Democrats have lost 900+ state legislature seats, 12 governors, 69 House seats, 13 Senate seats.

[Scuba]

Under President Obama, Democrats have lost 900+ state legislature seats, 12 governors, 69 House seats, 13 Senate seats. That's some legacy.

If you haven't read the three-part thread by Admiral Loinpresser you need to do so. The future of our nation is at stake.

Here's the links ...

Part 1: http://www.democraticunderground.com/128069296

Part 2: http://www.democraticunderground.com/128069291

Part 3: http://www.democraticunderground.com/128069290

[kelliekat44]

1. And it's Obama's fault because .........?

His fault for being black No. 1

[Javaman]

23. Because...

Thanks, Obama!

[Scootaloo]

44. Amazing that the OP never blamed obama.

No, these are losses the party has incurred during the Obama administration. There is no implication that correlation equals causation - except by you, of course.

[Blue_Tires]

69. Except for the part where he said "That's some legacy"

[B Calm]

71. Looks like Obama blaming to me!

[morningfog]

87. It is his legacy.

[Scootaloo]

163. That's not blame. That's simple notation of fact

The Democrats have taken some gnarly losses during the Obama administration. Those losses will remain after the end of the administration, for the most part.

That's the situation we're left with as the Obama administration draws to a close. And with Debbie Wasserman-Schult runnign hte operation, we're not likely to have a last-minute reversal

[Blue_Tires]

216. I just don't like the implication that Obama never did anything to help state candidates

or that he's somehow responsible...

[olegramps]

56. This is the result of the Republcians' grassroots campaign that starts at the local level.

They are very active in bringing their campaign to the extensive evangelical and fundamentalists block of voters who vote in local elections. This has been totally ignored by the Democrats who have failed to make any effort to take their message to these voters and challenge the Republican's claim that they represent Christian values. They target the entre spectrum from local school boards, city government to the state house.

What is required is someone who can convince the Democrats that the war is actually won on the local level and can energize local politicians to take the fight to community politics. I certainly can not discount the racism that is similarly not addressed and has been a major factor in recent elections. This has not been forcefully contested as being absolutely un-Christian. Democrats should loudly proclaim that it is they that actually put into practice the teachings of Jesus that obligate those with resources assist those in need.

[haikugal]

82. You're correct in this.

They've been working their 7 Mountain strategy for decades.

We need to have candidates that speak for the people rather than the status quo.

[leveymg]

108. This one ^^^ The GOP knows how to mobilize its base, the DNC would rather suppress it to raise $$$.

It's really as simple as that. In areas such as Northern VA local races are fought and won by a progressive grassroots organization called The Brigades, when all the rest of the state goes Red, you can count on progressive GOTV. The local Congressmen and Delegation top to bottom know that, so they have to pay attention to the liberals. Where you don't have this sort of grassroots mobilization of progressives and labor, the GOP wins.

[Depaysement]

202. Plus gerrymandering and money

These help too.

[olegramps]

214. Yes, but the Gerrymandering is the end result of their campaign.

[Act_of_Reparation]

90. It's not all his fault, but he has played a part in these losses.

He did nominate Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to chair the DNC. As the person chiefly responsible for developing the party's national election strategy, I'd say she's been a pretty poor choice.

[Mojorabbit]

112. +1000 nt

[hifiguy]

159. +1000 and DWS is as useless as

a submarine with screen doors. She won't even ENDORSE Democratic challengers to her Repig BFFa in the House. That is the equivalent of treason to the party whose national chair she holds. Yet she remains.

Why?

She must be doing exactly what those who could replace her want her to be doing. No other possible explanation. Her treachery keeps being rewarded.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

165. She doesn't conduct herself

in accordance with DU's Terms of Service!

[hifiguy]

166. But she'd be warmly welcomed and applauded by

the Bernista-hunters in these parts. Some animals are more equal than others, you know.

[malokvale77]

174. I was about to post that very thing before I read yours.

[frylock]

113. Who appointed the DNC Chair?

[Stevepol]

152. You might give some consideration to the wholesale theft going on via voting machines.

The programmers and riggers of the voting machines have just about lost all sense of caution. Who's going to challenge ridiculous results? If nobody challenges something like Alvin Greene's 60-40% victory in the SC Dem primary, a guy who never lifted a finger to campaign, a guy that nobody knew from Adam, then why would anybody challenge a result where the flip was only 5-10%? And in SC, it was the Democratic Party that refused to have another vote or to recount (if that was possible) or audit. It's just craven cowardice I think. Just speaking up about it after seeing the result of any election is apparently too scary for Dems. If any change comes, it will likely come from a Repub or one of the other parties, the Green Party e.g.

[malokvale77]

175. The Democratic Party never bothered...

to challenge the obvious fraud that happened in Texas way back when GWB became governor.

Why you say? Because they are complicit. I don't believe for one minute that it is out of fear. They are all on the same "Gravy Train". They have no intentions of stopping it.

That is why they are so desperate to stop Bernie Sanders and his called for political revolution.

[Skittles]

186. complete bs

the problem is Democrats not voting, and that has nothing to do with Obama's skin color

[eridani]

200. Running the party is not his job. It IS the job of the DNC n/t

[B Calm]

2. WTF, I sure as hell don't blame Obama!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

22. Yeah, cause someone else appointed DWS!

The buck never stops with the head of the Party or the country!

[B Calm]

27. She was appointed by the DNC!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

39. I'll be darned, I stand corrected.

I had always heard it was an appointment slot. I just googled, and it is indeed a voted in position.

[jeff47]

88. When there is a Democrat in the White House, his choice always wins that vote.

So it's de-facto appointed by Obama, despite it technically being an elected position.

[ananda]

32. Exactly!

We got the whole DLC machine, a lot of Bushinc operatives, and lost Howard Dean.

That IS on Obama-rhama.

[B Calm]

98. No it's on the DNC, they appointed her!

[former9thward]

105. False.

Apparently you don't know how the system works. The President makes the selection and the DNC rubber stamps it by "electing" her. The same thing happens when the President is a Republican and selects the RNC Chair. The only time there is an actual election is when the party is out of power (as it was when Dean was elected).

