Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

randys1

(16,286 posts)
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 01:12 PM Dec 2014

So it's my imagination that people are PAID to disrupt us and convince us NOT to vote?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/11/10/voter-turnout-in-2014-was-the-lowest-since-wwii/



General election voter turnout for the 2014 midterms was the lowest it's been in any election cycle since World War II, according to early projections by the United States Election Project.


I dont know where to begin...
49 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So it's my imagination that people are PAID to disrupt us and convince us NOT to vote? (Original Post) randys1 Dec 2014 OP
Yes. n/t leeroysphitz Dec 2014 #1
Here in Oregon turnout was about 70%. Roughly twice the national average.... Bluenorthwest Dec 2014 #2
Doesn't Oregon have some kind of really practical and elaborate mail in voting system? eom Blanks Dec 2014 #15
Yes. And so do at least fredamae Dec 2014 #27
Practical and simple. Everyone votes by mail. Or you can use a drop box. Bluenorthwest Dec 2014 #31
Being a "Native Oregonian" fredamae Jan 2015 #49
Internet trolls keep voters home? LittleBlue Dec 2014 #3
I think there are people who are paid to disrupt and discourage people from voting notadmblnd Dec 2014 #4
Yep, no wonder the approval rating of congress is so low dissentient Dec 2014 #6
There are, to be sure. Igel Dec 2014 #5
No, randys1, it is not in your imagination. There are people who cheat and lie for money to win. Dont call me Shirley Dec 2014 #7
I see it a different way. Savannahmann Dec 2014 #8
I agree. Elections have bee dumbed down to... TreasonousBastard Dec 2014 #16
I don't know if they were paid but I had heard Rove had a bunch going and I Thinkingabout Dec 2014 #9
You are not going to get much support for those upaloopa Dec 2014 #10
Then they do not have a complaint. Thinkingabout Dec 2014 #11
Agreed. Bobbie Jo Dec 2014 #36
Nope no imagination... Historic NY Dec 2014 #12
One of the reasons politics is so negative is to disgust and turn off voters. It's effective. Scuba Dec 2014 #13
Negative ads work. former9thward Dec 2014 #20
Oh they work all right. In multiple ways. Scuba Dec 2014 #24
It's definitely not your imagination. Tarheel_Dem Dec 2014 #14
In the long run it's probably better for democrats... Blanks Dec 2014 #17
Hope you are right and it is all the more reason why you will see an extreme effort randys1 Dec 2014 #18
I will vote for Hillary if she's on the ballot... Blanks Dec 2014 #21
Maybe a "None of the Above" option and vote by mail would put them out of business. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2014 #19
Yes, please vive la commune Dec 2014 #38
Anybody that bases their decisions on anonymous internet postings is a weak-willed dimwit. Throd Dec 2014 #22
Many many many minions base votes on much less, all the time randys1 Dec 2014 #25
Yes mmonk Dec 2014 #23
Nope not your imagination. mstinamotorcity2 Dec 2014 #26
Nope. It's true. With the money that side has to throw around, I bet there's a paid troll calimary Dec 2014 #28
While I believe people are paid to do just that SomethingFishy Dec 2014 #29
Of course it works, the question is to what extent, otherwise they wouldnt do it randys1 Dec 2014 #30
Are you saying you might decide not to vote because a troll told you not to? SomethingFishy Dec 2014 #32
You BetterBelieveIt is not your imagination. great white snark Dec 2014 #33
Start with the thread posted asking of it's worth democrats winning at all Renew Deal Dec 2014 #34
Who is "us" in the sentence "PAID to disrupt us"? Are you speaking of DU? rhett o rick Dec 2014 #35
IDK who didnt vote from DU, neither do you unless you did a poll, I assume. randys1 Dec 2014 #40
You wrote "are PAID to disrupt us ". Are people paid to disrupt who? nm rhett o rick Dec 2014 #41
Can I presume we are all Democrats? If so, it is probably safe to say boston bean Jan 2015 #48
Blame voters AgingAmerican Dec 2014 #37
It may not be your imagination... ElboRuum Dec 2014 #39
No. Warren DeMontague Dec 2014 #42
Yes. Wall St is what disrupts our democracy. Not YouTube comments. raouldukelives Dec 2014 #43
I can't say for sure Jamaal510 Jan 2015 #44
I get the feeling there are people deliberately trying to convince the public that "the left" is Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #45
Citizens United freed up an awful lot of money .. MinM Jan 2015 #46
here you go. wyldwolf Jan 2015 #47
 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
2. Here in Oregon turnout was about 70%. Roughly twice the national average....
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 01:24 PM
Dec 2014

