The coming Democratic wipeout?

[Hannah Bell]

For months, most leading polls have showed the Republicans tied with, or leading, the Democrats in voters' preferences for congressional candidates...What's more, the polls have also noted a wide "enthusiasm gap" between people who say they plan to vote Republican and those who say they plan to vote Democratic...Washington election forecaster Charlie Cook predicts a "wave" that will sweep out the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives. Although considered less likely, Republicans winning a majority of the Senate is also not out of the question...

THOUGH REPUBLICANS will tout any gains they make as proof that Americans have rejected Obama's "socialist" agenda, rejection of the Democrats has a less ideological explanation..."A bad economy causes voters whose opinions are subject to change to view just about all of a president's agenda items negatively (or to de-emphasize the agenda items that they agree with). A robust economy reverses this phenomenon..."

This analysis is okay as far as it goes. But it focuses only on the conservative side of the political spectrum...To truly understand why the Democrats and liberalism look headed for defeat in November, we have to also look at what will be the most likely explanation for a conservative resurgence--demoralization of the Democratic "base..."

However "expansive" the Obama agenda, and however much the Democrats want to use the bogeyman of Tea Party hordes running the country after November 2, they can't get around the fact that core supporters of mainstream liberalism feel the Obama administration has not measured up to its rhetoric of "hope" and "change." And Obama and the Democrats have only themselves to blame for that state of affairs...The Democrats had large majorities in both houses of Congress, including, for a period of time, a 60-vote majority in the Senate, sufficient to overcome Republican filibusters on any issue. They had the potential to reset mainstream politics for a generation...THE MISSING element here has been a movement from below to pressure the Democrats to act on an agenda that responds to ordinary people, rather than to bankers and big business...

http://socialistworker.org/2010/08/09/coming-democratic-wipeout

[LAGC]

1. The "opposition" party nearly always gains seats in the first mid-term election of a new presidency.

I swear, voters are schizophrenic, voting against the incumbent party not remembering how bad things were when their side was in charge.

The thing is, the Repubs are fielding so many extremist candidates this time around, I can't believe they'll capture the independent vote. Sure, there will be some gains, but I think the end results will be far more muted than what they are expecting, even with lackluster enthusiasm on the Democratic side.

All I know is that if Sharon Angle somehow upsets Harry Reid in Nevada, then we can safely say the crazies have taken over. But I'm not writing him off just yet...

[Hannah Bell]

2. 2002: pubs gained 1 senate seat & 8 congressional seats.

[LAGC]

3. That was because of 9-11.

Bush had an incredible 90% approval rating for a time, if you recall. That threw everything off kilter that year.

The "get tough on national security" crowd won out.

[old mark]

4. The predictors before the presidential election in '08 were all talking

about all sorts of theories why Obama could never win-mainly white resentment or mistrust. I don't believe the media knows anything that we do not,and I don't believe they tell the truth about even that...they are propaganda marchants and their job is to grab viewer "interest" and thus insure more people watch the commercials, the real reason they are in business.

I have always voted in every election, and I have always voted for Democrats...there is no republican who has anything to say that I am interested in, and no reason in the world I would vote for one, nor will I sit out an election. It's juse pointless to theorise about shit like this - either vote or don't, stop searching for justification for not voting.


mark

[SecularMotion]

5. Right wing talking points from the Socialist Worker nt

[Fumesucker]

6. Any criticism of Obama is "right wing" by definition..

Since Obama is the mostest leftistist president evah!

[SecularMotion]

7. And talking points are "organized criticism" by definition.

Funny how you can find the same opinion, repeated almost word for word, from right wing sources.

[Fumesucker]

10. Right wing sources say that Obama is too conservative?

It's amazing the things you can learn on DU..

[SecularMotion]

12. Thanks for purposely missing the point

and I'm so glad you took that opportunity to repeat the talking point.

[Fumesucker]

13. I know what the talking point is..

It was in my first post on this thread.

Obama is the mostest leftistist president evah and any criticism of him is right wing by definition.

[bvar22]

14. Right wing talking points from the Socialist Worker?

I NEVER use smilies, but in this case, I will make an exception.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Hannah Bell]

34. lol. no, the right wing talking points originate elsewhere.