President Barack Obama has chosen Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz as the incoming chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, the party announced late Tuesday.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2011/04/wasserman-schultz-to-lead-dnc-052605#ixzz3qdexskUM

[B Calm]

107. No matter who he recommends, the selection is still appointed by the DNC!

[former9thward]

158. I guess you probably should tell the party officials

they lied when they said Obama appointed her. Word games.

[fasttense]

26. I blame Obama

He never said he was a moderate RepubliCON when he was campaigning. He sure talked like a liberal and then he morphed into a smart, good looking RepliCON. But it's Not All his fault, it's Not All any one person's fault.

The capitalist system makes it easier to stomp on and crush the middle class and poor then to help them. The same people who fill the campaign coffers of RepubliCON pacs also fill the campaign coffers of Democratic pacs. But if you don't have a pac? You get what you pay for and Some very rich people paid for Obama to do what he has done.

He has managed to turn off the Democratic base. I think that was his job. Remember when his chief of staff was calling the base names? Remeber when he extended the bush tax give aways to the uber rich? All he had to do was Nothing and they could have gone away. His whole purpose was to disenhearten and turn off the liberal voter. He did his job wll. Now, when he passes the TPP he'll have put a stake through one of the core groups that support Democratic leaders - Unions.

[pscot]

47. Urban 'identy' politics

don't play well in Peoria. Or anywhere else from Daytona to Walla Walla.

[Blue_Tires]

73. Neither did the civil rights movement...

[pscot]

117. True enough

but if we just write off half the country, we aren't going to be winning many elections. We have to find a way to talk to these people is what I'm saying. That's what Howard Dean was about. We used to win elections in many of these rural area, but not without trying. It seems like a solid majority of DUers flat out refuse to talk to anyone disagrees with them. We were supposed to be riding a demographic wave to victory, but that hasn't worked out, so far. Maybe that will change, but a lot can go wrong before it does.

[Buzz Clik]

67. LOL! Of course you do!

Make sure you rally the troops for Sanders because the US is eager for a hard left Democratic Socialist to lead them.

[eridani]

201. The leadership of a hard left Democratic Socialist worked very well in the 30s.

Sure, FDR didn't call himself that, but that's what the New Deal programs were.

[Blue_Tires]

74. Maybe you need to sit this one out and let the grownups talk...

[Dr Hobbitstein]

110. Congratulations, you won the jury!

Just barely, though.

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This post does nothing to contribute to the conversation. It was written with the intent of being rude and condescending.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Nov 5, 2015, 12:40 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If the reply fits…...
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: To be fair, the poster should sit this one out and let the grownups talk.
Remember folks, slamming Democrats is OK, calling out slamming is not.
-Dr Hobbitstein
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Just an Opinion, Crimminy people are getting thin skined around here
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: This is intentionally rude and should be locked for violating the CS.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: There have been far worse things allowed to stand. This does not seem than offensive.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Arrogant and uncalled-for rudeness - telling a DU member that they are not worthy to participate in the discussion. The post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

[valerief]

143. I love #7. Wanting to keep a poster from participating in the discussion, because

the poster said (it's interpreted) another poster is not worthy to participate in the discussion.

My head is spinning!

[fasttense]

172. And you think you are a grown up?

Comments like yours are why DU invented the ignore button.

[haikugal]

83. Well put and I think the same thing. He's been effective. nt

[RobinA]

208. Oh, Puleeese!

Anybody who was listening to him could tell he was a RepubliCON. He never sounded like anything else. It was only the media that painted him as anything close to an actual liberal. If you listened to HIM over the course of the campaign, it was clear what side of the fence he was on. He campaigned as what used to be a moderate Republican and he governed as one. Anybody disappointed in him wasn't paying attention. And I say that as someone who voted for him, but I knew exactly what I was voting for and pretty much that's what I got.

[kelliekat44]

3. Another thought on this. People (both parties) were so much ABC (anybody but Clinton)

that they won the election for Obama. Now we will probably get Trump for the same reason because Bernie will not be able to get voting factions needed to win in the general election.

The Karma of hate always is a bitch.

[FlatBaroque]

18. You oughta know.

[malokvale77]

176. LOL

It always strikes me that the most hateful of DUers are the first to pull out the hate card. They must sit in front of a mirror while posting here.

Thank you.

[1monster]

41. There wasn't much to choose between Clinton and Obama...

Obama was my third or fourth choice. I voted for Kucinich in the primary. My preference for Obama over Hillary was because I didn't much fancy another dynasty. Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton just didn't sit well with me.

[hifiguy]

162. I liked Kucinich a lot in '08.

I liked what I had seen and heard from Obama as well. HRH was never an option for me. The Kennedy endorsements helped tilt me towards Obama. Well, they got chumped, just like the rest of us, but we had no way of knowing at the time he was a "moderate 1980s Republican" (his own words, BTW). We were all dumb enough to think he was an actual center-left Democrat. The joke was on us, I guess!

[malokvale77]

177. My first choice was Edwards.

I still believe that the Clintons were behind his demise. The GOP would have saved that tidbit for the general election.

[Bluenorthwest]

181. You are the person who blamed LGBT for the loss in the 2014 election the following morning on

DU: "The openness and brazenness of the LBGT agenda and the media flaunting of gay marriages all across the country cost Dems dearly and threatens to do so in the future."

Self delete does not work on the memories of others, and that thread should shame those who count you in their cohort, the Hillary camp which runs about calling the other camp bigots.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025764803#post45

[davidpdx]

203. OWCH!

That's going to leave a mark.

[Fast Walker 52]

4. wasn't a big part of it the very bad luck of 2010 being a census year and the same year there was

a huge backlash against Obama and the Dems? Which led to massive control of statehouses by the GOP and redistricting that favored them. And yes, part of the blame goes to the Dems for being asleep about this and for Obama not being more aggressive in the 2010 cycle.

I agree this record is a huge problem and is astounding given how fucked up the GOP is in general and how progressive ideas are generally poplar.

But what can be done except to make sure 2020 is very different?

