Do We Really Want Change? Here's How We Get It.

[MineralMan]

The United States, politically, is split in its governance between two parties. Despite all the chatter to the contrary, there are real differences between those two parties. Right now, the House of Representatives is controlled by a majority of Republicans. We elected them to office. Not individually, but collectively. My House member is a progressive, but the representative from one of the neighboring districts is Michele Bachmann, who is as far from being progressive as possible.

We elect our own government. Sadly, a minority of people who are eligible to vote go to the polls and participate in every election. Even in presidential election years, more people who could vote don't bother to vote than those who do. In mid-term elections, like the one coming up in less than two months, even fewer bother to go to the polls.

The bottom line is this: If more people who will vote for Republican candidates go and vote, the Republicans win. That should be obvious enough. But, what would happen if that weren't the case? What if people who would vote for Democratic candidates were to turn out and vote in unprecedented numbers? Here's what would happen:

1. We'd get control of both houses of Congress and of a majority of state legislatures.
2. Bills that would begin the process of change that we so desperately need would be passed.
3. The voters would see that they do, in fact, have the power to implement change.
4. With that recognition, the same people, confident in their ability to choose better candidates, will pick better candidates for future elections.
5. Change and progress would begin to alter the direction of the United States.

So, how do we do this? It's really simple. We all, meaning each of us who understand what is needed, make a concerted effort to get people out to vote. In 2014, we encourage them to vote for the Democratic candidate who has already been through the primary election, even if that Democrat isn't our ideal candidate. Then, we work over the next two years and from that time on to select better candidates for each ensuing election. Our process lets us choose our candidates, as well, in the primary elections and in caucus and convention systems where those exist. Imagine what would happen if the Democratic turnout for primary elections was close to that for general elections!

The only feasible path to effective change requires one thing, and it's something we can all actually do:

GOTV 2014 and Beyond!

If you agree, kick this thread by posting a reply and rec it. Let's show everyone that the enthusiasm to win exists on DU. If that enthusiasm doesn't exist even here on DU, then we are surely and truly lost.

[NYC_SKP]

1. I wonder how many people expected another FDR know what FDR's congress looked like.

So there's a shitload of things FDR was able to do that make us all proud, and a lot of us are sayin', WTF Obama???

But thinking back to basic civics (as it's hard to understand how sickeningly dirty and complex government works, or doesn't work), we have to remember that the president can't do much with a hostile congress. Somehow people still hold unrealistically high expectations, IMHO.

FDR's 1935 (74th) Congress:

Senate--

....Dems: 73

....Reps: 21

House--

....Dems: 322

....Reps: 103


----Why can't Obama be more awesome???


Obama's 2014 (113th) Congress:

Senate--

....Dems: 51

....Reps: 47

House--

....Dems: 191

....Reps: 240
______________________________________________________________

I think it's fine to ask more of Obama, but unless we work hard to get more of the congress on our side it won't matter who the fuck in in the Oval Office.

Actually, it's not that complicated.

Carry on.

[MineralMan]

5. Exactly. For a President to get things done, he or she has to have

a Congress who will send him the bills. Presidents, themselves, have no legislative powers at all. They are adminstrators. Congress passes every federal law that goes into effect. The same thing applies in state legislatures, which are the bodies that must implement change.

Thanks for your numbers.

[rhett o rick]

7. And he has to appoint people other than Arnie Duncan and Penny Pritzker and Gen Clapper.

Granted Congress hasn't been helpful, but Pres Obama must share some of the responsibility for the actions of his appointees.

I strongly support GOTV but I will not be blackmailed into supporting DINO's.

[MineralMan]

10. Like everyone, you will do what you think best.

As will I.

[PATRICK]

38. The political state of affairs

is that both money and enthusiasm are not on the Dem side regardless that the other side has a minority dictating both using a media enabled fringe.

Not to attack those on either side of the DINO issue, that intramural squabbling is merely a symptom of an untreated political illness that won't go away even if all the activists flooded into GOTV (though, arguably, in theory at least, could almost save the day). The people, treated to an intentional numbing cynicism, would do better with less than perfect Democrats, but their election support will barely get up to the level of the rhetoric. Some law of political thermodynamics there. The party seems almost resigned to a spontaneous public uprising being a theoretical issue.

