a national market.
Common sales sense dictates that in order to appeal everywhere we may want to offer some percentage of hot beverages to appeal to the national masses, but that amounts to ethical treason to the Sno Cone liberals here who believe that everyone from Maine to Alaska are hungry for their icy treat of socialism. For the record, I love Sno Cones, especially the blue ones, but I know that if Fox News and hate radio irrationally proclaimed them a Communist threat to our way of life, sales would plummet, and that was my original point. We as democrats have to open a confectionery stand that attracts a wide customer base. Getting hard scrabble liberal voters to the polls is not the challenge we face as a party, it's convincing the moderate middle to show up and elect our candidates
If you or Manny ever decide to try your hand at managing a campaign, please find somewhere besides my home district. We have our share of racists and 'baggers here, but when we vote, it's for a democrat and I'm proud of that. If my congressman had run an unapologetic liberal campaign, we'd have ended up with that crazy republican obstetrician who's only platform was to end Obamacare on her first day in office, then return full time to her private practice. Please stop helping.
Scarsdale
(9,426 posts)The gop got in formation behind him (Cheney, actually) and supported EVERYTHING he did. They stuck together, all echoed the same message on TV EVERY Sunday. Had this party of Democratic reps done that for our President, we might have had a different outcome. President Obama was left swinging, on his own. The gop constantly insulted him yet nobody came forward to fight them off. THAT was a big mistake. United front is what they should have shown. The gop constantly claimed President Obama was ineffectual, when they blocked EVERYTHING he tried to do. The dems. should have come out swinging against those charges. When a bird brained clown like Palin can insult the President at every turn, something is WRONG.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)We need to take over the Democratic Party and give a retirement notice to present company.
Thenewire
(130 posts)They should actively campaign on a wide range of progressive issues. Strengthening the social net, infrastructure spending, and even universal healthcare. They can use other terms to describe these plans to appeal to the less educated, sort of a marketing initiative for ideas. If they are active and unified about this at national level I think they might be able to start labeling republicans as being lazy and good for nothing oligarchs, which of course they are. This could potentially turn their own base against them once people start realizing how much harm stagnation really does.
DFW
(59,877 posts)DNC Chairman-- Howard Dean. Yes, he'll be 66 this month. So what? McTurtle is 72 or something, and chomping at the bit to do some serious damage. Come back, Howard. We miss you. You have no idea how badly.
Senate minority (ugh) leader: Al Franken. He's outside the mainstream, but cordial enough to run the faction, and has his heart in the right place.
House minority leader: Get one of the old guard black caucus guys to do it. Conyers and Rangel are too old, but not all of them are, and they are not beholden to the Pelosi crowd.
Democratic governors assoc.--who cares? There are so few left, they might as well meet in a phone booth.
The Republicans will do some real damage. Due to their almost solid ownership of the media, the masses will cheer them on, and think everything that goes wrong is our fault. When their families all get cancer due to their drinking water being fracked, and they can't afford health care, because they voted to extinguish it, they'll figure it out eventually--probably after China buys the West Coast of the United Sates out from under us, but who's counting?
INdemo
(7,024 posts)And voters will come of their shell and support it.
We need the Bernie Sanders and the Elizabeth Warrens and not the corporate owned candidates that dance to the same tune as Repukes
randr
(12,633 posts)and it would work for the Democrats to get more liberal.
Supporting the values of your constituents works every time.
We all know the country is far more liberal than the leadership we currently have, this is a large reason no one votes.
Put up liberal candidates willing to argue liberal ideals and you will see the majority of Americans support you.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)let's learn from them!
INdemo
(7,024 posts)And don't think we will find that in the Democratic party as is..
We will not get more liberal if Hillary is nominated.
She might talk the liberal talk but after she is nominated just watch her follow the corporate sponsored scripts.And we will see if she is nominated that she is nothing more than a Republican lite.
If Hillary is nominated our turn out of Democrats will be just like the mid-terms and we lose.
randr
(12,633 posts)thing people are willing to vote for them.
INdemo
(7,024 posts)Last edited Wed Nov 5, 2014, 06:15 PM - Edit history (1)
A candidate enters the primary and shows their true colors as a liberal and not appear as some Republican lite or center of the road candidate people will vote for them.
Remember what Harry Truman said, and boy does it ever hold true today...
He Said "When Democrats get out there and act like Republicans, voters will vote for the Republican every time"
edited
bvar22
(39,909 posts)"I've seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the Fair Deal, and says he really doesn't believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign."
---President Harry Truman
No less true today than it was when he said it.
INdemo
(7,024 posts)got me on that one. I guess I was confused with this clip
of FDR
Thanks for correcting me
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Chathamization
(1,638 posts)senatorial primary in New Jersey. There are liberal and progressive candidates who run, but most of the time they get almost no support. That needs to change.
Autumn
(48,867 posts)What a farce this shit is.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)There are Third-Way DUers who are advocating we move more to the right. I swear to goddess. 
And the election wasn't 12 hours old and someone is already hailing Hillary as our Savior. The Democrats are doomed if they keep up with this. You'd think after losing and losing and losing, over and over again, they'd figure it out but no, they're going to double down.
Rex
(65,616 posts)further to the right to win in red states. I'm done with Third Way types - they failed miserably and are (as usual) blaming everyone but themselves.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)It's stupefying.
KPN
(17,201 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)Operative word is genuine.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)That ought to send them a signal that voters don't want Democrats who act like republicans.
But it probably won't so be prepared for President Chris Christie.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)if we go further left it will just make us appear more radical, we really need a progressive party.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)
Rex
(65,616 posts)The Third Way lost last night and now they are pretending it was everyone elses fault (and of course are blaming their favorite group to hate - the Left).
Until we remove that cancer from our party, we will continue to lose to the GOP with Third Way/GOP-lite candidates.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)What a novel ideal. Rank and file Dems are less the problem than the politicos. What is wrong with sitting down and talking to one another?
swilton
(5,069 posts)This is Paul Jay on the eve of the 2010 election - How the Democrats Allowed the Tea Party to Rebrand the GOP - from TRNN and worth its own thread
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=5806
Erose999
(5,624 posts)
Loge23
(3,922 posts)The accomplishments and achievements of the left are many and represent the most significant advancements for the citizens of this country. Clearly, I do not need to list these in this forum.
So why have we let "lunatics, idiots, and rogues" as Manny well-put it re frame the argument against us?
It's not us that's the racists and elitists, they say, it's them! It's not us that are the fiscally irresponsible ones, it's them! It's not us that are the obstructionists, incapable of governing, it's them! And the electorate - those who show up anyway - buy it!
Meanwhile, after voting, they shuffle off to their Medicare-covered appt. and cash their SS check - two of the many things this would not have if not for the left.
Can anyone name ONE significant accomplishment from republicans since the Eisenhower administration?
Their idol, Reagan, fired the lethal shots on the middle class and unions. The Bush's hubris and incompetence is firmly of historical proportions. In each, their foreign policy, their fiscal policy, and their domestic agenda were virtual train wrecks.
They claim to be the protectors of freedom and liberty and yet actively pursue policies restricting the very same.
They coddle and patronize racists, misogynists, and domestic terrorists.
They have effectively destroyed our national standing in just about every measurable category - we are truly a laughing stock of a country now.
We need a party that will uphold and celebrate the liberties and fairness that the left still believes in - the human side of governing. I argue that our government is a well-functioning one - it's the elected government representatives that are not. I argue that the right is bent on destroying our well-functioning government. We all know what that makes them.
Forget about the old guard Dems - they have lost their credibility. We, the people, must elevate our next leadership and we must finally take a stand supporting our philosophy instead of running from it.
Many on these pages, admittedly including myself, have been critical of the President for not being left enough. Meanwhile we left him defenseless against the unscrupulous and false accusations that the right relentlessly leveled against his administration - from Day 1. Yes, that doesn't absolve him of his own lack of conviction but neither does it absolve us.
We have two years to mobilize. Let's go.
randr
(12,633 posts)31%, or slightly more will control elections.
One third of our country are conservatives, one third are liberal, and the other third are apathetic and unwilling to participate.
I do believe the Republicans have made their case to win over the conservative vote and I do not believe they can convince the apathetic third to support their cause.
I do believe the Democrats could convince enough of the apathetic crowd to gain the majority.
If only an increase of 5% to 10% of either women or young people were convinced of the need to vote for their self interests we would see an end to the madness.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)You remember it, the one that controlled both houses for 40 years, from 1954 - 1994 by being the party of the left.
This 'halfpublican' experiment thingy has pretty much ruined the country, because it just keeps driving everything further and further to the right.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)brooklynite
(96,882 posts)The Religious Right and the Tea Party became influential because they did the hard work of joining School Boards and Party Committees at the State and Local level. I see plenty of demands for agitation" but no sign that the disenchanted left is prepare to step away from their keyboards and get their hands dirty.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts) 
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Got handed their asses in a bag by the Smirk Meister, Rahm Emanuel as he made sure that only neo conservatives get into positons of power inside the Democratic Party.
Rahm spent years traveling around the ntion, circa 2005 to 2008, making sure that anyone who even seemed a little bit Progressive got knee capped, poltiially speaking. He also ensured that the chosen few got the Democratic Party's backing and funding.
We now have a status quo wherein only the rich and powerful matter. And that is the way it is set up. (From both sides.)
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Corruption Inc
(1,568 posts)Second, if Ds won't prosecute the criminals then we're just as bad.
Third, the issues are: universal health care, useless military spending, criminal banks, the environment, illegal spying on citizens, torturers and war criminals that aren't yet prosecuted, immigration, social programs like social security, education, whistle blower protection and the economy which is being destroyed by 1%er propaganda and payoffs to almost everyone in politics.
Finally, Most people are too dumb to even care or too desperate to care as a full 1/3rd of our population is more than 6 months behind on their bills. The dumb will keep staring at cats and cartoons and the desperate will ignore the corrupt, post-reality fools and get on with their lives without giving a flying F about Ds or Rs.
charlespercydemocrat
(46 posts)we don't need a new political party ,what we need is put new idea in the democratic party. you cant run a car without gas and that's what the democrats are doing.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Like it or not, he's going to have to make some significant compromises. If we support him -- rather than abandon him -- we'll get something out of it too, including a better footing in future elections. We damn sure better get behind a Presidential candidate who can win in this environment.
As an example, assuming I haven't already been branded an ignorant ass and alerted on by the masses, I'm fine with him supporting chained-CPI if he is forced into it -- AS LONG AS, we get some things like:
--protections for those on the lower end of the SS scale (as laid out in the catfood commission who actually called for an increase for those on lower end);
--Some help with jobs for our youth and undocumented immigrants who will be paying our SS and don't need to become an enemy of the elderly to get their share;
--increase in minimum wage;
--protect those who are being helped by ACA and make some improvements;
--and more.
As a sumarry, he can cut my SS check $30-$50 a month for the next 10 years as long as he helps young folks and immigrants get good paying jobs (which will help SS in long-run); saves me a few dollars on my Part B Medicare premium; incentivizes building of apartments that saves me a little money; increases the FICA cap some; protects those on lower end as he and the catfood commission proposed; etc.
Alternatively, we can draw a line in the sand, . . . . . . and wither thumbing our noses at what the voters said in this election and the power they gave to the right wingers.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Has he shown any evidence at all that he gives a flying leap about the thoughts of anyone to the left of Reagan?
He's in this now only to make his mark on history, and the mark he wants to leave may not be pleasing.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)circumstances. Your criticism likely didn't help either.
I too wish it were different, but things ain't gonna happen overnight in this country. We can hope for immediate change. But, we'll likely be sitting here in 20 years with nothing to show for it.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)
- I'm sure Mao would be delighted to know that in the 21st century, he's still relevant.....
Thrill
(19,342 posts)Democrats will never stick together or be Progressive as a whole. Forget it.
kentuck
(115,279 posts)We need to remove the purists (mainly progressives) from the Party. The Democratic Party has less and less appeal to constituencies of the past, for example, NRA members and pro-life Democrats. We need to get out of the way and let the DLC moderates run the Democratic Party. We should no longer feel obligated to force our progressive views on the Democratic Party. We need a divorce.
We should vote our consciences and promote a progressive agenda for this country and no longer be shackled to the present moderate Democratic Party. We could still vote for Democrats but we would have a hell of a lot more leverage.
Bonhomme Richard
(9,504 posts)I have come to the conclusion that things are going to have to get really, really bad before we see any change in voter thinking.
Progressive dog
(7,588 posts)doesn't work for you? It seems to me that declaring war on Democrats doesn't solve the problem of people voting for lunatics, idiots, and rogues.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)The OP is pretty clear. Why don't you tell us how you feel instead of trying to twist the words of the OP?
Progressive dog
(7,588 posts)and there was nothing crazy about the way I read it.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Why don't you just give us your opinion or argument?
Progressive dog
(7,588 posts)It isn't a trick, just allowing the OP the chance to explain why he claims to be a member of a party that he dislikes so much.
Response to Progressive dog (Reply #336)
rhett o rick This message was self-deleted by its author.
JonLP24
(29,883 posts)The one that had the most success at it was a former Green Party supporter who worked on the Nadar campaign who never expressed or waffled when it came to key social issues. She even supports the death penalty and gun control in Arizona.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025771285
Summary of her recent two elections in a swing district with very unique demographic voting blocs.
840high
(17,196 posts)for anyone with a D after their name.
peace13
(11,076 posts)The message can't get out when the rethugs own the meda. It is pointless!