So if your theory is correct it means that Oregonians are twice as smart, half as gullible as say, your State. While that seems to fit with my observations here on DU, I really think that the reasons have to do with our having better candidates and election systems more than it has to do with the sheer gullibility of much of the country. These are things that could be replicated. Or you could keep looking under the bed for the monster that steals your elections.

fredamae

(4,458 posts)
27. Yes. And so do at least
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 03:41 PM
Dec 2014

a couple other states and their numbers were down.
We had some important ballot measures that likely helped turnout...but there is one other thing...Oregonians are an independent lot, that's indisputable, but with that, I believe-comes a more informed electorate.
Legalizing cannabis won More votes than Gov Kitz as did GMO's (I think).
I suspect Kitz wouldn't have been re-elected if his opponent (Richardson) was Not a card carrying member of ALEC.
D-5 Congressman Schrader a Blue Dog...didn't really "win" his reelection on his merits and voting record..many folks simply voted Against his opponent Tootie Smith who is ....well....shall we say a bit out of touch.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
31. Practical and simple. Everyone votes by mail. Or you can use a drop box.
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 03:49 PM
Dec 2014

We get our ballots for 2 weeks, so there is lots of time to do the deed and also to become informed. More people know what they are voting for in more detail than in other places I have lived, vote by mail is the reason.
I think many if not all States could benefit from such an election process. It is popular here on a bipartisan basis, about 85% of Democrats like it and about 75% of Republicans like it. In both and all Parties, about 30% of voters say they vote more regularly with vote by mail. It is convenient for the very rural communities, it's great for elderly people, disabled people, the very busy, and also everybody else.
It's fun, it's easy, it's on paper. You can vote alone, with friends or family, and like Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, you get Lifelines, you can call people who know about an issue or do some internet research on a line by line basis.
Can't say enough about it, it was established before I got here and it speaks very well for the State and the people who put it in place, the electorate of the State of Oregon.

fredamae

(4,458 posts)
49. Being a "Native Oregonian"
Thu Jan 1, 2015, 10:33 AM
Jan 2015

I went through the transition and I gotta tell ya--I Hated the idea of this change. It was "not normal"
Buuuuut, then I experienced it and I will Never go back to the "old ways".

I'm sure some can point out a few flaws...but it is about as near perfect system as any voter could dream of.
We, in my small group actually have a "Ballot Party".....good food, Great discussions and Robust debates about the candidates and issues. And then we vote. Priceless.
Remember, tho-"they" want to ruin that here for us. Don't ever forget the GOP tried to repeal Oregon's Vote By Mail before and I believe they'll be back again.
ALEC members and supporters.
HB 3506 2011 session
http://gov.oregonlive.com/bill/2011/HB3506/

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
4. I think there are people who are paid to disrupt and discourage people from voting
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 01:36 PM
Dec 2014

whether it's on the internet or MSM.

 

dissentient

(861 posts)
6. Yep, no wonder the approval rating of congress is so low
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 01:44 PM
Dec 2014

At this point, a lot of people hate both parties.

Igel

(35,197 posts)
5. There are, to be sure.
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 01:40 PM
Dec 2014

They're called "advertising consultants" and "political consultants." They produce disruptive, voter-turnout-lowering paid advertising on tv and radio. The goal is often to not get voters to vote for your guy. High voter turnout is only a positive thing in a democracy, it seems, when it helps your party--voters for the other side are always cretins who should be discouraged, if not disenfranchised. In many cases, the person paid is the politician himself.