[LonePirate]

34. Bingo! The ACA backlash destroyed us in 2010 which led to redistricting devastation in 2012 and 2014

That is a very simple summary of the huge losses Dems have experienced this decade. People can blame whomever they wish; but that's what happened in a nutshell.

[krawhitham]

85. Bullshit, people staying home because they did not get a pony THAT what led to the redistricting

Half of DU bragged about not voting at the time, SEARCH DU. They have now backed away from that claiming it had nothing to do with poor dem turnout

[frylock]

115. So are DU emoprogs all-powerful or completely irrelevant?

Did liberals really stay home and cause the 2010 rout?

[jeff47]

89. No, our 2010 campaign theme was "OH MY GOD!! WE'RE SO SORRY FOR THE ACA!!!"

Shockingly enough, that didn't win us many seats.

[busterbrown]

5. And Bernie Sanders will fix this mess?

In a perfect world perhaps.. but believe me this all about Citizens United and Fox News. The political divide in this country is so freaking deep that the Right Wing would spend billions in order to label Sanders as Neo-Commie Socialist.
Perhaps he could pull the pure Dem. electorate out to vote in better numbers than Clinton, but thats as far as it would go..This country is fucked because of Citizen’s United and Right Wing Controlled Media, which have millions upon millions of voters completely locked up in Right Wing lying dumb rhetoric...

By the way here you go..

http://www.examiner.com/article/50-politically-biased-sources-not-to-get-your-news-from

[malokvale77]

179. How many billions will they spend to stoke the fires against a CLINTON?

If one did a GOP hate word cloud, Clinton would take up 90% of the cloud.

A Clinton will never get a GOPers vote. Hillary has to obfuscate and triangulate to get Democrats on board.

It is sad that the Democratic Party wears blinders so as not to see the real pain and suffering experienced by a large majority in this country alone.

As long as they are aboard the "Gravy Train" they just don't care.

[davidpdx]

204. Two thoughts

Actually three. First, I agree with you the Clinton's couldn't give a flying fuck about ordinary people.

Second, there will not be enough obfuscating in the world to get some Democrats on board.

Third, the amount of dark money that is going to be dropped once Clinton is the nominee will be in the immortal words of Donald Trump "HUGGGGGGGGGGE".

[HereSince1628]

6. Movement cons have by their philosophy focused on state gov't, the Dems don't

Significant blocks of democratic voters don't turnout for state and local government. Perhaps because they feel it provides little protection or value compared to programs of the federal government.

The outcome seems consistent with the efforts invested. We end up living in a nation with a two party system controlling a two tiered system of government with differing success for the parties at different levels.

[Truprogressive85]

7. The Party is on a brink

There are those that will say the Democratic Party is fine and not imploding in front of our very eyes.

if the party only puts effort during Presidential cycles we are screwed !

This what Deray an activist with BLM is saying :


deray 56m56 minutes ago
Voter turnout is low, I'd argue, b/c hopelessness is high. Folks are (rightly) tired of choosing b/t bad & worse. That isn't much choice.

[truebluegreen]

20. ^this^

People came out and enthusiastically endorsed Hope and Change in 2008...and got instead a smart, articulate defender of the status quo. I wonder when the Democratic Party is going to realize that the status quo is not actually worth defending.

[Tommy2Tone]

106. You should consider leaving the party

Sorry it's not about "who you want." It's about the majority rule. The Dems chose Obama twice and he won big twice. Now a lot of whiny ass dems who probably sat out the election in 2010 and 2014 want to blame Obama.

[Ron Green]

128. Bullshit. I knocked on 6000 doors in my own campaign in 2012 and many times had to

defend Obama from those on the right who called him a "socialist" and those on the left who saw his corporate ties. All the while trying to get my OWN message out in a Republican district, beg for support statewide "Dems" in bed with the Repubs, and try to get Obama's local organization to walk with me (they never did.)

Obama could have started the Big Shift we need with some simple truth telling. Instead he played nice with the Rs and gathered crooks around him as advisers. Perhaps, as a black man, he couldn't appear to be "angry." In that case, he was exactly what our owners need.

[Tommy2Tone]

130. Did I mention you by name?

I said a lots of Dems stayed home and now a lot of them are blaming the president. All they had to do was vote. I never quite understand progressives saying they were deceived or lied to by the Prez. In fact he was never a progressive and like me he is a Democrat.

[Ron Green]

132. Sorry, I was too harsh. I haven't forgiven Obama for squandering some of

the opportunities we had in early 2009, for clearly explaining what "Hope and Change" really meant.

[Tommy2Tone]

141. It is amazing he accomplished so much

Hope and Change was DOA. On the day of his inauguration I believe it was McConnell who came out and said his job was to make the president a one term president. Then went on to say they were not going to work with the president and when he could not get bills passed he would be blamed.

Then when it came to his signature achievement, the Affordable Care Act, he was torpedoed but Dempublicans like Ben Nelson into getting the act but far from the one he proposed.

Still he got two Supreme's appointed and if he did nothing else I would support him for that alone.

I just wish I could vote for him again.

[truebluegreen]

169. Why is "who you want" in quotes in your reply?

Are you talking to someone else? Someone who cares what you think maybe?

I've never sat out an election in my too-long life, and have always been a Democrat. And fyi in 2008 I contributed to, phone-banked for, canvassed for, was a state convention delegate for, poll-watched, and voted for Obama. Voted for him in 2012 too, although it was more like voting against rMoney.

2 effing million people, of which I was one, came to Obama's first inauguration. Do you think that if they got something even remotely like what they hoped for, 2010 would have been the debacle it was? Do you think if Obama had mobilized that enthusiasm, and the grass-roots network he built instead of disregarding them (Thanks for all the hard work, guys! I'll take it from here!) that would have made a big difference? Do you think that if he had not been content with nudging the ship of state 2 degrees off its current course, when what we really needed (if even he couldn't get it done!) was a major correction; not been content with a lame-ass Democratic Party (We're not as crazy as those guys!) (Hello DWS!), had been willing to....oh fuck it. Some people aren't worth trying to educate.

I think you got lost and ended up on the wrong board. Ciao, baby.

[davidpdx]

207. That one is close to going on vacation

Personally I won't be sad about it.

[truebluegreen]

211. I hear you. nt

[Tommy2Tone]

213. Some people aren't worth trying to educate.

We agree. Done with you.

[davidpdx]

206. Which is funny because we are told by the "big shots" on the DU

who supposedly know all the insiders that we can only change the party from within. I worked my fucking ass off and donated quite a bit in 2008 to get Obama elected. I donated to his reelection in 2012. I have donated to various candidates including three who lost in 2014. I've voted in every single election since I turned 18. I have been a Democrat since I was in my teens, that is how passionate I felt about politics.

While I support President Obama, there are some things he has disappointed on, the main one being TPP. But it's not all on President Obama, we have a DNC Chair that doesn't do jackshit to help the party.

I'd tell you where to stick your suggestion, but it's not worth the hide.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

21. Exactly.

DeRay is a spot on there, as he is in so many other cases.

[malokvale77]

180. Deray is absolutely right.

It is in fact the Democratic Party that is imploding.

As an example: Here in Dallas, Texas - we went all democrat several election cycles back, but because our DA decided to spend funds freeing the wrongfully convicted instead of forcefully prosecuting people, they worked against him. We now have a batshit crazy, drug addicted Republican eating up the DA budget.

The Democratic Party no longer gives 2 hoots about any of us that cannot afford a ticket on the "Gravy Train".

[Truprogressive85]

183. Thanks for the info

I love to here about how the Dem party is doing on the local level.

I was just watching MSNBC and Rachel Maddow was doing a interview with head of S.C. Party Chair, and he was basically saying the national party has abandon the South allowing the GOP to rise. He goes on to say that there needs to be long term plan not just ever presidential cycle to GOTV

[malokvale77]

188. Your welcome.

In 2014 the party came to Texas under the guise of "Battle Ground Texas" supposedly to elect more Democrats in Texas. Nope, seems the real reason was to gather names for possible donors to Hillary Clinton's bid for the WH. The democratic losers from that election are now on the Hillary bandwagon.

Although Dallas is mostly made up of Democratic officials, those officials bend more to the wishes of the Park Cities and North Dallas (read that as the monied) over the needs of the majority of the populace.

Both parties will throw us proles a bone once in a while, just as long as we allow that "Gravy Train" to roll.

[raouldukelives]

205. The party is a reflection of its people.

If many of its people are all supporting corporations and only putting in effort during elections, then of course we lose. Those who subsidize the attacks against hope, change and against democracy itself, have no place complaining when they are victorious.

[Darb]

8. A testament to the fundamental racism in this country,

Nothing gets out the vote like whites fearing the loss of control.

[Scurrilous]

156. Yep.

[former9thward]

198. I guess they ignored that "loss of control" in 2008 and 2012.

[Liberal_in_LA]

9. Dems have to stop being lazy about voting

[Le Taz Hot]

13. And, boys and girls,

here's your answer in a nutshell. The blind loyalists blaming the voters. It's certainly NOT an internal problem so quit saying that!!!!111!!1!

[OnyxCollie]

49. +900+. nt

[Enthusiast]

58. + a bazillion!

Voluntarily extend the Bush tax cuts, surrender on the public option then say, "Oh, those lazy voters!"

[Blue_Tires]

72. Then in that case people damn well better be prepared

to fucking DO SOMETHING to change their local Dem party...It starts down low with city/county councils or whatever...

Folks need to be proactive -- There is a disconnect between "Dems always run repub-lites so I'm staying home" and "I can't be bothered to voice my support for more liberal democratic candidates with the local committee"


But like I said, this is all strange to me because I grew up in a household that *always* voted, for state races, referendums, city council, school board, etc... Because my father was old enough to remember the time when he couldn't vote growing up in rural Va.

[jeff47]

91. And in the real world, the party works its ass off to disrupt and avoid change.

If you are not the right kind of Democrat, you will be driven out of the local party apparatus.

[haikugal]

86. There it is!!!

As usual...voters want a pony....eat your peas....ad nauseam!

[Mojorabbit]

121. Bingo! nt

[Liberal_in_LA]

127. Lol

[malokvale77]

185. I'm in complete agreement...

with your perfectly sarcastic post.

The blind loyalists who believe all us voters are stopping them from boarding the "Gravy Train".

I find it amusing that they claim "voters" are too lazy to vote. Wouldn't that make them "non-voters"?

[hobbit709]

15. Maybe the party should give them a reason by offering a CLEAR choice

Not as bad as the other guys is not exactly a real choice

Too many people see both parties as corporate stooges so their attitude is "I'm going to get screwed either way so I won't have anything to do with either of them"

THAT is the response I get from about 2/3 of the people I talk to about voting.

[abelenkpe]

36. +1000

Thought the same during midterms. Offering nothing but we're not as bad as the other guy is a losing strategy.

[Le Taz Hot]

37. That's been my experience as well.

Every Bernie event we have we register voters. I can't tell you how many people have told me, "I have never voted/I don't usually vote but I want to vote for Bernie." Bernie is the counter to the disenfranchised voter. Hillary perpetuates it.

[gwheezie]

43. A bit of advice

Take it for what it's worth. If you really want to change the party do not stop with Bernie. Start growing the new democrats by either running for office yourself or organize to get people you support elected to everything from school board to sheriff in your county. Put up some people for your state legislature. That's how you build the party. Expecting the party backbone to change because you say so is naive. Grow your movement. This is how the teabagger changed the GOP.

[yeoman6987]

57. I would love to run. Unfortunately I have not had a squeaky clean life

I haven't been arrested or anything but my financial life is not perfect. I haven't claimed bankruptcy but still a lot of debt which will be used by a challenger and any other perceived negative in my life will be used. Politics are awful today.

[gwheezie]

60. My early pole dancing days doom me

Joking.

[Le Taz Hot]

59. I'm not a Democrat and since they sold me out years ago

I'm not going to do their work for them. By law (and my own ethics) I register voters regardless of which party, or lack thereof, with which they register. I just happen to do it at our Bernie events.

Not sure where you assume that I "expect the party backbone to change because you say so." I see the Democratic Party in reality-based terms -- working for the same .01% as the Republicans. and they aren't about to shut down the gravy train. Personally, and especially after watching the DNC interference for Hillary, I think the Democratic Party has done irreparable harm to itself because people have caught on to the game. That's particularly true of millennials.

As for elections, if you haven't noticed, the system is rigged. The Party controls the candidates and if a progressive challenges their precious third-way-corporate shills they mobilize to choke off the campaign in any number of ways. Remember, this isn't the Republicans, these are the "Democrats." You know, the ones we're all supposed to get together and sing Kum Ba Ya if their corporate shill happens to "win" the nomination? I'm not going to be a part of that and neither should you. Neither should anyone.

ALL of this is controlled down to every City Council, County Supervisory Board, School Board, Water Board and dog catcher. Local control can either be by political parties or other entities but they're all working for the same goal and that goal isn't us.

Now, having said all that, I've worked campaigns/causes for 40 years, regardless of chances of winning. I just don't do it out of party loyalty for a party that no longer represents me nor wants me in it. I do it because I truly believe in the cause/candidate and try to walk the walk as I talk the talk.

[gwheezie]

62. It takes all kinds I quess

Your way isn't wrong but how do you get folks to run for higher office unless they start somewhere

[Le Taz Hot]

66. First you have to find the right person.

For me, they have to have integrity and a willingness to fight the good fight. There are other criteria as well but that's where I start. Then it's all up to the powers of persuasion BUT whoever is doing the persuading needs to have some gravitas and ensure that there is a ground game in place willing to back their candidacy.

After that it varies. If the progressive candidate is running against an incumbent Democrat in the primaries, the California Democratic Party has decided that the local organizations must back the incumbent, no matter how odius (see Jim Costa). So the question becomes is your candidate better off registering as a Democrat and having to wage a battle against the Democratic Party AND the Republicans or do you consider other options?

[haikugal]

95. Thank You!!!

[jeff47]

92. A bit of advice

Don't assume we haven't tried.

If you are not the right kind of Democrat, the party prefers a blank on the ballot.

[Le Taz Hot]

99. That is correct.

I worked within the party for almost 30 years and the biggest obstacles were put up by fellow Democrats. We could take the Republicans, it was the entrenched Democratic Party structure unwilling to see anything different than the same way they've always done it (with increasingly diminishing results). Not only are they unwilling to change, they're unwilling to engage in any type of correcting self examination.

I only have so much energy and I don't have time to spend on battling the local party potentates.

[malokvale77]

190. No.

The GOP has won because the highest level put money and effort into local campaigns.

Democrats are losing because the highest level is focused on the WH only.

It's one reason I support Bernie Sanders. He worked his way up from local to national politics by way of support from real people, instead of conditional party support.

[joshcryer]

147. That is what the Republicans want you to think.

It's self perpetrating, Democrats aren't much different than Republicans, let the Republicans office, government is poorly done, proof there is no difference.

But no, that's wrong, put the Democrat in office and life is demonstratively better. It is a bullshit lie that they are not much different. A lie that the Republicans are either behind or well meaning ideologues on the left who are too stupid to realize they are being played.

[hobbit709]

149. Then I suggest you talk to the people on the bottom.

all they see is they're getting screwed by both sides.
Like I said 2/3 of the people that don't bother to vote that I've talked to see life that way.

[joshcryer]

150. Don't lecture me about what I should do.

Real life isn't empty soundbites.

The people not voting are the youth, and they need inspiration that they are not getting because the people they would vote for are bashed daily.

Voter apathy is the only way the Republicans stay in power, so they rely on this shit more than anyone.

[hobbit709]

151. "Look in the mirror, boy" when you talk about lecturing.

There are plenty of people in my age group that are just as uninspired.

[joshcryer]

153. That kind of talk will surely motivate voters.

The boomers fucked us for two generations.

[hobbit709]

157. Oh, goody goody gumdrops, blame the boomers.

That is more pitiful than funny.

[joshcryer]

189. No, this is pitiful:

[malokvale77]

192. Not only are you not motivating...

but your views on the various generations are a major turn off.

[joshcryer]

193. Yeah, because the education, housing, and climate...

...crisis were all brought on by kids not even born yet.

I would rather we look at the facts and then get ourselves out of this mess by moving forward, and that is by motivating these kids who never had a fucking chance in hell to go out and vote, not tell them that there's no difference between the parties.

[malokvale77]

195. Wargle Bargle is that you?

Your posts have such a familiar feel to them.

[joshcryer]

197. Nice.

I know I've won the argument when people result to pointless banter.

[hifiguy]

168. Harry Truman figured that out a long, long time ago.

'Given a choice between a fake Republican and a real one the public will choose...the real Republican every time".

Truer words, etc.,etc.......

[malokvale77]

187. "Not as bad as the other guys is not exactly a real choice"

I assume by your avatar you are in Texas. Correct me if I am wrong.

Here in Texas the Democratic Party is nothing but lame. How do you lose to idiots like Abbott, Patrick or Paxton? By being lame.

The proof is when the losers jump on the Clinton bandwagon. All aboard the "Gravy Train". Not you proles.

[frylock]

116. Why aren't consumers buying our shitty product?

[hifiguy]

170. We'll put the same old shit

in a glitzy NEW package! That's so much easier than changing the shitty product. And we can say it's not QUITE as bad as Brand X, even though it's 85% as bad as Brand X.

A sure winner, everyone. Cigars for all.

[malokvale77]

182. No, a thousand times no!

The Democratic Party needs to quit fucking us over.

I vote every election, no matter how small or local. I'm seeing little, if anything at all, Democratic related to vote on for many cycles.

Quit blaming voters. The Party is giving us NOTHING!

[Moliere]

10. Let us all give thanks to DWS for this mess

Howard Dean should have been congratulated for his efforts and not disposed of

[B Calm]

11. I agree! She needs to be fired immediately!

[DinahMoeHum]

16. DWS - Doesn't Win Squat

[Omaha Steve]

29. How can you say that about her with her eyes on a cabinet seat?

[DinahMoeHum]

42. If that's satire, it stinks.

Her "leadership" and judgement suck, big time.
She's a L-O-S-E-R.

I want Howard Dean back in her position.

[Thinkingabout]

31. Non voters doesn't win squat, we can't blame someone else for not voting, it lies with every citizen

[Scootaloo]

46. Shitty candidates don't get voters voting

[Thinkingabout]

51. So we should like the republican candidates more, doesnt make sense to me.

[Scootaloo]

164. Funny you should say that.

For the last decade that has been the Democratic party strategy.

"Be more like the Republicans."
"Republicans win elections, we need to be more like the Republicans!"
"When we don't win, it's liberals' fault, we need to be more conservative!"

And the result is that the Democratic base - liberals and the left - sees worse and worse candidates put forth and supported by hte increasingly conservative party elite. The Democrats are in effect suppressing their own vote.

[Thinkingabout]

167. Not the Democratic party I know.

[malokvale77]

194. The Democratic Party of Texas...

is a sham. For you to pretend different is laughable.

Your avatar should be a reminder, to every Texas Democrat, what happens when the party becomes complicit with the GOP.

[Dustlawyer]

28. Dean's 50 state strategy is a proven winner!

Also, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce started dumping large amounts of money on state and local races 40 years ago since a little money in each race would make all of the difference. Our Party has NEVER TRIED to compete with this, they let it continue! Why?

[pscot]

45. Unfortunately, it's the Republicans

who are using it to win.

[joshcryer]

155. Yes! Bring back the blue dogs!

Couldn't agree more!

[truebluegreen]

171. I suppose in the past it was about

being a Democrat = no organized party whereas the Republicans (authoritarians that they are) have always played the long game. Now I think its more about having a one party system (the Business Party) with half of it willing to throw a few bread crusts to the masses.

Personally, I think we lost this one (a Republic, if you can keep it) and are now just rearranging the deck chairs.

[Dustlawyer]

173. Sad but,true!

I still have hope thanks to Bernie, but a lot of eyes need to be opened.

[truebluegreen]

178. Ditto regarding Bernie...

[DCBob]

12. Its the "foxification" of America.

RW media has brainwashed the electorate into thinking everything "Democrat" is evil. Just listen to Fox, Hannity, Limbaugh, or any RW radio host.. its shocking the crap they spew and more shocking how many people believe it.

if we dont counter RW media dominance we are doomed.

[Blue_Tires]

77. +1

[Octafish]

14. Whatever happened to the Bully Pulpit?

Apart from the TPP, I don't recall much of an effort to change minds the classic way, through rhetoric - the art of persuasive speaking.

Thank you for the heads-up on Admiral Loinpresser's series, Scuba. That's a lot of change in reverse.

[Enthusiast]

63. Precisely.

[kelliekat44]

97. The Bully pulpit only works when people listen and the pulpit gets coverage.

Obama can't get a forum from the media like Trump can. Whose fault is that?

[ncteechur]

17. Here are the reasons...

1. It's easier to run against something or someone than stand for something. GOP is good at demonization.
2. Gerrymandering.
3. Democrats are terrible in midterm and off-year elections. Just pitiful.
4. All politics are local and we dems focus on the White House but less on local and state politics.
5. Power of incumbency. Once a bad politician is in its very difficult to remove unless there are term limits.

[Freddie]

19. "All politics is local" and incumbency are huge factors

I know people who will vote for their R state rep because "he helped Grandpa get his veterans benefits" and other personal reasons that only a local politician can do. They think "he's such a nice guy, not a whack job like the other R's" while that state rep goes back to Harrisburg and votes in lockstep with the party. Multiply that by millions.

[tavernier]

54. That's very true.

That, and unless R or D helped grandpa, most folks don't care enough to vote unless it's every 4 years for the big one. Hell, many don't even know that there ARE other elections. "Who are these people and why don't they get their damned irritating posters and commercials out of my face?"

But they do care who the Kardashians are dating.

And that's why the donald might very well be our next president.

And p.s. - I'll betcha that 75 % of registered democrats have never even heard of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, so there will be no rush for change on that front.

[Blue_Tires]

75. Don't bring sane, rational thought to a riot...

DU has spoken, and this is all Obama's fault

[Amimnoch]

24. Most of those seats were gained by Democrats under President Bush.

This is not unusual for the party of the president to drive the opposite party into power because everything bad always gets hung on the President's head.

check out:
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_party_division_2.htm

Going all the way back to 1945, there's been few times that either party had the Legislative and executive branches wrapped up.

[Blue_Tires]

79. good find..

[brentspeak]

103. There is no precedent for the amount of seats and legislatures the GOP have taken

And you conveniently left out the crucial point about state legislatures being captured by the GOP. That is a failure squarely on Obama's choice for DNC chair -- Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

[Amimnoch]

118. ahhhh, I'm sorry didn't realize this was just an anti DWS shill thread.

I get it now. Nevermind I'll just move along to something interesting.

[brentspeak]

123. If you support DWS, it's hard to say if you truly support the party. n/t

[Amimnoch]

124. ahhh, "if you're not with me, you're against me"..

Where have i heard that one before?

[brentspeak]

125. I don't know. Ask DWS

as she helps to run the party into the ground.

[GeorgeGist]

142. Surely then, Carson or Trump will save us.

[LiberalArkie]

25. Anybody remember back when the Democratic party was Liberal

When just about ever state was Democratic, when idealism wasn't ridiculed. Back when the government built public housing because it was wrong to have people living on the streets. Back when public welfare was good and helped people in need.

[abelenkpe]

33. Nope. Hear it was once like that though

Must have been nice.

[Art_from_Ark]

55. I remember that

I remember Great Society commercials that spoke of hope for the future, of ending poverty and discrimination, of creating a society where the elderly could lead fulfilling lives without fear of losing everything

[jeff47]

93. No. I'm not a Boomer, so that was before my time.

There has never been a Democratic candidate on my ballot for federal office that I actually wanted. 20 years of "who else you gonna vote for?" gets tiring.

[Thinkingabout]

30. Who approved a 30% voter turnout. We are giving the offices to republicans, republicans vote,

what is wrong with voting? We are mad our wages are going up and sit back and allow the republicans to vote their candidates in office, what does this say about Democrats?

[jeff47]

94. That we are putting up shitty candidates that inspire indifference. (nt)

[Thinkingabout]

129. Which republican candidates do you deem better than the Democrat candidate?

[jeff47]

131. Not voting does not mean the Republicans are better.

Not voting means the Democratic candidates suck. That is independent of how much the Republican candidates suck.

Yes, the end result benefits Republicans, but the vast majority of Democratic voters are not motivated by hatred. Thus they will not reflexively vote for the Democrat out of hatred of Republicans.

Democratic candidates need to give voters a reason to vote for them, not give reasons to vote against the Republican.

[Thinkingabout]

133. It means a lost vote for Democrats, a positive in the minds of republicans, they love low turnouts,

they win.

[jeff47]

134. Yes. Which is why you should bother to find out why "Republicans bad!!!" is utterly failing

instead of continuing to shout "Republicans bad!!!"

[Thinkingabout]

135. Why am I seeing the complaining about Republicans winning in the last election?

[jeff47]

136. The last election was Tuesday. We didn't do well, and turnout was low.

The election before that was 2014. We did abysmally and turnout was low.

The election before that was 2012, Obama won by 1/2 the margin in 2008, and we lost a lot of state races. Turnout was down from 2008.

The election before that was 2010. We did abysmally and turnout was low.

The election before that was 2008, we did very well by giving people something to vote for (Hope and Change), not just "Republicans bad!". Turnout went up.

Where are you seeing "complaining about Republicans" winning in the last election?

[Scuba]

138. /\_/\_This right here_/\_/\

[Thinkingabout]

144. This op.

[Bluenorthwest]

184. Not sure what State you live in, but here in 2014 we elected good Democrats, legalized marijuana

and put an ERA into the Constitution, turnout was about 70% or twice that of the national average. 2010 was much the same but we actually broke midterm records that year. CA, next door also wiped the floor with Republicans in 2010.
So if it's all about these deep existential longings for inspiration ala church, why then do some States vote and elect good officials and practice decent policies while others do not? Why are entire States spared this angst?

It's really super easy to vote here, so people vote. Think about that. The more people vote, the better the candidates and propositions become.
So I tend to think that access and ease of voting are factors those of you in States with low turnout should certainly consider because turnout is how you eventually get things moved along. And your State makes election laws which can in fact be changed.

Tuesday's election here was purely local, we passed a property tax levy to extend hours at branch libraries. No candidates, one question. It was single issue voting in the most literal possible sense.
But it was a tax hike for libraries and it did pass.....

[AngryAmish]

35. Our appeal is just more selective

[Purrfessor]

40. The saturation of Rant Radio across this country and the 24/7

demonization of Democrats and liberal policies plays a major role in getting Republicans elected, I believe. Driving from Ohio to Tennessee Rant Radio covers the AM dial. Not a single progressive voice on it. For that you need Sirius.

[get the red out]

78. This!!!!!!

You've got it! Nailed.

[Blue_Tires]

80. +1

[Fumesucker]

161. Another thing we can thank Bill Clinton for

[Turbineguy]

50. Gerrymandering works!

Why even bother to vote? I can get screwed and save the price of a stamp.

[Adrahil]

52. But hey, the party doesn't matter, according to some here. nt

[TBF]

53. Complicity. K & R nt

[blackspade]

61. The DNC under DWS has been a joke.

This is her loosing record.

[Tarc]

64. "Admiral Loinpresser" ?

How charming.

[Botany]

65. Gerrymandering, election rigging, a dirty media, and Debbie W Schultz

http://www.kansas.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/article32685087.html


BTW a call to Dr. Dean might be good.

[ileus]

68. We will take back many of those next November....all is not lost.

The next year will doom the pukes.


We will retain the Oval office, and retake the Senate next cycle, and take many seats back from congress.

But even with all that our real power will be Hillarys two picks on the SC that will set our agenda for decades...

Give us 8 years and you'll be dancing in the streets....they don't have the numbers to win. With the SC on our side we can't lose...

[Arkana]

70. If only Obama hadn't been so black, we'd still have all those seats.

[former9thward]

196. Wasn't Obama black in 2008 and 2012?

I guess people missed that.

[Arkana]

215. Yeah, but he got blacker in the off years.

[BlueStateLib]

76. democrats abandoned the center

Throw a progressive under the bus and they stay home, throw a centrist under the bus and they vote republican.

[angrychair]

81. All politics is local

We need a canidiate and a cause that goes a different direction, if my choices are light grey and dark grey, what the hell do I care who wins. The age of the 'superstar' candidate is dead. Presidential politics won't carry the day alone anymore...coattails Are not what they used to be. We need the on the ground, grassroots local government candidates to carry the day.

If I tell people I need your taxes dollars for this thing or that thing and it never happens or takes years and more tax dollars and the benefit is not as visible anymore, it makes me less inclined to believe you next time you need my money or effort.
Our candidates have to matter. They have to be different. We need to refocus our efforts at the town, county and state levels.

All politics is local

Win the hearts and minds at a town, county and state level, you win them at a federal level. Talk to people, listen to people and be accountable to people.

I am a progressive. Ask me why.

[melm00se]

84. The root cause of this issue

is that the Republican party have messages that are resonating with voters and the Democratic party does not.

it's that simple.

Say/champion something that a voter supports and they will vote for you.
Say/champion something that a voter doesn't support and they won't vote for you.

Say what you like about Trump, his message is resonating with enough voters to make the race between him and Clinton far far far closer than it should be.

[jwirr]

100. IMO the real consequences of this are huge. When a state

has Rs in control there is little that can be done from the top to help. The ACA is a prime example. 30+ states refused to become part of the new expanded Medicaid and this made sure that the poor in their states did not get the help needed and it also contributed to the problems ACA is having as a whole.