If the nation and people are chained to the train tracks both parties only celebrate or get glum depending on their own assessment of getting elected in a miserable election process. Nothing is happening on the tracks except an approaching rumble.

[rhett o rick]

39. I don't disagree, but I must accept an altered sense of reality to maintain my sanity.

DINO's are not the problem. Democrats that act like Republicans are not the problem. Grassroots Republicans are not the problem. The problem seem inherit in human nature.

IMO, the First Law of Human Nature: "Those that gain power become, if not already, corrupt."

The Second Law of Human Nature, "A good share of people accept or embrace that their leaders are corrupt and will provide support."

The Third Law, "The majority of people, for one reason or another, are apathetic about who is in power."

If I were to let myself, I would say there really is no hope of developing a government that favors most of the people.

[Blanks]

8. The folks who don't understand why Obama can't be more awesome...

Also seem to be unaware of how long it took for us to recover from the Great Depression.

In large part due to the conservative control of the Supreme Court. They ruled things unconstitutional and provoked FDR to make the 15 justices recommendation and the 'hardening of the judicial arteries' speech.

The recovery didn't happen overnight. The stock market crashed in '29 and they hoped that WWII would get the economy going after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in '41. There was a huge depression in '37 and '38.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession_of_1937–38

It took a long time to get things going in the right direction.

[Octafish]

32. Except the Banksters responsible also got jobs in the administration...

Ask Penny Pritzker. Ask Tim Geithner. Ask Jacob Lew. Ask Lawrence Summers.

[Blanks]

35. That seems to be a common criticism...

And I don't know much about banking, but I expect that it's like any profession and it's complicated enough that you can't just drag people out of the local tavern to fix it. You need the people familiar with the industry.

I'd like to see more oversight on banking, and the democratically controlled congress passed Dodd-Frank when they were in power. It comes back to: if we want the banking problems fixed we need to have democratic control of congress. They were doing the people's work and the tea party brought it to a halt.

[Octafish]

37. Look up William K. Black, a forensic economist who prosecuted 1,000s of S&L crooks...

He calls the process "Control Fraud" because the banks' officers are corrupt. Their financial crimes can be very complicated.

The Two Documents Everyone Should Read to Better Understand the Crisis

by William K. Black
Assoc. Professor, Univ. of Missouri, Kansas City;
Sr. regulator during S&L debacle
February 25, 2009 10:31 AM

As a white-collar criminologist and former financial regulator much of my research studies what causes financial markets to become profoundly dysfunctional. The FBI has been warning of an "epidemic" of mortgage fraud since September 2004. It also reports that lenders initiated 80% of these frauds.1 When the person that controls a seemingly legitimate business or government agency uses it as a "weapon" to defraud we categorize it as a "control fraud" ("The Organization as 'Weapon' in White Collar Crime." Wheeler & Rothman 1982; The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One. Black 2005). Financial control frauds' "weapon of choice" is accounting. Control frauds cause greater financial losses than all other forms of property crime -- combined. Control fraud epidemics can arise when financial deregulation and desupervision and perverse compensation systems create a "criminogenic environment" (Big Money Crime. Calavita, Pontell & Tillman 1997.)

The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence. To understand the crisis we have to focus on how the mortgage fraud epidemic produced widespread accounting fraud.

CONTINUED...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/the-two-documents-everyon_b_169813.html

The reason the current and past administrations failed to listen to Dr. Black and his colleagues are a mystery.

[Blanks]

40. Unfortunately corrupt does not equal illegal.

Last edited Sat Sep 13, 2014, 03:30 PM - Edit history (1)

Excerpt:

Control fraud epidemics can arise when financial deregulation and desupervision and perverse compensation systems create a "criminogenic environment"

If they aren't breaking (or haven't broken) the law - then what we need are the regulations and laws that once existed.

Going after people who have behaved unethically, but not illegally is a waste of time. As I said before we need a congress controlled by democrats that will bring back the regulations.

I'm pretty sure that's consistent with the purpose of this thread. Whereas complaining about the president - isn't.

[Octafish]

41. Thanks! I'll try to keep consistent with the purpose of this thread.

Oh, for the record, we Democrats did control both Houses for the first two years of the current Administration.

One more thing: The Democratic platform is superior and the majority of voters will support it. So, if we want to GOTV: Field Democrats who actually will govern as they campaign.

[FrodosPet]

2. Some of the people I know with progressive attitudes REFUSE to vote

I feel like I cannot push the issue any further without risking damage to these important friendships.

But let me reach out here: Does anyone have any secret tricks to turn people who proudly proclaim "I'm not going to vote, thinking about politics gives me a headache"?

If I turn on the news and my visitor says "Change that shit! I don't want to hear it. Put Supernatural on Netflix!" should I just ignore them and make them feel uncomfortable? Perhaps I should ask them to leave?

[MineralMan]

3. Actually, I don't know any real progressives who refuse to vote.

Just the opposite, actually. I'm involved in the DFL party organization here in St. Paul, MN, and its leadership gets more progressive every year. The old guard is being replaced by younger, more progressive people.

As for individual voters, here's what I do: I ask each person I talk to what their most important issues are and what they want to see done about those issues. Once they tell me, I tell them about a DFL-endorsed candidate who shares their point of view and ask them to go to the polls and help elect that candidate and other Democrats. Often, that's all that's required to get them out to vote. As for my personal guests, just about everyone I'm close to is already a solid, voting Democrat, so your second example really doesn't apply in my case.

[rhett o rick]

9. I have been very active for many years and it's not the progressives that stay home.

It's those that are warm and happy with the status quo. Afraid to take a stand on important issues. I have marched and picketed in the pouring rain, and it was always side by side with the crazy assed liberals.

[FSogol]

11. Many people like to gripe about everything. If they don't vote, then they do not want a say

in how things work, therefore, they are not allowed to gripe, moan, complain, kvetch, bellyache, or squawk. Shut them down wherever they start.

[jwirr]

4. Each one reach one. If we just reach one other non-voter and get them to the polls it will bring

about change. I also am lucky. All of my representatives are liberal Democrats. I go to vote joyfully.

[MineralMan]

6. Yes. And if each one reaches two, that's even better.

Then, if each of those who is reached reaches another, we cannot lose.

[mcar]

12. K&R for GOTV

[taught_me_patience]

13. Impossible with the gerrymandering n/t.

[MineralMan]

14. Nope. Not impossible at all.

Gerrymandering is done based on historical voter turnout information. Gerrymandered districts still turn out less than half of people who are eligible to vote. We do not need to win in every district, anyhow. We only need to win in enough districts to gain a majority.

We need to turn out Democratic voters in every district in unprecedented numbers. You'd be amazed how many districts would flip if we actually made that happen. In every state, there are congressional and state legislative districts that can be flipped with a large enough turnout.

I'll give you a concrete example. In 2012, Michele Bachmann won her district by a margin of only 1%. I think that makes things more understandable with regard to my OP.

[Ninga]

15. Yes! AND HELP! OHIO needs GOTV. We are a sad, hot mess here in Ohio.

Please please please Ohio. Vote. Staying home because your are a disheartened voter will only make matters worse.

[MineralMan]

16. There are many DUers from Ohio.

I hope they'll all get involved with GOTV efforts there.

[J_J_]

17. This is a DEMOCRATIC president starting another 3 year war

We had both houses and Obama and we couldn't even discuss single payer


Will voting actually fix the problem?

Have we even fixed the diebold machines that are so easy to manipulate?


We need to stop waiting for the next election, and start demanding they work for US right now!

[MineralMan]

18. "...start demanding they work for US right now!"

The two things are not incompatible. So far, though, your suggestion isn't getting it done, either. Both immediate and long-term goals need to be addressed. Yes, we should demand action, but we should also be working toward better governance down the road, as well.

My suggestion is not incompatible in any way with yours. Both are desperately needed.

[whatchamacallit]

19. Sorry MM, couldn't help myself :)

[MineralMan]

20. I have so stolen that image!

Watch for it in a post near you!

[whatchamacallit]

21. Haha!

[MineralMan]

22. See:

Last edited Fri Sep 12, 2014, 02:26 PM - Edit history (1)

[whatchamacallit]

23. That's the spirit!

[Chathamization]

24. Great. And an important point about primaries. Progressive candidates will only come into power if

we put them in power. There needs to be a lot more people getting involved, paying attention to elections and voting for good candidates. I don’t think people realize how massive change is possible if people pay attention and vote – even more so if they occasionally became active in encouraging others to.

[MineralMan]

25. Many Democrats don't think they have anything to do with

who runs. They couldn't be more wrong. Candidates are selected by the voters. In some places, candidates are also selected for endorsement by the local party organization at district level conventions. Getting involved officially in your local or district level Democratic party organization is simple. Becoming a delegate is simple in most places, too. Why not be part of the process that selects the actual candidates for local, state legislative, and congressional offices? It's amazing how few people are actually involved in that process. More could be, and should be.

And then, there's the primary election. Turnout in those elections is typically very, very low. Even a small GOTV effort for a particular candidate can boost that candidate into the general election in many districts. We made that work in my state senate district, and elected a state senator who most people did not think had a chance by doing GOTV for him in the primary election in 2012. He is now our state senator.

As voters, we have power we're not even aware of. We should learn what is possible and then go out and do it. Procedures and organizations are different in different states, so you have to find out how it works in your state and get involved. It's easy. It's fun. You get to have face-to-face time with candidates, and they know who you are, so when you write to them or email them, they read what you say. I've met every elected official in my own districts multiple times. They know my name and face. I've helped them get elected.

We have the power. We just have to use it.

[Chathamization]

29. Yes. Agree 100%. We should probably put what you wrote on fliers and pass them around. A ton of

stuff can get done, but our biggest obstacle is the entrenched apathy that present in most of the population. Even many Democrats I know aren’t registered as Democrats but rather as independents; I keep trying to explain to them that all that means is that they can’t vote in the Democratic primaries. Hell, even some Republican’s here have realized that and register as Democrats.

Many people might complain about their local party, but how many voters pay attention to which state committee member they vote for? Gerrymandering is a problem, but it can be stopped with strong state parties, strong GOTV efforts, voter registration and fighting back against voter disenfranchisement laws. And there’s a ton of stuff that can get done at the state level – things like single-payer healthcare, infrastructure spending, free higher education, higher minimum wages, etc. that progressives have been wanting for a long time.

But people need to start paying attention to the power that they have. The activist forum here is pretty quiet. So too are the state forums (at least the ones I’ve checked). Once people realize the power and responsibility they have, a lot can get done. But it’s going to take time to get that message out.

[JustAnotherGen]

26. I stand with MineralMan!

[MineralMan]

27. Thanks! We're shoulder-to-shoulder in the battle for progress.

[Vincardog]

28. Mkick

[daligirl519]

30. But. . .

whining on a message board is a heap more fun!

[MineralMan]

31. It's a lot easier, too. GOTV is hard work.

It's worth it, though.

[cali]

33. Alas, it's not anywhere close to as simple as you claim

not with gerrymandered districts and gobs of dark money.

[MineralMan]

34. Cali, I've seen it work too many times to fall for that.

If GOTV is successful, it works just great. If people don't show up to do it, it doesn't. It's that simple. Ask Foung Hawj ( pronounced Fong Her) in Minnesota's 67th State Senate District how GOTV worked for him. He came in third at the district endorsement convention. Then, in the primary election and in the general election, he won and is now my district's state senator. Almost nobody believed he had a chance. Those of us who did got out and brought voters to the polls during the primary and he won that. Since the district is solidly Democratic, he won the general, as well. At the time, he couldn't even afford yard signs (I had a few made with my own money). His election was entirely due to GOTV efforts on his behalf.

And that's not the only election that I've worked on where an unlikely result was due to GOTV work. It works.

I hope you're planning to be active in GOTV work wherever you are. If not, then that's too bad.

[tiredtoo]

36. Bravo

This is the only way to win back our government. If we vote, we WIN!