Politics masquerading as journalism--the so called new journalism from 40 years ago--doesn't help. A lot of people are outraged and more determined to vote when told that horrendously high barriers are being put up to their voting, even though the barriers affect a very, very small percentage of possible voters. Far more, I'd guess, are discouraged from voting when told about how impossibly high the barriers are to getting proper ID--even if they already have that ID sitting in their wallets or purses. Or how there aren't enough voting machines at peak voting times, even though they'd probably go during off times.

I must say, last elections I looked at the candidates, their chances of winning, where I'd have to vote, and decided the hassle of finding my voter registration cards and the time I'd spend waiting for bumbling election clerks and incompetent voters just wasn't worth it. (Full disclosure: I knew it was sitting on my desk, in one of two stacks of papers and files that I had to eventually sort through anyway, and I had spent hours in mindless web surfing while sitting within 2 feet of it in the week prior to the election.)

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
8. I see it a different way.
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 01:56 PM
Dec 2014

Despite being the most expensive midterm in history, the turnout was lower than it has been in seventy years? Polling indicated that people were interested in issues, they wanted the candidates to talk about the economy. They wanted the candidates to discuss what is going on and what plans for the future the candidates held. They did not want propaganda, and they did not want assurances that the water running down their back was rain.

What was the core of the Democratic campaign plan? We suck, but we suck less than the Republicans. We had polling that showed the Republicans were were barely more popular than Herpes. But we didn't read the next line in the poll. We were only a couple points more popular than the Republicans. To most of the voters it came down to the ones who wanted to discuss the issues.

Republicans addressed the economy by opposing the job killing insert things here. Job Killing Minimum wage. Job killing Obamacare. They would have opposed the Job Killing Daylight Savings time if they could have gotten away with it.

We ran on the War on Women. Senator Udall was known as Senator Uterus. We didn't inspire people to vote for us, we ran a half assed campaign waiting, at first patiently, and then desperately for the Republicans to obligingly give us a Real Rape quote to campaign against. They learned from their defeats in 2012. We didn't learn.

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
16. I agree. Elections have bee dumbed down to...
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 02:38 PM
Dec 2014

"He sucks and is a crook."

"No. He sucks more and is a bigger crook."

Bring up actual issues and you might say something a voter disagrees with. Besides, issues can be complicated and how do you explain your position on Obamacare in a 15 second TV spot? Global warming? A real jobs plan?

Around here, Tim Bishop tried to tell us how he saved Plum Island from developers, helped rebuild the beaches after Sandy, and a bunch of other things, but his opponent ran twice as many ads just calling him a crook and poking at the wound of hating government in general without saying anything specific. And there were a few dirty tricks involved. Bishop lost after six terms.

While knocking on Democratic doors, I got a lot of positive response but was disappointed with a fair number of people who just refused to vote. Turnout ended up pretty high, but could have been higher and we might have won with a few more votes. Or maybe not. It was Republican rout at all levels last November.

Anyway, I really feel for those places where voters are discouraged. The old-timers who came up with poll taxes, tore up the "wrong" paper ballots, and other ways of stealing the vote taught their charges well. It not as easy now, but you can still steal an election.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
9. I don't know if they were paid but I had heard Rove had a bunch going and I
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 01:58 PM
Dec 2014

saw post here on DU complaining "their" kind of candidate was not running so they did not vote. A non vote turns out to help the GOP get their candidates elected, this is shameful, people gave their lives to get the right to vote and people gave their lives getting people registered to vote.

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
10. You are not going to get much support for those
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 02:15 PM
Dec 2014

ideas on this board.
One the one hand they will tell you why there was no reason to vote and on the other they will tell you how bad it's going to be because the repukes won.
I think you can vote against someone as well as voting for someone else. Also elections like that in 2014 had local issues and local candidates on the ballot. We also throw in the towel on those when we don't bother to take part in our democratic system.

former9thward

(31,805 posts)
20. Negative ads work.
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 03:30 PM
Dec 2014

If they didn't you would not see them. No one is going to spend hundreds of thousands or even millions on ads that don't work.