I have often said that FDR's New Deal did not reach the inner cities and the reservations. This is why. Local officials who did not push it for these areas.

[Scuba]

139. /\_/\_And this_/\_/\

[davidn3600]

101. Yet people on here constantly talk of the impending death of the Republican party

The reality is this...the Democrats have had success when it comes to the White House. But we are getting routed at the state and local level....especially outside the urban areas. The rural areas are VERY Republican. And that's why they will have the House of Representatives for the foreseeable future.

Gerrymandering is part of it, but not all of it. Take a look at the electoral maps by county....the urban areas are blue and the rural areas are all red. We have a urban-rural political divide in this country. That's not going to change anytime soon. Things like gun control that now Hillary wants to push will only further the divide and hurt Democrats running in House and Senate races.

Yes, we captured the House in 2006 and expanded control in 2008. But we need to stop living in that past because it's completely gone up in smoke since. And that's not just a temporary condition. Many of the Democrats that won 2006 due to Dean's 50 state strategy were moderate. They won in conservative areas. So when the Democrat House started to pass "liberal" legislation, they got slaughtered in 2010. Democrats cannot capture the House unless they get moderates to win in conservative areas. Ramping up vote totals in the urban areas won't do much when it comes to the House.

[moondust]

102. The Great Bigot Revolt n/t

[Tommy2Tone]

104. How many of those were lost during the off years?

The GOP made inroads when Obama was not on the ticket and Democrats thought it was cool to stay the fuck home and not vote. Obama ran twice and both times increased the amount of Democrats in the house and senate. I won't read the articles for the same reason I don't read Red State.

[Maedhros]

109. Party apparatchiks have been shoving the "Lesser of Two Evils" mantra down out throats

for two decades.

How has that worked out for us?

[DreamGypsy]

111. Americans for Prosperity was founded in 2003...

...in the four years 2003-2006, Americans for Prosperity received $1,181,000 from conservative foundations, so about $300K per year.

In the 2012 campaign the 17 allied groups in the Freedom Network raised, and presumably spent, $407 million.

And now, from Koch Brothers' network will drop almost $1 billion on 2016 election, we find that

The stunning sum from Freedom Partners would dwarf expected spending from official GOP committees and many of the hopefuls expected to seek the party's presidential nomination in 2016. The $889 million budget is almost twice what 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney spent from his campaign accounts.

Democrats lose when politician are bought and sold by conservatives. Oh, and when Democrats don't bother to vote.

[Iggo]

114. Thanks, Debbie!

[hollowdweller]

119. Dems have not come thru for the middle class

That's #1

We have been liberal on social issues but not really on economic ones.

Look at the rust belt. There was no dem money or plan to bring prosperity to those regions after Dems voted for free trade and sent their jobs overseas.

So if neither party is seen as better or worse for the working class, and the GOP paints dems as the party of gun control and taxes that will further reduce their income they vote republican.

The dems really need a unified vision for the country that involves a decent wage, family leave, a secure retirement and hope for the working class to move up.

Also the Dems have not branded the GOP like the GOP has branded the dems. I have seen people in rural areas actually apologize because they support some things Obama has done because being a democrat is not cool.

[leftstreet]

148. +1

Good post, this especially

So if neither party is seen as better or worse for the working class, and the GOP paints dems as the party of gun control and taxes that will further reduce their income they vote republican.

No kidding

[L. Coyote]

120. And when you finally look at the bottom line:

The statistics evidence cheating the American people of majority representation.

[Rex]

122. The M$M and Hate Radio are powerful, they have helped divide this country for decades.

They also cause so much fear in their audience, that they will go and vote no matter what it says on the ballot. A very dangerous group of people, that react to fear and anger.

[pinebox]

126. We need progressive candidates

Not blue dogs. This past Tuesday exemplifies why. People stay home and aren't excited about who's running.

[KamaAina]

137. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is President?!

Who knew?

[Scuba]

140. I see what you did there.

[Eleanors38]

145. Close enuff for gubmint work.

[WillyT]

146. K & R !!!

[HassleCat]

154. We always blame the president for the failures of our party

But the president is not the architect of party strategy. At least I don't think he had much of a hand in developing the current approach. I fact, I would say the party shows some reluctance about getting too closely associated with the president. It seems they want to claim him or brush him off, depending on circumstances.

[LoveIsNow]

160. To be fair, we gained seats both times he was on the ballot.

It's our "strategy" of ignoring local elections in favor of the presidency that's screwing us over.

And even that, I would somewhat attribute to Citizens United.

However, I think the Republicans are beating us in grassroots enthusiasm as well, so you can't really blame it all on money. Cold and calculated may be a good strategy to make best use of our scarce financial resources, but it's not a good strategy for actually getting people into the voting booth.

You gotta give 'em hope.

[MFrohike]

191. Wow

I'm shocked to see this on DU. It was one thing to write off 2010 to the "stab in the back" myth of low Democratic participation, but 3 full cycles of losses are a reality that can't be ignored. Sure, the guy at the top limped out a win in 2012, but that's about it. It's a complete meltdown and it's time to acknowledge that reality as well as finding the causes. It's not all money and it's not all racism (though I've seen plenty of both at play, living in a battleground state). Those two things have put the GOP over the top, but it's not what put them in striking distance. It's time to come to Jesus on how that happened.

[Bernblu]

199. The problem is the alienation and disaffection of working people from the Democratic party

Only 37% of the public bothered to vote in 2014. TPP and the election of Clinton and her third-way economic and trade policies may be the finals nails in the coffin. I don't know if the Democratic party will recover to be a viable national party again. We desperately need Sanders to be elected and provide real change.

[Truprogressive85]

209. When you have so called "progressive think tanks" echoing neo-con talking points one has to wonder

Neera Tanden president of Center for American Progress

VS
Donald Trump

[99Forever]

210. And unless they change their stategy of "vote for us, we suck a little less"...

... they are going lose more. Many of us are done with the bullshit. Work for US and we'll work for you, keep stabbing US in the back...

[WI_DEM]

212. I guess the Democratic Base needs to start voting in off-year elections

and not just in presidential election years or just for Barack Obama.