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
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Ok then, Let's spell it out for Hillary "Democrats" [View all]bvar22
(39,909 posts)218. You can't support your claim.
"The Left" showed up, voted, and did most of the heavy lifting in 2010.
Progressive Candidates "WON". Blue Dogs and Dinos LOST.
It was the mushy "Centrists" and Conservative Democrats who were too lazy to vote.
Here are the stats:
[font size=3]Did liberals really stay home and cause the 2010 rout?[/font]
"You know what I'm talking about. The claim that a bunch of liberals were so pissed off at Obama that they stayed home and this caused the 2010 rout. It's pervasive. I won't link to examples because it comes up so regularly I see no point singling anyone out.
So I went back to the exit polls and the picture I see shows nothing like that. If you are a proponent of this claim, I challenge you for empirical proof that some set of activist liberals "took their ball and went home" or whatever metaphor you prefer to make Obama's leftward critics appear childish and immature. Inside, the evidence I found that shows this just ain't so.
Here's what CNN found in the 2010 House exit poll, when respondents were asked for their ideology, note the number in brackets which indicates the proportion of the respondents who picked that option:
Liberal (20%)
D - 90%
R - 8%
Other - 2%
Moderate (38%)
D - 55%
R - 42%
Other - 3%
Conservative (42%)
D - 13%
R - 84%
Other - 3%
<snip>
Wherein is this great liberal(/progressive) sulkfest in lieu of voting? Liberals voted. They voted for Democrats. I don't know how many held their noses while doing so, but they damn well did so, at least according to the most reliable evidence we have of such things.
<snip>
Still the claim that petulant liberals punished Obama to their own detriment is repeated so often with such certitude, I thought I would request to see the proof of it, because I don't see it, in the most obvious place it would appear if it were there, the proportion and voting of actual liberals in comparable elections. If you have some more complex explanation of how it really happened, I would like to see it, because all I see is the proportion of the voting population calling themselves "conservatives" grew tremendously at expense of those calling themselves "moderates." Either a bunch of moderates became conservatives, or moderates stayed home, or a lot of conservatives who usually stay home came out. Or some combination of those things. Yet any of those explanations would be tremendously at odds with the "blame the progressives" explanation.
So what am I missing, or am I missing nothing, and this is just becoming that rarest of creatures, a "zombie lie" of the left?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/8/5/1003805/-
There it is.
If you have some stats that refute it, lets see them.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
312 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
This Revolt Has Been Building For Years - The DWS, DNC, DLC, Third-Way Has Only Themselves To Blame
cantbeserious
May 2016
#1
I don't vote for her. If you hate her so fucking much, call her on the phone.
Buzz Clik
May 2016
#51
Fine. If you choose to take no direct action, then quit expecting me/us to justify what she does.
Buzz Clik
May 2016
#66
The chances of speaking with DWS directly on the phone are very slim indeed. At best
Cal33
May 2016
#139
Give people a reason to vote and they will. Offer a pale imitation of the other party ...
Scuba
May 2016
#87
None ever asked for ponies, that's just a meme from the right-wing of the Democratic Party.
Scuba
May 2016
#96
"What exactly has the establishment done to Bernie supporters? Thrown them out of the party?"
Dragonfli
May 2016
#266
No, the GOP left him but DWS took him in and ran him as a Democrat. That's a betrayal ...
Scuba
May 2016
#246
It's because of the party's establishment connections that do not care about the Average
bkkyosemite
May 2016
#104
The DNC's establishment has done nothing for the Average American they care only about
bkkyosemite
May 2016
#212
Nadin, check out this link, I think you will be among those that understand it.
Dragonfli
May 2016
#267
Nadin doesn't endorse candidates, everybody knows this, she does critique certain tactics and idiocy
Dragonfli
May 2016
#268
False. I'm so fucking tired of this lie you conservadems like to trot out
LondonReign2
May 2016
#289
Paleeze! You shit on Leftists for 30 years and expect them to vote for you?