Blanks

(4,835 posts)
17. In the long run it's probably better for democrats...
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 03:17 PM
Dec 2014

The pendulum swings frequently and the party that is in control is held responsible. As long as the party that is not in power points out the record (accurately or not) of the party in control.

It was pointed out that in 2016 republicans will be defending senate seats in blue states, whereas 2014 had the opposite scenario.

It's difficult to get people excited about the mid terms and there were a lot of negative ads.

randys1

(16,286 posts)
18. Hope you are right and it is all the more reason why you will see an extreme effort
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 03:21 PM
Dec 2014

here to convince people not to vote.

I am so liberal Hillary is a rightwinger to me, yet you wont be able to keep me away from the polls where I will vote FOR her if she is the nominee.

Blanks

(4,835 posts)
21. I will vote for Hillary if she's on the ballot...
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 03:31 PM
Dec 2014

I don't have a problem with her. I'd rather we have some new faces to choose from, but if that's what it takes to win - it's much better than losing.

I'm gonna vote no matter what.

calimary

(80,699 posts)
28. Nope. It's true. With the money that side has to throw around, I bet there's a paid troll
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 03:45 PM
Dec 2014

under every bridge in America. Make that - a paid troll EXTENDED FAMILY.

SomethingFishy

(4,876 posts)
29. While I believe people are paid to do just that
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 03:47 PM
Dec 2014

I don't believe it works. I do believe that until we stop placing the blame on everything but the Party nothing will change.


Begin with a populist movement. We need to be represented. We aren't.

great white snark

(2,646 posts)
33. You BetterBelieveIt is not your imagination.
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 04:26 PM
Dec 2014

Considering that juries routinely let the most vile comments towards our party and President stand it's no wonder that they thrive here.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
35. Who is "us" in the sentence "PAID to disrupt us"? Are you speaking of DU?
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 04:50 PM
Dec 2014

Of the nation? Because the national turnout was down doesnt mean that DU turn out was down.

randys1

(16,286 posts)
40. IDK who didnt vote from DU, neither do you unless you did a poll, I assume.
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 08:47 PM
Dec 2014

Us is the united states, given the low numbers

ElboRuum

(4,717 posts)
39. It may not be your imagination...
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 08:07 PM
Dec 2014

...but what's the point? If true, does this materially affect whether you do or don't vote? People don't vote when they think their votes don't matter. I can certainly understand that people don't need much push to see their votes as "electoral theater". It makes me question the sanity of those who would pay for disruption when the reality of the value of the vote does much of the work for them.

raouldukelives

(5,178 posts)
43. Yes. Wall St is what disrupts our democracy. Not YouTube comments.
Wed Dec 31, 2014, 10:56 PM
Dec 2014

Sure, somebody out there might be paying someone to post what they want. Does it depress the vote? Maybe. But I still feel the numbers would be so small as to be negligible.
However corporations are certainly paying lobbyists to derail us, destroy us, lock us up, dumb us down, bring back Jim Crow and ignore climate science.
If someone is looking for somebody doing major damage to our democracy, just look for someone invested in the markets.

Jamaal510

(10,893 posts)
44. I can't say for sure
Thu Jan 1, 2015, 02:57 AM
Jan 2015

that is the case, but it sure feels like it. It makes me mad every time I hear about the low turnout is here, and then I compare it with other countries and their turnout is much higher. What's also frustrating is that probably a big chunk of the people who complain about the candidates, the system, etc. didn't even vote in 2014 (and some may not vote at all). Both the RW disruptors and the non-voters make my hope for the future diminish.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
45. I get the feeling there are people deliberately trying to convince the public that "the left" is
Thu Jan 1, 2015, 06:27 AM
Jan 2015

aimlessly lost, pompous, and bankrupt of actual ideas.

I think we need some better intellectual leadership. Too many people are recycling the same old crap and trying to pass it off as new.

MinM

(2,650 posts)
46. Citizens United freed up an awful lot of money ..
Thu Jan 1, 2015, 07:34 AM
Jan 2015

but I can't imagine they'd use it to disrupt elections ..

or attempt to dissuade the unwashed masses from voting?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So it's my imagination th...