General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAnother General Election cycle, another Democratic Party loss.
How many State and Local losses is it going to take before everyone in the leadership at the DNC is fired?
I'm a Cleveland Browns fan...and that is relevant! Do you know how much it takes for me to lose heart?
Retain the Governorship in Kentucky? No, sorry, we're going to elect someone who has promised to throw hundreds of thousands off of Medicaid.
Win back the State Senate in Virginia? No, sorry, we're going to re-elect a former shipyard owner whose company was convicted of defrauding the US Navy out of millions.
What the hell does it matter that we can have a progressive, sane, thoughtful and intelligent President, when my local School Board wants to teach that the earth is 6,000 years old, Creationism is just as valid a theory as "gravity", and global warming is just because god is hugging the earth a little tighter?
What the hell does it matter to protest against police brutality in the streets, when our local elected officials believe that law enforcement has been too restrained?
What the hell difference does it make that we have a president that wants to increase the minimum wage to $12 or $15 an hour when our local leaders think that we just ought to be damn thankful that the wealthy condescend to give us some crumbs from their table?
If this doesn't change prior to November 2016, we're going to wake up with a President Cruz, Trump or Carson, Republican majorities in the House and Senate, and Republican control of 47 State Governments.
There was a post a couple of days ago asking if we were watching the implosion of the Republican Party. How stupid does that post sound today?
Being a local Democrat is like watching Titanic on a continuous loop and rooting for the ship!
The entire leadership of the DNC needs to go, and they need to go now. In fact, I would have fired them all as soon as the polls in KY and VA closed last night. Whatever it is that they are doing is NOT WORKING!
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
yardwork
(69,236 posts)
bvar22
(39,909 posts)....isn't working.
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)When we do vote for them and us hoi-polloi are thrown under the bus ( yet again ) and we say to them we are ( justifiably ) circumspect of the same happening again,their attitude is:
"You HAVE to vote for us....Who are you gonna' vote for? Republicans!?? Ha Ha Ha haa haaa 
"
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)And it is costing American families not just money but in terms of mental and physical health.
We can do better.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)Dems lose elections when DEMS don't vote. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
Stevepol
(4,234 posts)could easily have been the result of voting machine shenanigans. I heard an interview on radio this morning that indicated that in the governor's race the Dem had a 5% advantage in pre-election polling. The poll or polls might not have been good ones (I'm sure that's what the media will say), but I would trust a poll over an election any day when the votes are counted by ES&S or Dominion or one of the other far-right owned companies. By now, the companies have not the slightest fear that anyone will make even the meekest DEMAND that we VERIFY THE VOTE when it is counted in complete secrecy using far-right wing manufactured machines that are considered by the experts to be trivially easy to compromise or fraudulently or maliciously program.
yardwork
(69,236 posts)Why doesn't the Democratic Party demand accountability?
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
BuelahWitch
(9,083 posts)
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
NBachers
(19,364 posts)and don't say "How could you ever suggest such a thing!"
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)puppets of the Oligarchy. The Democratic Party Elites will turn our party into the old Republcon Party because they are beholden to the billionaires.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)And as far as I know, NONE of them had any signs up anywhere around town, while Republican candidates had signs up every-freaking where.
The local Dems are cash-starved, while the national campaigns suck up all the money and don't redistribute it downwards, but keep it all for themselves.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)It's just all reserved for HRH.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)I see what you did there. 
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)VENDELL VILLKIE!!!" to quote the wartime classic Looney Tune "Falling Hare."
Thespian2
(2,741 posts)the "1%er"...
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)They gained two seats on BOA and now hold a 12-2 advantage.
Every other city office went R.
This R team took over in 2013 after the then D mayor lost his bid at his 9th term. Folks wanted change and were sick of the same people running the town year after year.
This is one of the issues with a two party system.
Freddie
(10,090 posts)Dems swept all open seats in PA Supreme Court. A referendum to end gerrymandering in Ohio won by 70%.
Zing Zing Zingbah
(6,496 posts)As did the two other state referendum questions (money for roads/infrastructure and affordable housing for seniors). In my city we got some good people on the school board and the Dem won for city council in my ward. Mayor race is a run off now, so no results on that until December.
Lochloosa
(16,701 posts)Here is our Purple State breaks down
House
As of November 2015
Democratic Party 39
Republican Party 81
Total
120
Senate
As of November 2015
Democratic Party 14
Republican Party 26
Total
40
1939
(1,683 posts)Is that the Democratic base tends to be concentrated and unless there is a gerrymandering effort in favor of Democrats (i.e. odd shaped districts to scoop up enough Democrats), redistricting will favor Republicans even if it is done geographically on a computer. If you respect political boundaries of cities and counties, this will also work in favor of the GOP.
Lochloosa
(16,701 posts)They real very similar in the intent. I can't remember now why there was two, but I believe it was needed to meet the constitutional requirements for getting them on the ballot.
Both address making the districts "fair". So far, the repugs have successfully resisted this.
Title
Amendment 6's official ballot title read:
“ Standards for legislature to follow in congressional redistricting.[27] ”
Summary
Below is the ballot summary for Amendment 6:[28]
“ Congressional districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries.
Title
Amendment 5's official ballot title read:
“ Standards for legislature to follow in legislative redistricting.[17] ”
Summary
Below is the ballot summary for Amendment 5:[18]
“ Legislative districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries.[17]
1939
(1,683 posts)If you shape districts to assure that racial and linguistic minorities can "elect representatives of their choice" you are going to get the election of a minority of black and Hispanic Democrats and a majority of white Republicans. The only way to get a Democratic majority to have every swing district "scoop up" enough minority votes to elect white Democrats but not enough to elect a minority Democrat.
The contretemps the Republicans are having in Florida is saving incumbents and not in having enough Republicans. If you have contiguous districts adhering to political boundaries as closely as possible, you will still get a GOP majority in Florida just because of the nature of the distribution of the population.
NonMetro
(631 posts)House:
GOP - 61
Democrats - 46
Senate:
GOP - 27
Democrats - 11
Michigan went for Obama by about 54 - 55% both time, and has two Democratic US Senators: the only offices that can't be gerrymandered out of power.
Democrats, a majority of the citizens, cannot win a majority in either house or in the US House. Some call this minority rule. I call it tyranny.
llmart
(17,524 posts)We had David Bonior in the House and I really liked him, but after the gerrymandering, we ended up with Candyass Miller who basically did nothing.
BlueDemKev
(3,003 posts)...Democratic voter turnout has consistently sucked in non-presidential elections. That, more than anything, is the reason we have lost both houses of Congress, a dozen or so governorships, and God knows how many state legislative seats since Barack Obama became president.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)That will definitely do it...
daleanime
(17,796 posts)instead of republican light?
Just saying
Doubledee
(137 posts)For far too long the real democratic party has disappeared , its progressives silenced, its message muted, its leadership focused on the same large donors as its rival across the aisle. I believe the reason for this rightward shift is simply the need for ever more campaign cash, the Citizens Untied ruling , the twin evils that blight our democracy and make democrats too busy bowing to the corporate donor to focus on their own heritage.
When coupled with a President, however eloquent and well meaning, who has spent seven years making noble speeches and then hiding somewhere, refusing to stand and fight for his supposed and eloquently expressed principles. the obvious result is an electorate having little choice but to follow the party making all the noise.
WHEN CRABS ROAR
(3,813 posts)Now is the time for a real progressive populist movement, but the message needs to be clear and not overly complex and it needs to be repeated over and over to drive it home into the minds of the people.
Then Bernie will win.
Doubledee
(137 posts)The how is missing. Further, I think that whomever occupies the White House can make little difference in our corrupted system. Pessimistic? Yes I do not deny it. But, as long as we see politicians grubbing for corporate cash to remain in office we will not see a progressive agenda delivered or supported in any way but empty words and certainly not passed by a Legislature in which compromise has become a dirty word.