Peace Patriot
May 2016
#306
In 2009, Democrats in DC had an opportunity to protect our elections and voting rights.
Scuba
May 2016
#217
But it didn't pass, despite Dems having a super-majority in the Senate in 2009 with ...
Scuba
May 2016
#235
They lose, over and over again, DWS and the others still keep their cushy jobs.
leveymg
May 2016
#47
I have considered alternative reasons they have kept DWS in power. None of them good.
Enthusiast
May 2016
#273
Her actual words are worse. Of course I paraphrased but for those interested
berni_mccoy
May 2016
#29
Not this Democrat. Why would either party not what to include and to attract independent voters ?
CentralMass
May 2016
#38
Look at the argument, NCTraveler, though... it is about who can best defeat tRump, can you address
JudyM
May 2016
#75
I am sure you know it is expected that SBS unfavorables will plunge once anyone runs negative....
bettyellen
May 2016
#183
That is not the issue... same as anyone, but his negatives are minuscule in relation to hers.
JudyM
May 2016
#187
What the entire electorate will see as SBS's negatives have not been put out there. The better
bettyellen
May 2016
#192
Most of her margin over him is, like it or not, as a practical matter, not going to help in the GE.
JudyM
May 2016
#194
She is winning the swing states. He is winning tiny empty red states- and that means nothing.
bettyellen
May 2016
#195
I guess I'd say that anything that isn't in the "Solid D" column would be considered at some risk...
thesquanderer
May 2016
#309
Cook Political: the people that gave us "The Numbers Favor Hillary Clinton Over Trump"
brooklynite
May 2016
#311
You don't think that Democrats would vote for Bernie if he wins the nomination?
dana_b
May 2016
#109
We revealed the degree to which Hillarians will sell their souls to defend the indefensible in DWS.
Kip Humphrey
May 2016
#228
Lots of things are theoretically possible. That's why they establish odds and HRC is a 1-3 favorite.
DemocratSinceBirth
May 2016
#106
Odds six months out, like polls, cannot be accepted as totally reliable.
thesquanderer
May 2016
#310
Dana Milbank: blah blah blah blah blah ... Derp! ... blah blah blah... fart.
ChisolmTrailDem
May 2016
#265
You seem to have a hard time with the concept Sanders has NEVER been vetted
KittyWampus
May 2016
#77
At the end of teh day, you have to convince DEMOCRATS that you're the best candidate.
Adrahil
May 2016
#82
The Party elite were "ready for Hillary" long before she announced her candidacy.
senz
May 2016
#171
I thought it was a very liberating comment. I don't know about anyone else but it's a package deal
Autumn
May 2016
#110
Reasonable "Independents" will rally behind Hillary. The "HillaryHaters" will not. We don't care ...
NurseJackie
May 2016
#114
In the General Election, with Clinton v. Trump, I trust independents to look at their choices
Agnosticsherbet
May 2016
#152
I know a few Repubs that will not be voting for Donald or anyone. I think there are
Pisces
May 2016
#196
You might want to check your sources on that. Trump has done well with evangelicals.
BillZBubb
May 2016
#279
Let's spell it out for Bernie fans: HRC has won 12.2 miln votes, Trump: 10.1 miln, Bernie: 9.1 miln
Bill USA
May 2016
#226
When you have the apparatchiks known as superdelegates, the vote suppression, etc you go crazy. n/t
bobthedrummer
May 2016
#232
"This is why comments like DWS "We don't need the independents" comment so damn stupid. "
malokvale77
May 2016
#255
That's not accurate. Even Obama didn't need to win the independent vote in 2012.
BzaDem
May 2016
#258
I'm not sure how you get from "primary turnout gap" to "need to win independents by double digits"
BzaDem
May 2016
#263
In case you haven't noticed, historically primary turnout is not a predictor of general election
onenote
May 2016
#308
unfortunately, they are unable to process that information. a sad day for democracy.
pdsimdars
May 2016
#290
Guess who else has an unprecedented unfavorable rating among indpendents: Trump
onenote
May 2016
#307