MisterP
(23,730 posts)Foundation's ideas and 2. saying Obama got us out of Iraq
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)better dems has always been my goal, which is hard to accomplish without convincing others that the need exists.
That's what the turdwayers of the world can't seem to understand or appreciate if they do.
obxhead
(8,434 posts)not give them to billionaires and their corporations.
That's ALL the Democratic party needs to do. Say it, then do it. They NEVER lose again.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)By purging US?
adirondacker
(2,921 posts)True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)Or is it only other people hundreds or thousands of miles away from you who need to change?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)20 years ago I was pretty politically active. Then it occured to me that Americans, as a whole, were in stupid mode and there was nothing to be done that could head off a crash. We just had to crash, then hopefully people would start to think again. So I sat on the sidelines and watched. And wrote some nonsense to keep sane.
It might be time to jump in again. Thinking about it.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)as phony "compromise"/"bi-partisanship"/"triangulation," but we can clearly see now that their sole intent is/was to destroy our Party, and Nation, from within.
drmeow
(5,961 posts)brooklynite
(96,882 posts)Or is that someone else's job?
drmeow
(5,961 posts)Like I have the resources to start some new media. PUH LEASE.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)If that results in us loosing a few "purple" states so be it. We need to have strong party discipline and a unified party platform.
BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)is that the DLC "moderates" would declare themselves the true winners and absolute vision of the party no matter the outcome. If we won, they would go on about how their way led us to victory and so we ought to further move right, and if they lost well, just look around as they beat up anyone and everyone but themselves for their failure. They have a position that literally cannot be disproven because they are dishonest, rightwing extremists who thinly veil their austrian and chicago school radical in a handful of social issues and some bones thrown to the peons to appease them.
They are a cancer and must be ruthlessly excised before they destroy what is left of American progressivism for good.
DrBulldog
(841 posts)... Obama will be completely forgotten the day after he leaves office. What an incredibly horrible disappointment that worthless wimp of a man he has become. I cannot believe now I cried for joy on election night in 2008 ...
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)To expect the reverse is stupid.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)If you don't pass their lameass litmus test, you're not worthy of even running for political office!!!!!
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Then he should promptly re-appoint either Warren or Biden as the chair.
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Or should I say "second" party?...
Demeter
(85,373 posts)There was no good reason for that many people to walk from the Iran/Contra without orange jumpsuits.
I won't be around long enough for it to happen, if it's going to take generations (and it will) to build up enough strength to overcome the Forces of Evil, including the Military/Industrial/Espionage complex, the BFEE, the sheiks and the Zionists. Long before the Democrats got that strong, the Chinese and Indians will have inherited the earth.
I think a new party would have an easier time of it...fewer entrenched parasites like Harry Reid and Diane Pelosi and Chuck Schumer...provided it can keep the moles and subversives out.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)It is more than just Republican obstruction.
Think of the last 6 years.
How's that Guantanamo Bay treating our "guests"?
Domestic surveillance makin' ya feel safe?
Glad it's so easy to imprison whistle blowers and journalists?
Looking forward to the Trans-Pacific Partnership?
I'm going to point out the obvious. This election defeat was a fundamental failure on our leadership to support Democratic ideals, defend important civil rights, and negotiate treaties to support all the people.
I voted straight Democratic ticket, but I knew we were going to lose bad. The responsibility is with our President.
People follow for a reason.
INdemo
(7,024 posts)for President and the liberals will come out of the woodwork to vote.Thus giving the "liberal" status back to the Democratic party instantly.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)And she is the real deal.
Fox will attempt to destroy her, but it didn't work with Obama during his runs for office because the majority of us want progressive policies. We got hoodwinked with Obama, but she has proven she walks the talk.
She will get the young people back in the game too.
INdemo
(7,024 posts)
DCBob
(24,689 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)Will more likely lead us to disaster.
meow2u3
(25,246 posts)We must have Elizabeth Warren as our leader to show us how to convey the populist message effectively.
We also need to purge the Democratic Party of the corporatist, neoliberal Republican-lites who have infiltrated our party--the ones who talk the populist talk but walk the corporatist, neoliberal walk. In other words, we should take a page out of the Tea Party playbook and challenge corporatist Dems from the left, sticking resolutely to populist principles, even if our message sounds crazy and outrageous.
Bill Clinton mentioned that the people will respect those who are "strong and wrong" more than those who are "weak and right." It's time we be both strong and right.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Renew Deal This message was self-deleted by its author.
MineralMan
(150,879 posts)Become the Democratic Party. Get involved. Become a leader in the party organization. Don't ask others to do it. You do it.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)I liked this post:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025767160
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)It's war.