Thinking one person can make a difference is a false meme in my own opinion, when basic changes ; changes like abolishing Citizens United for one such example, are so necessary to the restoration of an uncorrupted governance.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)might turn them away from the Democratic message? That just goes to show how much you know about politics.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Clearly they just need to be preached at until they realize what their interests actually are.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Preached at? I was thinking a full-court press of public derision, ridicule and mocking is in the offing.
First, we should start out by claiming they are personally culpable for every bad thing in the world. Then, we shift to denigrating their way of life. Finally, just for good measure, we zero-in on their deepest held beliefs that have carried their families through thick and thin over multiple generations; re-casting those beliefs as essential evils. Maybe we can even throw in a snide comedian mocking the baby Jesus just to round things out.
Heck, after that we won't know what to do with all the people showing up at our campaign headquarters looking to tell us how much they appreciate our hard work.
luvspeas
(1,883 posts)They still have the voting machines and they have been slowly taking over the lower level positions like school board and local races and squeezing the tube of toothpaste from the bottom.
All this while dems complain, can't come together to get anything done and strip the president of what little power he might have. Yeah, Bernie Sanders is gonna fix all of that.
if you aren't concerned you aren't paying attention.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Nothing I can do to help that, you could but you won't. Are you paying attention? If so why aren't you working to rid your State of video game voting? It's hard to understand really.
We had a single question ballot this week, we passed a property tax levy to expand library hours at the branch locations.
luvspeas
(1,883 posts)states. all but one of which use machines. Smug much? Also there are lots of other ways to rig a vote and the repugs are using them all.
Zynx
(21,328 posts)In the major cities, we run up the score in incredible ways, but we lose all rural areas by the biggest margins we ever have and there are a lot of states that are predominantly rural and within bigger states there are a lot of districts out there that we are losing consistently 55-45 or 60-40 that had been competitive seats back in the day. Our support in these areas has withered at the vine because we make no effort at all to communicate with these voters that the Democratic Party can be inclusive of them.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Doctor the voting machines so conservative votes are undercounted? Maybe send armed squads into democratic precincts to force voters to the polls? Maybe they could have sent an undercover agent to run down the independent candidate who drew off votes in Kentucky?
Oh, for heavens sakes. It's so obvious: No need for illegal maneuvers -- The DNC should have gotten big money out of local, state, and national politics by just snapping its fingers. How stupid are we?!
But tell me: What's the NEXT step? Politics is no longer local -- it's polarized into right and left wings. People on both sides are now voting for their party on every ballot. Conservatives specially will vote for candidates they know are horrible because they are conservative. The DNC needs your instructions on what to do to fix this. Take out Fox News? Maybe just...buy up all of America's right-wing media and close them down? What if they're not willing to sell? Please send your plan as soon as possible. They'll need to implement as soon as possible for 2018.
IF you have no answers, maybe at least try for a little bravery and heart? If anyone's entitled to be fussing and whining today, it's those who worked so long and hard to save Kentucky from what's going to happen to it. And I'm guessing you weren't among them.
KeepItReal
(7,770 posts)The DNC let it walk out the door with the departure of DNC Chair Gov. Howard Dean.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and the rest of our subversive billionaires, the religious right would never have abandoned the teachings of Jesus, the social right would have learned to love their neighbors, and our conservative citizenry would still be able to discuss politics fairly knowledgeably and rationally.
WHAT a tragically lost opportunity. Maybe it's DNC headquarters we should bomb -- just on general principles? 
Recursion
(56,582 posts)You'd think a forum that cares so much about the strategy would take the time to learn what it actually is.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)Can you describe Dean's fifty state strategy in, say, one sentence? (Hint: Dean did.)
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)I see nothing of DWS 50 state strategy. Can you point me to it beyond the one web page?
(added in edit) I remember Dean's 50 state strategy had links to local party organizations, DWS's 50 state strategy page has a 50 state strategy link on the right side. If you click it, for all intents and purposes, just reloads the web page.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The strategy itself is showing its results: stronger state parties and a weaker DNC has meant little to no coordination nationally during off-year elections. On the plus side, we're showing some results in downticket races we've traditionally really struggled at. And like Dean repeatedly said, the 50 state strategy is not about results now but about results decades from now. It's building the kind of infrastructure the GOP started building in the 1970s.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)The webpage in question just says basically, "yeah, we have a 50 state strategy" without following up. If someone visits that page, perhaps they might be interested in getting involved in the 50 state strategy. Their are state links on the the website, but they aren't linked to the 50 state page.
It seems like DWS want's to keep a tighter rein on the 50 state strategy than Dean did. Just my opinion.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I think there's a temptation on DU to just take everything good Dean did and call it "the 50 state strategy", which isn't really helpful.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)You posted (in part):
Can you show me some of this in action? What specific downticket races had how much results that can be attributed to the DWS 50 state strategy. How about national and local coordination meetings that are linked to DWS's 50 State Strategy?
In short, where are the results that can be directly linked to the "new" 50 State strategy and where is the 50 State Strategy beyond one webpage?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The DNC is weaker compared to the state parties than it was 20 years ago. The state parties are now better funded and so more autonomous, but lack coordination in off-year races.
In terms of results, we've gained seats in many state legislatures. We haven't taken many back, but we're starting to rebuild there. And that's probably the most important set of elections in American politics; at least the party is admitting they exist now...
What, specifically, do you think has changed?
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Here's a link to a NY Times story about Dean and the 50 state strategy:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/01/magazine/01dean.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
For Schumer, Emanuel and their allies, this rejection was irritating enough. When they heard the stories of how Dean was actually spending the party’s cash, however, it was almost more than they could take. Dean was paying for four organizers in Mississippi, where there wasn’t a single close House race, but he had sent only three new hires to Pennsylvania, which had a governor’s race, a Senate campaign and four competitive House races. Emanuel said he was all for expanding the party’s reach into rural states — roughly half the House seats he was targeting were in states like Texas, Indiana and Kentucky, after all — but he wanted the D.N.C. to focus on individual districts that Democrats could actually win, as opposed to just spreading money around aimlessly. The D.N.C. was spending its money not only in Alaska and Hawaii, but in the U.S. Virgin Islands as well. Democratic insiders began to rail against this wacky and expensive 50-state plan. “He says it’s a long-term strategy,” Paul Begala, the Democratic strategist, said during an appearance on CNN in May. “What he has spent it on, apparently, is just hiring a bunch of staff people to wander around Utah and Mississippi and pick their nose.”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/23/1019707/-Where-did-the-50-state-strategy-go
Fri Sep 23, 2011 at 04:10 PM PDT
Where did the 50 state strategy go?
by
Cheesemanswife
Follow
20 Comments / 0 New
When Howard Dean became DNC chair in 2005, he put in place "The 50 state strategy". This meant that Democrats would compete everywhere. This strategy played huge dividends for Democrats in 2006 and 2008. However, when Barack Obama was elected he replaced Dean with party hack Tim Kaine, who pretty much ripped down the 50-state strategy and reversed all of the gains that Dean had made.
For instance, in 2007, Democrats competed in districts all over Virginia in that year's legislative elections. This year, Democrats don't even have candidates to face Republicans in what are Democratic leaning districts. This has been the case everywhere, from the Virginia to Suburban Philadelphia to Upstate New York.
Democrats had Republicans on the run with the 50-state strategy, but then ripped it all down under Obama and predictably, the Republicans are now the ones that are contesting Democrats everywhere.
I wish Obama and Kaine had realized the importance of party building and contesting Republicans everywhere. If they did, maybe Democrats would still control the House and most state legislatures and wouldn't be nearly shut out in the crucial redistricting process.
Ripping down the 50-state strategy has brought the Democratic party to its knees.
Those two stories sound opposite of what you want, Dean wanted a Democrats to challenge republicans in every race rather than key districts with easy victories. The DWS "50 State Strategy" sounds like a rigid top down system that wants access to "the better funded" state parties' funds. No doubt to put those funds into "sure win" elections.
Can you please supply some proof to your claim instead of assertions, deflections and rhetoric?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)You have complaints about it from 2006, and a guy on kos saying "we didn't have good candidates in VA".
The 50 state strategy does not mean we'll run good candidates everywhere. In fact, if the state party doesn't want to, the 50 state strategy says we won't.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Show me Tim Kaine continuing the 50 State Strategy.
Stop
Deflecting
Provide
Links
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Dean lays out the strategy pretty clearly here. Read it.
https://www.democrats.org/about/our-party/50-state-strategy
Here's the current page on the still-in-effect 50 state strategy
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)As far as Howard Dean, if you had read the NY Times story, instead of dismissing it you would have read a fairly concise but comprehensive recounting of Howard Dean's 50 state strategy, which has nothing to do with DWS top down movement(as you describe it)
Since your repeating yourself, I'll do the same:
*Can you show me some of this(meaning the current 50 State Strategy) in action?
*What specific downticket races had how much results that can be attributed to the DWS 50 state strategy?
*How about national and local coordination meetings that are linked to DWS's 50 State Strategy?
**In short, where are the results that can be directly linked to the "new" 50 State strategy and where is the 50 State Strategy beyond one webpage?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)You realize blog posts are not "proof" of things, right?
Read the book and learn what the 50 state strategy actually is.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)The book proves Dean's original strategy, which pretty much ended when Tim Kaine became head of the DNC.
You are the one claiming:
So, once again:
*Can you show me some of this(meaning the current 50 State Strategy) in action?
*What specific downticket races had how much results that can be attributed to the DWS 50 state strategy?
*How about national and local coordination meetings that are linked to DWS's 50 State Strategy?
**In short, where are the results that can be directly linked to the "new" 50 State strategy and where is the 50 State Strategy beyond one webpage?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)You're claiming that and offering no actual demonstration of it, just a guy on kos complaining about Virginia candidates and concluding from that that the fifty state strategy ended (which it didn't).
Can you demonstrate that DNC funding to the state parties fell?
Can you demonstrate that some state parties had to get rid of their permanent staff?
No?
Then the fifty state strategy is still happening. You just were wrong about what it is. And Dean's book will explain that.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)You are the one claiming:
The strategy itself is showing its results: stronger state parties and a weaker DNC has meant little to no coordination nationally during off-year elections. On the plus side, we're showing some results in downticket races we've traditionally really struggled at. And like Dean repeatedly said, the 50 state strategy is not about results now but about results decades from now. It's building the kind of infrastructure the GOP started building in the 1970s.
So, once again:
*Can you show me some of this(meaning the current 50 State Strategy) in action?
*What specific downticket races had how much results that can be attributed to the DWS 50 state strategy?
*How about national and local coordination meetings that are linked to DWS's 50 State Strategy?
**In short, where are the results that can be directly linked to the "new" 50 State strategy and where is the 50 State Strategy beyond one webpage?
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)and I have seen nothing to indicate any strategy whatsoever is connected to my state.
So Bernie volunteers are stepping in to fill the gap. We are going to make some things happen next year despite our state party.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)You are the one claiming:
*Can you show me some of this(meaning the current 50 State Strategy) in action?
*What specific downticket races had how much results that can be attributed to the DWS 50 state strategy?
*How about national and local coordination meetings that are linked to DWS's 50 State Strategy?
**In short, where are the results that can be directly linked to the "new" 50 State strategy and where is the 50 State Strategy beyond one webpage?
I'll keep asking until you answer. Since you say the 50 State Strategy never went away, link away, just two requests on my part (1) nothing else about Howard Dean, it's 2015, not 2006 right?, and (2) Some other current links besides the static https://www.democrats.org/about/our-party/50-state-strategy . Since you claim the Dean strategy never went away current links should be no problem, right?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)You want a "link" to the lack of a party policy change?
I'm still waiting for somebody to say what they think had changed.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Can You Provide Any Links To Current 50 State Strategy Activity? Something besides https://www.democrats.org/about/our-party/50-state-strategy.
You claim that:
what are those results, and can you prove that it's the result of the 50 State Strategy, and not efforts by the local party?
Do you have proof that the 50 State Strategy is currently engaged in activity that builds infrastructure?
Since the 50 State Strategy under DWS is so vigorous, there should be plenty of local parties thanking them for increased support and infrastructure.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)My God this is absurd. No, I will not play a game. If you actually cared you would learn about this rather than parroting talking points from the Web.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)All you've posted is one web page that, doesn't seem to point to a vigorous, dynamic, ongoing program. When Dean ran it there was a lot of news stories, contact etc. You claim to know the program, can't you show where the success is?
Ah we DO agree on something in this thread.
So in other words, I have to do all the heavy lifting here, and prove or disprove your conclusion about the 50 State Strategy?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The fifty state strategy still exists. The party says so, and the funding to state parties is still there. There's not really anything to argue about there, so I'm kind of mystified why you persist.
I don't get what "links" you want. The cancelled checks from DNC to the state parties?
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)I remember the Dean version of the 50 state strategy, and it was more than one webpage, or are you telling me that it was only one webpage that linked to itself?
The proof that you have provided is just the one webpage. No press releases about the 50 state strategy? No local parties talking about how they benefited from the current 50 state strategy? No news stories comparing the 50 state strategy under DWS compared to Kaine and Dean (after all, you claim it never ended under Kaine)?
I've provided you with a lot more proof which I doubt you've even looked at. Did you read the NY Times story?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Decide what you mean by "fifty state strategy", then look at the party's activities and decide for yourself if it meets your definition. You're clearly using it to mean something a lot broader than Dean did when he put it in motion.
I'm not the one making a "claim". The party says it's still happening, and the money is still being spent. You are the one claiming a "secret" fifty state strategy that we got rid of.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Here's my google search for "Howard Dean" 50 "State Strategy"
http://www.governing.com/blogs/politics/gov-democrat-howard-deans-fifty-state-strategy.html
Despite opposition from national Democrats, the former Vermont governor's bid to build up party infrastructure in every state was a success in the unlikeliest of places -- at least while it lasted.
by Louis Jacobson | May 6, 2013
When former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean became chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in early 2005, one of his main efforts was to undertake a "50-state strategy," a bid to build up party infrastructure and candidate recruitment at every level and in every state -- even in solidly Republican bastions.
"We strengthened the parties so sitting governors could find good candidates" for offices high and low, Dean said. "That's much easier to do from Topeka than it is from Washington."
State party chairs loved the idea, but among national strategists, the approach was controversial. Dean bumped heads with then-Rep. Rahm Emanuel, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who believed in a more conventional strategy of focusing limited campaign resources on swing districts. On CNN, Paul Begala said Dean's gambit amounted to "hiring a bunch of staff people to wander around Utah and Mississippi and pick their nose." (Begala later apologized.)
Dean has long since left the DNC -- he served four years, departing in early 2009 -- and the 50-state strategy has faded from memories. But looking at it from today's vantage point, the project offers a nifty example of how modest investments in party infrastructure can pay tangible dividends -- and how those dividends can disappear once the investments dry up.
Wot? I thought the 50 State Strategy never ended. Ahh I guess cutting the amount of funding is different from canceling
http://www.fairvote.org/research-and-analysis/blog/the-real-november-election-showdown-howard-deans-50-state-strategy-vs-rahm-emmanuels-traditional-approach/
by David Moon // Published November 7, 2006
Dean vs. Emmanuel: When former Vermont governor Howard Dean took the helm of the Democratic National Committee, he made a strategic decision to pump resources into all 50 states, in an attempt to build the Democratic Party in places where it hasn"t been competitive in presidential races and most federal races for years. His so-called "50-state strategy" has been the source of much controversy, leading to Dean"s public battles with Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Rahm Emanuel, who favors focused spending on targeted races. Many think the results of tonights election results will indicate which party leader had the right approach. Not so fast....
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/nov/11/barack-obama-howard-dean-democrats
Ari Berman
Barack Obama's victory is proof that the DNC chair's 50-state strategy has revitalised the Democratic party
Tuesday 11 November 2008 11.00 EST Last modified on Saturday 4 October 2014 09.58 E
Indiana, North Carolina and Virginia are not states that Democrats normally win in presidential elections. Nor are Idaho or Alabama places where they customarily pick up congressional seats. And the unlikeliest rub of all: these Democratic takeovers in formerly red America were partially engineered by the recent governor of one of the bluest states in the country, Vermont.
Howard Dean inherited a moribund, disorganised and dispirited party when he became chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in February 2005. He patiently rebuilt the party from the bottom up, state by state, organiser by organiser. His 50-state strategy, as it came to be known, helped pave the way for the party's takeover of Congress in 2006, expanded majority in 2008 and Barack Obama's historic election.
Dean, who announced on Monday that he would step down as DNC chair at the end of his term in January, was vilified by much of the Washington establishment when he inherited the job. His presidential campaign in 2004 was viewed as a massive flameout after he came in third in the Iowa caucus - a loss punctuated by the infamous, media-manufactured "Dean scream" - and he possessed few of the insider connections that mark most DNC chairs. Yet Dean's unorthodox presidential campaign and DNC chairmanship in many ways laid the foundation for Obama's improbably candidacy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/01/magazine/01dean.html?pagewanted=all
By MATT BAI
Published: October 1, 2006
Not all states are equal on an election map, and Alaska is one of those less populous states — like Kansas or Idaho or Alabama — that national Democrats almost never bother to visit. For one thing, just getting there presents a logistical ordeal: the journey from Washington takes as long as it would to reach, say, Nigeria, and even then you sometimes need a hydroplane to get around. And more to the point, there aren’t a whole lot of people to see once you get there. Registered Republicans outnumber Democrats by a margin of 2 to 1 in oil-crazed Alaska, which hasn’t sent a Democrat to the House or Senate in more than 30 years. To put it another way, there were more Democrats in Central Park for the Dave Matthews concert a few years back than there are in the entire state of Alaska — all 656,000 square miles of it.
It seemed somewhat bizarre, then, when Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, chose to make the long odyssey to Alaska at the end of May, near what was the beginning of one of the most intense and closely contested national election campaigns in memory, when every other Democrat in Washington was talking about potentially decisive states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Connecticut. It was also strange that no one in Democratic Washington seemed to know he was going. Although I had been following Dean closely for months, I found out about the trip accidentally and invited myself along — an intrusion that Dean seemed merely to tolerate. We met up first in Las Vegas, where he was making appearances with Harry Reid, the Senate minority leader. Dean, who enjoys his image as an unpretentious New Englander, is given to finding his own flights on discount Web sites, so it’s sometimes hard for even his own staff to track his itinerary. On the morning we left for Alaska, Dean went missing for a good half-hour. It turned out that he was in the business center of the MGM Grand, where he had been trying to figure out how to print his boarding pass but somehow ended up in an impromptu game of online backgammon with a guy who claimed to be in China.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/25/AR2008082502463.html
Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, turns over the convention gavel to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in Denver. (By Preston Keres -- The Washington Post)
Buy Photo
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
DENVER, Aug. 25 -- When Howard Dean officially opened the Democratic National Convention on Monday night, he could look with satisfaction at the assembled delegates from all 50 states, knowing that many more states are in play this campaign season than were before he took over the party.
"Looking out from this podium tonight, I see this diverse assembly of Democrats as a testament to the strength and unity of our party and the fruition of our 50-state strategy," the party chairman told the throng as he gaveled the convention to session. "While the Democratic Party is the oldest continuing party in the world, I can also see that we are the most vibrant, inclusive and energized party, and we are ready to compete in all 50 states in November.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96956854
November 13, 200812:29 PM ET
Howard Dean, former presidential candidate and chairman of the Democratic National Committee, implemented the "50-State Strategy" to help the Democrats win big in 2008 — and it appears to have worked.
The "50-State Strategy" doesn't just focus on swing states and it doesn't write states off as "unwinnable." Instead, the goal is to campaign throughout the country, and win elections from the ground up.
http://truth-out.org/archive/component/k2/item/66811:howard-deans-50state-strategy-pays-off
Monday, 13 November 2006 04:23 by: Anonymous
Howard Dean's 50-State Strategy Pays Off
By Scott Galindez
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Monday 13 November 2006
The chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), Rahm Emanuel, stormed out of Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman Howard Dean's office in May after an expletive-filled tirade against the DNC's spending too much money, too early, in "non-battleground states." Emanuel was concerned the DNC would be broke and not on the playing field in November. The opposite was true, and the playing field was larger due to the early investment.
See a real 50 State Strategy has plenty of visibility.
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)we got technical infrastructure and outreach from the DNC.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)The infrastructure was an event, not a process. The outreach was a process. It has stopped as far as I know. Dean came here and used his bully pulpit to change the culture of defeatism.
The culture of defeatism is back in a big way in my state. Other than progressives, there seems to be very little constructive activity. The leadership mainly bitches about money and completely ignores the western half of the state.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I only know the DC and MS parties, where that hasn't been true as far as I know. (And, the actual DC local party, not the national party which is also in DC.)
Now, I fully believe that Dean and especially his team were better at it than the current crop of hacks. If you want me to say that Dean implemented the 50 state strategy better, I'll agree with that 100%.
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)So little constructive dialogue on here in during an open primary.
BTW, if MOM were to get the nomination, I would stay in the Party and work for him in a neighboring swing state. He is a reasonable alternative to Bernie.
If HRC were to be nominated, I would very likely leave the Party. What then? Probably I would just continue organizing for change locally and regionally, allying with the Party in some situations, but mainly focusing on how to obtain a desperately needed revolution to overthrow the oligarchy.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)This isn't GD-P so I won't go further into that, but there it is.
Admiral Loinpresser
(3,859 posts)Thx for the heads up.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)
MADem
(135,425 posts)For some reason, they get mad if "the DNC" gets all bigfooty and makes decisions about what races are viable and worthy of funding, and they also get mad if the DNC lets the state party infrastructure take the lead with regard to growing local candidates from local timber.
No matter what they do, for some folks, it's just WRONG.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)Is that the left wing then starts bitching about DINO's being elected.
maxrandb
(17,375 posts)and just because I'm not from Kentucky doesn't mean that I don't care about what is going to happen to the good people of Kentucky.
My point is that there is no coherent national strategy from the Democratic Party to stop, or at least slow the bleeding from all of these local and state losses.
At the local level, you have over 2,000 radio stations that do nothing all day on election day than advertise polling places, where to vote, who to vote for, and the Republicans, crazy as we may think they are, are winning everywhere from Dog Catcher, to School Board to Governor.
Where do you think the "bench" comes from moving forward? How many current member's of the House and Senate began their political careers as School Board members?
Democrats run the risk of being so "righteous" in their "righteousness" that they miss the forest for the trees.
About 90% of our daily lives are influenced by LOCAL GOVERNMENT!
If folks don't start getting out and winning some of these local elections, there will be no bench of good Democratic candidates going forward.
It's like the national strategy seems to be to just wait until the older middle class white voters die out, or turn things over to the T-Baggers so people will see how horrible a mistake that is. Neither is a very sound strategy.
I'll give you an example of how it works. John Boehner is "hated" by the right-wing in his party, but you know what? If he was running again, THEY'D GET OUT AND VOTE FOR HIM and he'd win handedly. And it's not "just" because of redistricting. It's because no matter how much they loathe Boehner, they'd come out and vote in force for him, because to do otherwise would be to give his seat to a party they view as EVIL.
Sometimes, I wish Democratic voters had just half the passion and hatred for the Republican Party as the Republicans have for the Democratic Party.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)major reason why blaming the DNC for everything is like blaming the wind for not turning back the tide.
If we had a quarter of the hard right's passion and none of its nastiness, our nation would be rather wonderful, our remaining problems mostly fixable because we would be a nation dominated by people who believed in fixing them.
As opposed to those determined not to fix them. Kentucky's governor-elect is determined to smash their remaining social programs because he chooses to think that feeding hungry children creates poverty.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)That's why they're Democrats.
You have to give Democratic voters something to vote for. We keep giving them something to vote against and nothing to vote for.
We stopped trying to fight big fights out of fear we will not win them quickly. As a result, we give Democrats nothing to vote for. For example, "We only gave away 6 weeks of abortion!" instead of fighting for expand access and a lot more "What the hell are you doing trying to police women's bodies?!!"