[nenagh]

8. Moochelle.......

I've spent much time on an oil blog learning about the BP Macondo blowout..

More right wingers post there and recently one ugly person referred to Michelle Obama as Moochelle... I emailed the editors to complain.

How often do we truely see the ugly face of the Repub party?

So maybe, just maybe, you vote against Moochelle and for Michelle in the upcoming elections..

[SidDithers]

9. Unrec...

agenda-driven tripe.

Sid

[SkyDaddy7]

11. I am Liberal and a realist...

Whoever bought into the so-called 60 seat super majority listens to much to the press hype. With a party as diverse as the Democrats there was never the votes to pass liberal ideas like single payer as MUCH AS I WISH THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN...The votes simply were not there.

Do I like the HCR yes & no...It is not perfect and I was never expecting perfection. It is a work in progress as much as many hate that term it is what it is. Any bill would have been.

However, I am not in the camp that say if I can't get a sound Liberal Bill I want nothing...I know that is not how our government works. Never has & never will!


Anyway, I could go on but those who want to see the big picture will and those who don't won't. It takes time to turn a country that has been going to right for so long back straight then to the left...Obama has started that slow turning and he warned everyone this would not happen overnight of maybe even in his first term.


No votes no bill...Not to mention the Republicans have changed the game forever with their disgusting parliamentary tricks.

[FBaggins]

15. Seems about right.

There's little question that any electoral damage will be due to the demoralization of the base (and general economic stagnation) at least as much as any republican policies/support.

[lunatica]

16. I still hold out hope that Americans will reject the Bush Era Right

Our country is crippled and getting sicker every day. Americans are affected. Americans should know how this all happened and they should voter against it continuing, if nothing else.

If the majority of Americans vote for Republicans then we'll get what we deserve as a nation and we'll get to watch as the country as we knew it is destroyed beyond help. That's what will happen. You can lay bets on it.

That will be the last time I put faith in Americans as a group.

[WonderGrunion]

17. Are the socialsists providing any kind of viable alternative?

I didn't think so. Vote Democratic in 2010 or admit you prefer the bogeyman of Repukes in office.

[FBaggins]

18. Of course they are.

They want more democrats in office to actually act like progressive democrats.

IOW... deserve the vote rather than assume that we have nowhere else to go.

[WonderGrunion]

21. That's a parasite hoping it's host goes somwhere the parasite wants to go.

Socialists are providing no VIABLE alternatives to the Democratic or Repuke parties. They're just leeching off the Democrats and complaining about how the blood tastes.

[FBaggins]

Deleted - Dupe

[blindpig]

19. Ain't necessarily so....

The repubs are every bit as inept as the dems......

[kctim]

20. Thats the thing about socialists

and wannabe socialists: they absolutely refuse to acknowledge the fact that the majority of Americans do not agree with their policy, so they create excuses to explain why it is mostly rejected by the people.

[Hannah Bell]

32. it's social security & universal health care we're talking about -- not stalinist labor camps.

the majority of the public supports both SS & universal health care.

they don't support mandated subsidies to insurance corps.

[kctim]

40. The majority of the people

reject hardcore liberal and conservative policies. SS and UHC are perfect examples of that too.

The majority of the people think universal health care sounds like a good idea, but yet they are not willing to pay for it. When less than half of those who say they "support" UHC, can you fairly say the majority want it? No you cannot.

The majority of the people now believe social security is their retirement. They would rather spend spend spend now and hope social security will get them through their later years. This is not by accident.
IF the majority of the people really support social security as it was intended then why is it not voluntary?

Fact is, social security and universal health care MUST be mandated in order to be somewhat functionable and the majority of the people do not support such mandated policies. If they did, we would already have them.

[jimlup]

22. Some of the conservative resurgence is overhyped by the media

[anaxarchos]

23. Two observations to add to your piece...

1) It is possible that this "wave" never actually transpires for technical reasons alone. The most important of these is that the Republicans may well have "peaked" too early... way too early. There is simply too much time in which the Republicans can talk voters into voting AGAINST them.

