Dems Lost Last Night Because UE was 9.6%. Period

[Yavin4]

That's the beginning, middle, and end of the story. Underestimating the severity of the economic crisis, its impact on jobs, and thinking that securing the financial sector would get growth starting again was a huge bet that the Obama administration and the congressional Dems made in 2009, and it has cost them big time.

The stimulus lacked size, vision, creativity, and passion. It should have served as a blueprint for the future, not filling in potholes or putting lights on railway stations.

If the UE rate stays at 9.6% or goes even higher, which is likely to happen, Obama will be crushed in 2012 unless Palin gets the nomination which I doubt. More than likely, we are looking at a Romney/Rubio 2012 ticket.

[denimgirly]

1. And part of the UE issue was due to listening to Geitner/Summers and Repub appeasement

He needed to go strong and not abandon progressive requests...Obama did and the issue remained unsolved...but bankers did get richer.

[vaberella]

8. What are you talking about? And every bloody economist has said it did stop the blood letting.

Jesus. Why do I come here...?! People want to make the WH the bad guy for the loss of Congressman and women. Have you taken a look at the some of these Congressmen and women. They helped in getting some of the shit you people are complaining about into place.

[jgraz]

2. It's more fundamental than that.

Obama and his team in no way underestimated the severity of the economic crisis. They just put their compromising, bipartisan agenda above the health of the economy, plain and simple.

[TZ]

5. lol--polls of independent voters totally contradict your opinion

The fact is more people are independents than democrats and in THEIR opinion the stimulus bill was TOO MUCH SPENDING as was HCR. I actually think people who believe as you do are hilarious because the national trends (go to any Pew poll for instance) completely show the opposite.

[jgraz]

7. Nope, that just reinforces it

A president with an actual agenda of strong leadership would have handled the political messaging. Even if they ended up compromising on the stimulus, a strong, visionary leader would have been on TV the next day, talking about how he expects this stimulus won't be enough and we'll need a comprehensive jobs bill.

Instead, Obama sold the stimulus as the greatest piece of legislation since the Magna Carta and pretended that everything was going to be just fine. All the while, Republicans were running to every microphone in the country to call him a Marxist.

Now we see the results of that failed strategy.


But hey, enjoy your laugh. Just remember, the Republicans are laughing at you, not with you.

[Igel]

14. In other words. . .

In a democracy, what we need are strong leaders who tell the people what they want and then give it to them.

There were a lot of failed components along the way. But saying that the response to discontent is to ride roughshod over the electorate is not one of them. The president presides, he doesn't dictate. The representative represent, not reign.

[jgraz]

17. It's so much easier to win a debate when you make up both sides, isn't it?

Now, if you'd like to respond to what I actually wrote, I'll be happy to discuss it with you.

[yourout]

3. I said at the time that the stimulas should have been 3 times the size it was.

And it should have been largly new and fairly large projects that would have employed 1,00,000 or more to restart the economy.

[Yavin4]

4. And It Should Have Been Focused on Renewable Energy Research

Something that would have been understandable by independents.

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. Predicted long ago:

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6171623&mesg_id=6171632

[pstokely]

9. And again in 2012

nt

[EC]

10. But it also tells me - that people

really don't know the difference between the parties or they would never had put repubs in charge of the hen house....Somehow we have to get people to realize which party works for the people and who does not...they both are for big business (duh - since we need business to survive, it's a given) so we have to get people to differentiate the difference between which businesses who is beholden to. The dems are for industry and schools ...while the repubs are for the non-working jobs - i.e. banking, investing, pharma etc....we have to keep harping on the differences...

[wiggs]

11. No. Dems lost because of relentless, unfounded, dishonest,

deceitful, shameless spreading of misinformation about dems generally but especially Obama. 9 of 10 talk radio hours were devoted to unbelievable attacks from the right...everything from how he shakes hands, his days off, his wife's arms and dresses, his faith, his patriotism, etc....not to mention the lies about the economy and who is at fault for unemployment.

If unemploymenet were 6, 7, or 8 there would still be outrage and vitriol about that or some other issue.

The election was a win for vast amounts of money dedicated toward destruction, a win for a policy of misinformation and media/think tank ownership that has been in place for 30 years funded to a tune of billions by corporate and RW money.

Dems had the issues!!! The RW drove the economy into the ditch and dems got blamed for it because of misinformation, fear, ignorance, and hate. If it weren't the economy, it would be something else.

[uponit7771]

12. If UE was -12% Dems would've STILL lost, there was no strategy for keeping seats NONE. Kaine had...

...not communicated ANY plan to ANY one in regards to how he was going to grow the DNC base.

[thereismore]

18. I disagree. It was the economy. People are impatient. Stupid, even. Throw in some racism and presto.

[TBF]

13. It's always the economy -

Bill Clinton recognized that and I'm surprised how many here don't see it. Rubio is the new golden boy - I can totally see that Romney/Rubio ticket in 2012. I think the teabaggerati is the old school republican's way of putting the rednecks out to pasture. The DLC are doing the same thing to progressives in this party. So what you have left are 2 very corporate parties with little to distinguish them. It's also known as fascism ...

[GSLevel9]

15. and the economic malaise in general. YUP. nt

[flpoljunkie]

16. Agree.

[treestar]

19. too easy to say that getting your visionary stimulus passed would

have worked out.