Contrast with the 67 Obamacare repeal votes. The Republicans know they will not go anywhere. But it gave their base something to vote for.
We stopped being Democrats and started being terrified mice.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)Knowing that the right is out to destroy social programs and we want to protect them should be a reason to vote.
I don't buy the argument that there is nothing to vote for. Your way of life is threatened by the right yet you need some DNC to spend money on you and give you a reason to get off your ass and vote.
You are responcible for defeats not the DNC.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Yeah, otherwise someone might put a time limit on welfare! Oh wait...
It isn't only the Republicans that are threatening my way of life.
I've spent my first two decades of voting buying into the "lesser of evils" argument. And that's resulted in a continuous erosion of my rights, the economy, and my future.
As a result, I'm done enabling "lesser of two evils" politicians.
BlueDemKev
(3,003 posts)...enjoy watching your civil rights, the economy, and your children's future not erode, but collapse straight to the ground.
Progressives not voting is the #1 reason why Republicans control both houses of Congress and the overwhelming majority of state governments across the country. It's amazing that in 2015, with the Republican Party completely off the deep end, that you believe there is no significant difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. The worst part is people like you are also destroying my future and the futures of my two young children.
You mean Democratic accomplishments like NAFTA? How 'bout the great effort we've done helping Republicans chip away at abortion and reproductive rights?
Why, if it weren't for Democrats, the closest family planning clinic might be hundreds of miles away!! Oh wait! It is!
Clue: You don't fix that by screaming at the voters. You fix that by running better candidates. How 'bout we start with candidates that don't run against our own party and its leaders? According to you, that is too much to ask.
Whether you take the scenic road to Hell, or the direct road to Hell, you still end up in Hell. The current "Republican-lite" strategy is just slowing the Republicans a little instead of reversing course.
Well, lesser of two evils already destroyed my future. I'm part of the first generation in US history that will be worse off than their parents. All thanks to broken promises and Republican-lite strategies. How irrational of me to learn from that experience.
Also, for our children (you aren't the only parent) to actually have something better than horrific dystopia, we have to change course. Not just give Republicans what they want at a slower pace.
BlueDemKev
(3,003 posts)...there is very little difference between having Republicans or Democrats running things? Think back to 2000...if Gore had become president, 9/11 probably wouldn't have happened, the Iraq War wouldn't have happened, ISIS wouldn't exist, there would be a liberal majority on the Supreme Court today, and the national debt wouldn't be half of what it is now.
If you believe at this point that there's no real difference between the two parties, I'm afraid you're a hopeless case and there's no point in trying to persuade you to see the light.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)then the end result over decades is nearly the same.
If the Democrats actually worked to oppose Republicans as hard as they worked to pass free trade deals, I'd be thrilled to support them.
Fact is, Democrats don't. They are thrilled to compromise when they don't have a majority, and terrified of being Democrats when they do have a majority.
As for Gore, his campaign is the poster child for what I'm complaining about: Democrats terrified of being Democrats. When that strategy fails, we keep being told the only solution is to keep doing the same thing and keep being terrified of being "the liberals".
BlueDemKev
(3,003 posts)Mister Ed
(6,902 posts)Perhaps a return to Howard Dean's 50-state strategy of the mid-2000's is called for. It worked pretty well then.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I'm really sick of hearing this excuse.
The party never abandoned the 50 state strategy. Every state party still has permanent personnel.
https://www.democrats.org/about/our-party/50-state-strategy
Mister Ed
(6,902 posts)Is money and aid flowing to the hinterland? Sufficient numbers of boots on the ground? I ask in earnest, because I don't know the answer and don't know where to look it up.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The state parties have their funding now and are doing what they want, which may not be what the DNC wants. But that's the strategy. Such as it is.
Here's what Rahm Emmanuel wants:
The DNC holds its money and watches for a weak spot in a local election, and pours money into it.
Here's what we have:
The DNC funds the state parties constantly, so that each can operate more effectively. That's "the fifty state strategy". It means the DNC doesn't have the cash on hand or the control to swoop in if there's GOP blood in the water somewhere.
Both strategies have advantages and disadvantages. But you can't want both stronger guidance from the DNC and the fifty state strategy; those are contradictory ideas.
Mister Ed
(6,902 posts)FrostyAusty
(57 posts)Our country will end up electing someone like Trump, Cruz, or Carson if Hillary is the nominee. The republican fear mongering propaganda machine and general distaste for Ms. Clinton from many progressives may cause us to end up with a lunatic as president. This is why I continue to tell people about Bernie and to get involved. The only way we will win the election is to get voters excited, I'm not sure Hillary can do that.. Just my two cents
JudyM
(29,758 posts)My take is that their voters will be much more incensed by the thought of Hillary and the vitriol will be off the charts, generating more votes.
Interesting because the corporarists in the control booth would prefer her to Bernie.
Welcome to DU!
I've been reading posts on the boards for a few months now after I heard Thom Hartman talk about this site on his radio program. I thought i'd finally take the plunge and create an account.
Really excited for Bernie and what he's all about, I had never donated to a campaign before his
I also think his message will resonate with people looking to make this country work for all of us, especially those of us in my generation (20 somethings who have grown up with seeing nothing but republican dysfunction and politicians who adopt positions to simply look good ).
Hopefully the enthusiasm Bernie has created will continue to grow and everyone will feel the Bern come election day!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
PatSeg
(52,988 posts)can hold her own against a Trump, Cruz, or Carson. Meanwhile, I'm concerned about the House, the Senate, and state elections. We need a DNC chair who knows what she/he is doing.
Welcome to DU!!!
Agree 100% we need to take back all those things so the change we so desperately need can begin to take place.
I never would've guessed that I would be this interested in politics at 26, but when I realized the importance of these issues that we face, I figured now was as good a time as any to start getting involved!
Nice to meet everyone here at DU! 
PatSeg
(52,988 posts)have become more politically aware in recent years. There was a big shift of public consciousness when GW took office. Actually that is when Democratic Underground began.
It does get a bit volatile during primaries, so I try to avoid some "discussions" if I can. People get very emotional about their candidates, but everything becomes unified once we have a nominee. 2007-08 was a real roller coaster ride - I am much wiser now.
Be sure to check out some of the other forums. Not everything here is about politics!
mascarax
(1,528 posts)It's nice to meet you too. Glad you joined and are getting involved!
Fan of Thom Hartman too...
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)PatSeg
(52,988 posts)There is too much at stake right now. DNC chair should be a full-time position, ideally held by someone who is competent. Howard Dean was extraordinary.
I've signed every petition I can find about DWS. This is the latest one: http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/remove-debbie-wasserman
I also contacted the DNC and told them I would not support them until Wasserman Schultz is gone.
Martin Eden
(15,524 posts)I think the biggest reason Dems lose is voter apathy/disgust.
Far too many citizens feel (with considerable justification) that our political system is corrupt, so they just stay home.
The DNC has utterly failed to connect with voters, to make them believe their participation matters, and to earn their trust. I believe the majority of Americans would be Democrats if the Democratic Party would demonstrate through positive action that it truly represents the interests of The People at the local, state, and national levels. We especially need to reach out to young people, before cynicism supplants idealism.
I truly believe the "conservative" voting base is a distinct minority, but they go to the polls and vote. In 2014 Republicans swept to majorities in both the House on the Senate on a wave of 36.4% voter turnout.
The Democratic Party fails to the extent it is one of two corporate parties and offers little more than the status quo.
This country desperately needs a political revolution and a revitalized Democratic Party with candidates who generate enthusiasm and motivate people to be more engaged in their own governance.
Yes, the current DNC leadership must be replaced.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)It's the same country, same Party. 36% vs 70%. We vote by mail, it's very easy and registration is easier. Two weeks with the ballot, no polling place lines, no machines, no ID checks, the ability to research while voting. And so people vote much more than they do in some other States.
And we are not even #1 in turnout, some States do even better, habitually. Minnesota. They vote. Some States have same day registration and that helps turnout greatly.
So maybe it is not some existential disgust at the system and it's just that the lines are too long. We have 4 out of 5 House Members Democratic, two Senators, legal cannabis, equal protection for LGBT in housing and employment, the least restrictive abortion laws in the country, an ERA in our constitution and a bisexual woman for Governor.
Where do you live again?
Martin Eden
(15,524 posts)Disenfranchisement takes many forms, including making it a real hassle to vote.
The point I was making applies generally nationwide, but of course there are local and regional differences. I live in Illinois.
angrychair
(12,093 posts)This line for me is the quote of the day:
"The Democratic Party fails to the extent it is one of two corporate parties and offers little more than the status quo."
Good post
Martin Eden
(15,524 posts)I painted with a fairly broad brush, but I think it covers a big part of the reason for low voter turnout.
Botany
(77,016 posts)..... votes have been "flipped or lost" by the voting machines.
The Democrat in KY had a lead in all the polls going into the election but in the end
he lost the governor's race.
In 2014 Brownback was very unpopular in Kansas even among republicans but somehow
he got re-elected.
Something just doesn't pass my smell test.
*****
Browns Fan and now the Browns want to trade the only 2 solid players on the team
Mack and Thomas?
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)That's why voters should not look at polls as absolutes. Perhaps some potential voters saw the polls and thought they didn't have to vote because the democratic nominee was ahead.
PumpkinAle
(1,210 posts)dems will sit and tell people what should be done but won't show up on voting day - why?
The hatemongers and nutjobs on the right are winning simply by getting a few more to ballot box - these are not big margins, but hate sells and provides impetus for the right.
The DNC is somewhat to blame because they don't get the message out, but we need to change the apathy among voters - otherwise come 11/16 we might as well forget about it.
sinkingfeeling
(57,665 posts)a country full of un-thinking semi-zombies, distracted from serious consideration by each new gadget that is hawked to the masses. The GOP has gone from Eisenhower to blowhards like Trump. Crazy Southern evangelical religion and Fox News have caused people to give up working to make an inclusive, balanced society. Most people couldn't tell you one fact about any of the candidates in either party. They go by what their preacher, banker, or Facebook friend says. Nobody has time to study policy statements and the media is a failure at educating the public.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)elections who worked one of the precincts,he said they had 4 people vote who actually thought they were voting in the presidential elections. The GOP knows that lots of people will come out to vote on social issues that frighten them.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Democrats stopped fighting for anything significant. Instead, we're fighting to only lose a bit of the status quo.
We're trumpeting only giving away 6 weeks of abortion instead of fighting to increase access and asking "why the fuck is the government regulating a woman's uterus?!!"
Meanwhile, the Republicans tried to repeal "Obamacare" 67 times. They knew it would never go anywhere. They still did it. Because it showed their base they were fighting for something.
We will lose until our candidates stop acting like terrified mice, and start being proud Democrats.
dmosh42
(2,217 posts)DrBulldog
(841 posts)Is Bernie Sanders the ONLY politician in this country left that GIVES A DAMN?
SmittynMo
(3,544 posts)Indepatriot
(1,253 posts)unprecedented ability to motivate the base and new voters will result in a massive victory for Democrats in 2016.....she's a fighter who stands for the Working Class and is the only one who can take on the GOP......oh, never mind.
mountain grammy
(28,922 posts)attention to last year's student protests against what the radicals were trying to do that cooked their goose. Now, granted, the local media did it's best to undermine the students who walked out by interviewing the kids who didn't know what was going on and just wanted a day off, but, surprisingly, they didn't get away with it. The truth of the radical agenda came out, and the vote to recall the board was huge, thanks to a tremendous effort from parents and students.
I read you post and agree with it... K&R. Just want you to know that here in Colorado, where last year we sent a climate change denying teabagger to the Senate, there is still hope for a return to sanity. It just takes exposing the radical agenda of conservative candidates without any truth from the mainstream local or national media to people that are convinced by the same media that extending health care to sick people is some kind of unamerican concept that will take away their guns, freedom and jesus.
No problem.
turbinetree
(27,365 posts)and you are correct the DNC at all levels should be fired.
26 state and federal governments and now school boards are republican, guess what folks that means that 24 states, are sitting in the bulls eye, and if you don't think it can happen in the purple, blue states, you are really wrong---------------------look at Wisconsin, that was the tipping point and the other factor is the corrupt U.S. Supreme Court, that should be the message,
I know we keep harping on this, but it is the U.S. Supreme Court that is giving these loons power and corporations more power the DNC is doing what------------I mean really
DNC
Debbie, Steve, Chuck,
Bonhomme Richard
(9,518 posts)in Northwest, CT
I have an idea how they did it. The republicans made the mistake of closing one of the schools which upset a lot of people. The Democrats took the mayors office, town council and BOE. What they did was motivate the younger demographic (those with kids) that typically doesn't get out and vote to make the effort. We had a very large voter turnout.
As long as older white voters are the only ones motivated to get out then the repugs win. If you can use a subject that directly affects a younger demographic then they will make the effort to come out and a larger turnout benefits Democrats.
My take on national elections... Bernie and Hillary are on the right track but whoever the nominee is they need to focus on the issues that really affect the younger voter (20' to 50's) directly which means they have to hammer the republicans on the cost of inequality, education and heathcare, and job creation.
Fear motivates the republican voter and hope motivates the rest. Republicans don't offer, or even have to do, anything because they don't have to. Their base only insist that they stop change. Period.
WHEN CRABS ROAR
(3,813 posts)Now is the time for a real progressive populist movement, but the message needs to be clear and not overly complex and it needs to be repeated over and over to drive it home into the minds of the people.
Then Bernie will win.
rtracey
(2,062 posts)Last edited Wed Nov 4, 2015, 03:33 PM - Edit history (3)
Somebody is voting the winners in. As long as you have candidates that are liars, and constituents that are stupid enough to believe the lies, you are going to have these types of elections.... Take example the Kentucky Governor race... well idiots of Kentucky, you just voted in a man who says he wants to drop medicaid and cut the Kentucky sign-up for ACA. Ok well don't cry foul when you show up too your doctors check-up and find you are no longer covered. Don't cry foul when you need to get insurance and now your benefit cost are through the roof. Remember Kentucky, you voted Mitch McConnell back in....
As an addendum. I read that many of the local and state elections were in favor of Democrats, so not all is lost..
sorry, as I am reading, I am adding.... seems as if the DEMOCRATS now hold a 5-2 majority because 3 democrats were elected to the PA supreme court this election....this shows that the GOP is NOT totally take over the country.
Maine voters on Tuesday showed again that they strongly support taxpayer-funded political campaigns when they added new money and transparency requirements to the state’s Clean Election system on the statewide ballot.
librechik
(30,956 posts)how long have we been talking about taking our party back? When is that going to happen instead of a lot of whining about leadership?
I feel for Dem voters in red states, and I know you are working hard.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)It is why we have no national discourse or potential agreement on matters of tremendous importance to present and future lives.
They don't want us too. "Hey, that squirrel can water ski!"
The more successful Wall St is, the less reality we will enjoy. It's a barely a sliver as it is, and that is all thanks to fine contributions by some good independent folks still clawing at the cracks. Closely followed by corporate donors with fresh funds to fill them.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)party ticket can be elected county clerk in charge of marriages and is hailed locally
as some kind of female role model and hero.
And the AG and S of S were held, so please....Gloom and Doom is for Republicans, as Obama reminds us children once ina a while...some will listen...but not in Kentucky, land of the controlled mass media.
Kentucky....it isn't for lovers, it's for children.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)You are hilarious. Anyone with a brain can look at turnout results and see who is doing the voting where. The most left leaning States always have larger turnout and more victory. That's how it is. Turnout is high in Oregon, Minnesota, and low in places like Kentucky famous for blue grass and blue dogs....
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Hopefully the corporate Democrats will vote for the Wall Street candidate in mass.
SolutionisSolidarity
(606 posts)"Vote for me you petulant worthless asshole" isn't the best sales pitch, though granted it's the only one you know...
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)Nothing quite says political genius like repeating a repeatedly debunked lie (call it the centrist Stab in the Back myth) or insinuating that there is anything remotely resembling a radical left in Kentucky. That's some Steve Israel level political genius right there.
NYCButterfinger
(755 posts)I don't think I would get her upset if I were you. She's an attack dog on TV, but it doesn't translate into votes.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...OWE HER for her treachery,
and some Democrats running for President DO owe her....Big Time.
madville
(7,847 posts)I can't imagine her winning Governor here, especially since Florida does its election during the midterms.
MBS
(9,688 posts)One ray of hope: at least Democrats pretty much swept the judicial election (s) in Pennsylvania- these were listed in the Washington Post as one of the top 9 elections in the country.
But dammit, only 30% voter turnout in Kentucky- this is something that the DNC and Kentucky democratic party could have done something about, especially since the Dem candidate seemed to have been leading the polls right up to the election - but then lost big. Wow.
We need a DNC and in local democratic parties who can do their job.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)A little something for thought
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/33511-beyond-dystopian-visions-in-the-age-of-neoliberal-authoritarianism
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...dystopian paradigm. We are witnessing the transformation of our nation from a democracy to a dystopia, ruled by the insane who are supported and followed by the insane.
What's worse, all we can do is watch it as it happens. In a world where people will vote against their own best interests and put in place people who will seize on that weakness, we as a nation are lost.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)then I came across this well timed OP. Wow.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...then I saw maxrandb's OP and it says well enough how I feel - on the surface. But deep down, I'm scared and I'm depressed that my children and my grand-children will inherit this growing paradigm.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)Despair, Political Exhaustion and Demoralization played out with the voter turnout in KY last night.
Fear causes folks to stay with the status quo-at Least you Know the Bad...If these folks even consider stepping outside their comfort zone (into the unfamiliar)-to vote for/elect someone with a Different agenda.....even when that very different agenda will Improve their lives......"familiarity of fear" rules the psyche, even when their situation is bad...and does cause folks to literally sabotage themselves and keep voting against their own best interests...and "they" know that.
Me? When I get scared? I dig in deeper and fight harder.....but that's just me. And this is just my opinion.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)from this nightmare. But, where would I go?
And, now, Carson is tied with Hillary. Exhausted, indeed.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)a few days to decompress helps a lot. Nature walks, reading a book, crafting, friends etc can do Miracles - Don't let "it" get under your skin....
fredamae
(4,458 posts)
DinahMoeHum
(23,525 posts)How many down races in non-POTUS years have the Democrats won during her tenure?
DWS is a L-O-S-E-R. Period.
luvspeas
(1,883 posts)I don't get what you mean.
Blue_Tires
(57,596 posts)c-ville rook
(45 posts)Democrats cover a wider section of the electorate. However, they tend to be more moderate. Therefore, you are losing these off year elections.
The GOP is more radicalized they they win off-year and tend to find themselves out of luck in the nationals.
If you want to win off year you have to have a more zealous base or at least a section of it.
And it does not hurt the GOP has tried its damnest to break the gov't and then they point out that gov't does not work and they go, "See you zealots and martyrs we need more seats!" It is a very effective combo punch, but it gets diluted nationally as moderates see how stupid and/or nuts you are.
See the largest part of the brain trust that makes up the GOP presidential candidacy field.
moose65
(3,447 posts)And it's a lesson Democrats never seem to learn: off-year elections are BASE elections. Dems need to motivate our own voters and forget about trying to convince Republicans or the squishy middle to vote for our candidates. I am so sick of Democrats who refuse to stand up for their own beliefs and who try to hide the fact that they're Democrats. We have to give people a reason to vote for us, and to draw a clear distinction between our candidates and the Republicans. If we're going to try to be Republican-lite, then we're never going to win!
djean111
(14,255 posts)that the politician is a DINO - or - EVEN A REPUBLICAN.
Been happening for quite a while. Nice to see others noticing now - doubt it will make a difference, the money is in the bag, the fix is in. THIS is what depresses turnout, not some stuff on a message board. The crap that Debbie DINO serves up at election time.
Nobody is playing the "Who the fuck else are they gonna vote for?" game, any damned more.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)we wont be electing another republican for a long time if ever. It has very little to do with the DNC and a lot to do with our state Democratic party.
It's not the DNC's fault that the people of Kentucky think that Kim Davis and her god given rights to be a bigot, is more important than their access to health care.
You had might as well wake up to the fact that the South is pretty much gone to the Democratic party. The majority of Kentucky voters don't care what Democrat runs for office anymore. They want "religious freedom".
With the possible exception of Virginia and North Carolina, southern states are sinking deeper into the mire of religious fundamentalism and that's the GOP base.
The Democrats gave Kentucky medical care and an economic boost that went along with it but religion/hatred of women's rights/hatred of the other is getting stronger every day. What exactly do you want the DNC to do about that? They could run Jesus Christ and he couldn't win unless he ran on forcing women to have babies and abolishing Obama care.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)... a Republican much sooner than you can imagine.
Things do not get better for most people when corporate Democrats have power (even if things do get worse faster with Republicans). There are consequences for that.
The last 4 decades have shown the middle class, working class, and poor continuing to lose ground regardless of which Party was in control in this country.
If we can reform the Democratic Party back to what it represented during FDR's days the Democratic Party just might get another 3 or 4 decades of government control.
If we don't reform the Democratic Party, every time the Republicans behave horribly and lose their power (which they will ALWAYS do of course), the corporate-owned Democrats won't make the reforms that are desperately needed. Things will most likely continue to get even more difficult financially for most Americans. The Republicans WILL regain power in this scenario so much faster than many could believe possible.
The Republican Party's death is continually talked about around here, and they have so much of the country locked up right now. They are a ridiculous and horrible Party. But time after time the Democratic Party never makes them pay for the many horrible things they do. What does that say about the Democratic Party? This bipartisan crap needs to stop, and the American people need to be made aware of how extreme the Republican Party has become. The Democratic Party needs to start FIGHTING FOR US!
Walk away
(9,494 posts)they can kick their asses goodbye. This is a Blue State that is moderate Democratic. Even our Republicans are moderates. Chris Christie was a crook but a moderate one until he started getting ideas about running for president.
There are small bastions of left wing nirvana, but they are very wealthy liberal areas that elect the likes of Rush Holt and they are few and far between.
Most New Jersey voters do not mix religion with politics. We vote for a balance between services and taxes. Unlike Kentucky we pay the highest in the nation so Socialism doesn't sound too good to us.
The job of the DNC is to develop candidates for the party who can win the seats they run for. They have generously allowed a non member to run for it's party's nomination for president despite his public dislike of the party.
But usually, the DNC is supposed to be supporting Democrats, not ideologies.
I am guessing (I could be wrong) that you have never donated a penny to the DNC. Most progressives seem to hate them and not support them but feel free to tell them what to do and blame them for all of their problems.
RandySF
(83,178 posts)When the stakes are as clear as daylight and people still vote for the guy who says he's going to take away their health care? This was no academic argument over health exchanges vs single payer. It was "I'm going to strip you of your coverage and, in exchange, I'll protect you from the gays and that black president". How does one reason with that?
totodeinhere
(13,688 posts)That's the difference. As long as it's poor people they don't care.
NonMetro
(631 posts)1) Union busting
2) Welfare "Reform" (screwed the poor and they stopped voting)
3) "Get Tough On Crime" (War On Drugs disenfranchised millions more who usually voted Democratic.)
4) War on tobacco. (Millions switched to the GOP who promised not to raise taxes on tobacco or vilify people who smoked)
Throughout all of this, Democrats did not "side" with the people. People noticed. The DNC can now do very little to turn this around, and people who think HRC is a shoe-in next year aren't paying attention.
Yes, perhaps we need new leadership. But can anyone else do any better?
fredamae
(4,458 posts)NonMetro
(631 posts)We're like a brand name soap or cereal: "New and Improved!"
fredamae
(4,458 posts)who an elected official represents just review their voting records.
We have been listening to much to what "they" say and Not listening close enough to what "they" Don't say.
Regan Dems (aka: Mod GOP) have taken over the party, imo. Additionally the Dem Party seems a comfy landing place for far too many pissed off repubs who can no longer stomach the leadership with-in their own party....
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)...and if the DNC's strategy is to shamefully and cowardly run away from this president's record, we are doomed.
They couldn't even get the DNC and state-level Democratic Party establishment to run on Beshear's good record??!?!
Sigh...
luvspeas
(1,883 posts)DWS
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)
harun
(11,381 posts)It has never worked.
They take this stance because they want to still take all the corporate dollars. They want to take them and say "hey we aren't as big of assholes as the GOP you have to vote for us!".
People just aren't going to get off the couch to vote for the lesser asshole.
GOP on the other hand has the racists, the rural and the rich. They go vote.
The urban lib's will vote, but it will be to get a Dem president. For Congress we are fucked.
840high
(17,196 posts)many years. No more.
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)But when you're trying to sell parts of the Democratic platform to these voters, sell like you've never sold before.
stevieme
(1 post)I'm really fed up. We out spent Republicans in KY and there are more democrats then republicans registered. This is not the first time democrats have lost in what seemed like an obvious win. I hate to turn in to one of those paranoid republicans but I must admit the word fraud keeps popping in my head.
QUESTIONS:
1. Can the final results be manipulated?
2. Are there both Repub and Democrats overseeing the final results?
It probably was a straight up election but I keep wondering how so many people can keep voting against their best interests. I think I read that there are only 17 Dem Governors.....good god, that's terrible. Forget the south -- the Repubs have a strong foot hold that would be tough to crack.
My morale is so down in the dumps, I want to say "this is useless" -- Dems are so far behind we will never catch up.
Sorry for my ranting - believe me I could do it for hours (gerrymandering, citizen united, etc) but it is hard to be a Democrat when so many things that should go your way don't. If what the Repubs say about liberals owning the media is true, then I don't understand why the message is not getting out that Republicans are destroying middle class.
Ok, Rant over....now time to go outside and scream
MisterP
(23,730 posts)to the party: thing is, now the check amounts are the same whether they win or lose ...
and if they win TOO much there's pressure to pass laws that might harm the gravy train
if they lose they can play the underdog battling "The Stupid Party," while endorsing their candidates, deliberately handing them victories, and passing all their laws even over their own party's heads
and they're so used to telling everyone that left-deviation and the voters are to blame for any problem they've started to believe it
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)It's like a suicide mission.
How little can she do, so that PukeBaggers just take over.
It's beyond bizzare.
elleng
(141,926 posts)and we've suffered ever since.
They SNEERED at his 50 State Strategy, I saw it myself, at a book tour/interview with Rahm Emanuel in DC, ACTUALLY sneered at my question ("What about the 50 State Strategy?"
and wouldn't answer.
drray23
(8,698 posts)Like attorney general or state treasurer. How come these were taken by dems and not the governorship ? Does this means that some people voting D for attorney general and state treasurer decided it would be a good idea to get Bevins as the governor ?
You would think that if the dems were all voting down ticket, it would have implied that conway would have won too ?
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Sitting at home watching TV?
I dunno but they will be there in the primaries too, I bet.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)totally corrupt piece of human sewage who heads the DNC.
It's like she is being paid to throw every election save for the one involving the person whose boots she licks every day. And I am beginning to believe that is the case.
The Money Party doesn't care one bit if the label is D or R as long as the Money Party's wishes continue to come true.
Which is why they hate and fear Bernie.
DonCoquixote
(13,951 posts)"It's like she is being paid to throw every election save for the one involving the person whose boots she licks every day. And I am beginning to believe that is the case. "
Because then she can claim that when she has to shred the last of the fdr net, she had to do it cuz evil GOP, but you better send the dlc your checks anyway. (sarcasm)
Obama may be no Bernie, but when "impeachment was off the table" we knew that the Democrats in Congress were going to do anything to kneecap the victories of 2008, because that would mean they could not paid well being the jobbers to the GOP pro wrestlers.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)That is the perfect word for the modern institutional Democratic Party.
They're Iron Mike Sharpe, the Washington Generals.
The whole of their job description is to pretend to put up a fight and then take the prearranged dive while they still collect nice paychecks and, eventually, jobs shilling and covering for the oligarchy that has owned them all along. Cough - ERIC FUCKING HOLDER - Cough.
The entire structure of the party was sold to the oligarchs by the DLC, and the Clintons were the lead salespeople. Gotta get their hands on that beautiful. delicious corporate money. Strictly for themselves of course. Commoners with no favors to sell need not apply.
Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, JFK, LBJ and even Theodore Roosevelt must be hitting 25.000 rpm in their graves.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Please, tell us what you really think.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Democrats running against her Repig BFFs in the House. Yet she runs the DNC. 
I was being far kinder than she deserves.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)One person isn't responsible for the failure of many.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)is responsible for its priorities and direction.
The buck stops there, to paraphrase a REAL Democrat.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)And one person can't fix it. We spend all day on social media bashing democrats, and wonder why turnout is shit, and rather think about the cause and effect, we bash democrats further.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)if not an actual agent of the Republicans.
Her appalling record speaks for itself, in direct opposition to Howard Dean's record.
Why is it a good thing to protect an incompetent from criticism and let her keep a position at which she has failed so miserably and completely. Are there to be no consequences for repeatedly demonstrated incompetence?
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)...would be ripped to fucking shreds on this site today. I don't believe for a second when anyone critical of the DNC pulls the 50 State card.
Truprogressive85
(900 posts)@TheFix 1h1 hour ago
Republicans have total or partial control of 76% of the country's state legislatures. Wow. http://wpo.st/sjEl0
guillaumeb
(42,649 posts)Talking politics is fine, but actually getting out and voting is what counts.
SpankMe
(3,686 posts)The root of this problem is the fact that non-Republicans and others who could vote Democratic are just not out there voting. This is the one thing the DNC must work on.
On issue after issue, people favor the Democratic principle over the Republican one - in some cases by wide margins. But, through Republican gerrymandering and Democratic voter apathy, Republicans are gaining absolute political power over a huge amount of territory.
Fuck non-voters. Fuck them.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)since they're so popular.
blue neen
(12,465 posts)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141250542
Westmoreland County in sw PA also now has a Democratic majority in County Commissioners.
Believe me, the Republican party spent a TON in Pennsylvania this year.
Madmiddle
(459 posts)to the fact that people have become so dispossessed, that why would they even bother. Republican keep winning because of the disdain is so deep, that even as the R's have nothing to offer, the racism and bigotry, along with the fixing of votes, gerrymandering, voter suppression, have worked. The corruption has become the norm!!!
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)Tea baggers keep forging ahead - they pound away, softening up America to their extremist views and move wide swaths of the country to the far right wing. Democrats just coast along behind them, claiming to be a more reasonable conservative alternative, while trying not to make extremists feel bad being the ignorant shit throwing, douche-bags they truly are.
Another reason why you won't find senior Democratic leadership worried about conservative gains is because you have a mostly conservative Democratic leadership base. Just listen to the excuses they make to avoid needed economic reform. It's pathetic. Never a good word for working people. Just carefully scripted asshatery designed to avoid offending the rich.
And it is here we come to understand that the differences between DNC and RNC are in the margins of social policy.
People can detect what's real and what's not. Hillary & DWS are cold calculating, triangulating Wall Street money chasers who don't give a flying fuck about the middle class and below and will send your job to Vietnam faster than you can say "Miss Saigon" if they can make one penny in the process.
It's quite a sad affair when millions of people decide an honest to god village idiot is a better choice than a Democrat. But that's exactly what is happening thanks to DWS, Hillary and the rotten core of the DNC leadership team.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)too. I am very pleased with that.
houston16revival
(953 posts)can have very reactionary, traditional, skeptical elements
These people are worried about kids, pets, high school football, fast food,
vacations, money for tires, debt, roads. They're not sure if clean water,
minority and civil rights, and ACA is important for them. They trust their
doctors and pharmacists. Environment is green lettuce to them.
It's a hard bunch to reach. Fear and racism is used by the other party
to motivate them to vote. Democrats are not getting it done.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)It's that simple.