There was a certain degree of this in both 2006 and 2008. In any case, it is far from... err... "healthy" for a political party to depend on the opposition defeating itself.

2) Both the Democratic and Republican parties have been at "war" with their base for a significant period of time (more than a decade). For the Republicans, this was masked somewhat by the scale of their defeat in 2008 and their subsequent embrace of their own right-wing. For them it was a simple matter of survival.

For the Democrats this creates some confusion about what are the "right" and "left" wings of the party. For Democratic leadership, it is obvious that people like Bayh or Nelson are "right-wingers". For the base, the issue is much more complicated. The various divisions within the Democratic party (including "independents" who lean Democratic) are obvious when the focus issues are variously described as "social issues" or "wedge issues" and this is one of the reasons that self-described "Liberals" poll so poorly. Still, that confusion disappears immediately when polling focuses on support for the "public option" or for "government jobs programs" or against the Wars. Now, the descriptions of "right" and "left" within the Party virtually disappear, with overwhelming support that is in large part not shared by leadership.

In this sense, the erosion of support in both the "right" and "left" wings of the party, and the appearance of the "enthusiasm gap", are all part and parcel of the same thing.

[JoseGaspar]

24. K & R

.

[WilliamPitt]

25. The GOP will not take back the House or the Senate

Obama will be re-elected in 2012.

Bookmark this post.

[amborin]

26. K&R anecdotal, but in my area, O's formerly zealous supporters are sorely disallusioned

[L0oniX]

27. Both parties don't care about me or my concerns. I'm too left.

Dems? pffft ...they have blown it. They had their 60-vote majority and played centrist and fucked us without enough lube. Apparently they need us lefties so they have a toilet to shit on. I am surprised they even let us lefties here on DU. Of course there is that piece of info that says that DU is a place for Dems and progressives but I see us getting attacked and pushed aside just like the Dem party did to us. Like wise "maybe" we were only needed to get the DU member numbers up too and can expect a gradual tomb stoning of us lefties to weed us out ...party purity and all that. I hope that is not the case.

[Arkana]

28. The Socialist Worker has apparently bought the media spin as well.

[jtuck004]

29. Consider not rejecting this article out of hand...

Yes, in some "tween" years the party in power loses seats, and, yes, this is an article from a socialist site - but nothing in that statement is either a foregone conclusion nor a reason to ignore some good points, regardless of how hard it might be to swallow.

A large number of people, regardless of their policical persuasion, are unemployed or have lost their homes, and these numbers continue to grow. People need to hear of a plan to address those concerns in a big way, rather than the constant drumbeat of the conservative agenda which, for some reason, has been allowed to frame the national discussion for a long time, mostly to the benefit of the wealthy. If the rpubs are able to convert that into enough seats, they could block any good the Democrats could do for a long time.

[Dawgs]

30. Has anyone ever been to explain why 2nd place Dem beat Rand in KY primary?

Enthusiasm gap in a red state like KY should have shown a much larger turnout for the Republicans. Yet, second place Democrat beat first place Republican Rand Paul in the primary.

Anyone know what gives?

[Dawgs]

35. And what about all of the House wins over the past years.

The Democrat, Mark Critz of Pennsylvania, that was supposed to take a beating in a red district ended up winning, right? Remember him? Remember that day (May 2010)? It wasn't that long ago.

[Dawgs]

31. So, Democrats and Socialists are deciding to ignore the polls again?

Reid, Boxer, & Feingold have all been making gains.

[walldude]

33. Nah... Republicans handed the Dems the election...

if they want it, and I don't mean maintaing the status quo I mean taking over for real, making the whole Republican party lame ducks for the next two years. I explained my theory here:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8908938

[Skidmore]

36. I'll start taking you seriously when I see you start

crapping on the Rs with has much vitriol and vehemence as you do the Ds. Until then, I see you and being intentionally and consistently divisive in your contributions.

[apocalypsehow]

39. Amen to that. I've noticed that, too.

And it makes me wery, wery curious.

[jpak]

37. *yawn*

dream on

:rofl:

[apocalypsehow]

38. Oh, for crying out loud. UnRec.

:eyes: