How does it help Democrats running for office to say we're going to reach across the aisle more?

[Stinky The Clown]

In close districts, how does it help the Democrat to tell the people "There, there, it's okay. We'll work with that repub. No real need to vote for the Democrat."

And, as a practical matter, how long until we learn that reaching across the aisle to people hellbent on your annihilation results in . . . . your attempted annihilation?

[msongs]

1. dems wave the white flag before the election - repubs are counting on that lol nt

[Rabrrrrrr]

2. It doesn't help them with me. I'll still vote for the dems, but I tire of useless aisle reaching.

The repukes have shown themselves over and over again that they have absolutely no interest in working together, compromise, consensus, or any kind of non-partisan action.

It's far beyond time for the dems - including Obama - to just give up on it and tell the repukes "We've given you more chances than you deserved; from now on, we're doing what we want. Fuck you."

[kctim]

3. The term

reaching across the aisle is seen as a form of moderation, which the majority of Americans favor. They aren't telling us there is no real need to vote for the Democrat, they are telling us to vote for them because they won't go to the extreme.

[vi5]

11. The majority of americans favor...

Yes, we see how the democrats have been richly rewarded with great popularity and approval numbers due to them spending the past 2 years reaching across the aisle and going for moderate, reasonable actions. It's frightening how much that approach worked.

People like to say they are moderate and reasonable and bipartisan but it's largely because I do not think those words mean what most people think they mean.

When a republican says it, he means he wants democrats to do what he says. SO therefore people who favor republican proposals and ideas says he wants moderation and bipartisanship but what he really wants is for Dems to cave. And they do.

[kctim]

14. Yes

President Obama has been richly rewarded with great approval ratings from his fellow Democrats, around 80% last I heard. He is trying to represent ALL of the people, just as he said he would, instead of just a small fringe, so his approach really does seem to be working just fine.

[vi5]

16. Exactly my point

The people who would like him pretty much almost no matter what he did as long as he had a D after his name and was simply less batshit insane than most of the people with an R after their name approve of him. Exactly my point. 80% of people already inclined to approve of him, approve of him.

Do you honestly believe that any substantial portion of that 80% would be disapproving of him if he weren't attempting to reach across the aisle or govern in "moderation" and were governing with a little more forceful hand and more fortitude?

The only people who claim to want "moderation" and "reaching across the aisle" are people who are self proclaimed moderates and independents (both of whom in actuality in most cases are probably republicans anway who just don't want to identify with that brand) and what they mean is that they want Democrats to do what republicans want. Which I'd see the wisdom in Dems doing if it worked even one single iota. It doesn't.

When you show me consisten polls that says a majority or even large portion of moderates and independents and even some republicans approve then I'll buy that any bit of this reaching across the aisle garbage is yielding anything whatsoever.

[napi21]

4. There are a lot of people who are really sick & tired of the constant bickering and lack

of any cooperation in Congress-BOTH houses! I'm sick of it too, but I'm realistic enough to realize that it' not the Dems who hve been so non-cooperative. I assume that's the reason whuy they're saying stuff like that.

[Tatiana]

5. First of all, I am so sick of everyone Congressional Dems included assuming we will lose the House.

I mean... is this a foregone conclusion? Why bother showing up. Even Jimmy Carter has bought into this Rasmussen/Gallup/Faux-generated meme.

The DCCC is pouring money into races in AL when we have Dems running neck and neck in very competitive races like Grayson in FL and Clark in MN. WTF? If we would pour all of our resources into those competitive races that we have a decent shot at winning, we'd wouldn't be in danger of losing the House (mid-term or no).

That same defeatist attitude is what leads to this desire to "work across the aisle." Jesus turned the other cheek, yes, but Jesus would not let someone keep smacking Him without consequences. We have very few Democratic FIGHTERS. Sad to say, but the folks on our side that actually have a fighting spirit are the Manchins and Conways who are moderate-to-conservative, but will do what it takes to get a job done. Our progressives need to learn by example.

[Stinky The Clown]

9. Losing the Hoouse is, as you point out, NOT a foregone conclusion

We can win it by fighting, not by being right lite.

Howard Dean would have funded Grayson and Clark. Howard Dean got fired.

[Tatiana]

13. Exactly! This is so mind-blowing.

I have donated to exactly two candidates this cycle (due to financial constraints): Feingold and Giannoulias. Feingold, because as cantankerous as he is, he has principles and fights for them. Giannoulias because I live in IL and he seriously needs help. And a better campaign staff, which is where I miss Dean so much because I'm not really impressed with how this campaign has been conducted. I spent 9 hours this past weekend (pregnant, though I am) talking to business owners and residents and dropping off yard signs. I was in Democratic-friendly wards. And you know what the #1 question people have asked me? "Where have you been?/Why are you just now coming to deliver signage?" I'm in Dem wards but all I see are Kirk signs. It's ridiculous.

It has been left up to the unions to pick up the slack (my union's "all hands on deck ASAP!!!!" is what got me out). My question is, where is the party? If this is what OFA is bringing to the table, I'd rather have the antiquated but functioning infrastructure of 2006-08 back. One of the whole points of consolidating/merging with OFA was to take advantage of the huge donor lists and be able to access money bombs when necessary. Well lo and behold, the donations are not pouring in and I wonder why.

Maybe it's because no one wants to support "right lite."

[mmonk]

6. We're on our own. The party was taken over by handlers

who never got it a long time ago. We just have to do our best.

[DirkGently]

7. It's about having the courage of your convictions ... or not.

[polichick]

8. It's insanity to keep doing what doesn't work...

...and why in the hell would someone vote for a Republican wanna-be when they can vote for the real - imo, disgusting - thing?

[vi5]

10. Here's what I keep hearing from Dem leaders

"OMG YOU NEED TO VOTE FOR DEMS BECAUSE REPUBLICANS ARE EVIL.....
but we need to reach across the aisle and work with them BUT GET OUT THE VOTE FOR DEMS BECAUSE A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY WILL BE THE END OF THE COUNTRY but we need to consider all ideas and should pretend that republicans are serious people and AAAAAHHHHH VOTE DEMS BECAUE THE REPUBLICANS ARE GOING TO DESTROY US ALL but lets make sure we give them a lot of what they want so that we can pass things because we can't really stand up to them and OMG THEY ARE OBSTRUCTIONIST WE CAN'T WORK WITH THESE PEOPLE but lets create a commission to discuss and examine this really important problem and give them an equal seat at the table"

This back and forth talking out of both sides is really getting old.

[spanone]

12. it's a one-way street. mitch mcconnell is the epitome of partisanship.

[Swede]

15. In elections,candidates are reaching out to the undecided independents.

Everyone else has made up their minds.

[yurbud]

17. they say that not for voters but big business, either to get their money or at least keep them

from giving to their GOP opponent.

Both the Democrat running for senator and governor here in California sent me thank you letters for donations that had that kind of crap in it, and for a minute, I literally felt like I had just wasted my money giving to someone who is going to apologize to the GOP for not letting them win.

[bemildred]

18. It is always good to confuse your enemies. nt

[hfojvt]

19. it helps to win Republican and conservative independents and Democrats

first, we admit that some Republicans are sensible and willing to do what is right for the country - which is what WE are after - policies that will be good for the country.

They actually do this in the Kansas legislature. Democrats and moderate Republicans work together to out-vote the very Conservative Republicans. Of course, they give up lots of ground too, and do not do very much that is very progressive, but it certainly beats the alternative.

But by showing that you believe that SOME Republicans are reasonable, you also reach out to the voters, attempting to include many of the voters in this group. Reasonable Republicans who will vote for Christ Biggs, Dennis McKinney, and Steve Six instead of the very conservative Republicans who are running against them. It is math, especially in places like Kansas. In order to win, you need to pick up some conservative voters.

Thus, you cannot declare war on conservatives and hope to win an election.

[Atticus]

20. We reach across the aisle and they occasionally give us a reach around,

That's fair, right?

[and-justice-for-all]

21. I would reach across the isle

and smack the taste out of a pukes mouth.

[alarimer]

22. Reaching across the aisle is why they are losing.

When Democrats lose, it's because they are not progressive enough. But the media narrative is that they are not conservative enough. If you are going to lose anyway, why not do the right thing? What's the worst that could happen if the Democrats actually stood up for something other than mealy-mouthed, wimpy, pandering to the mushy middle?

[craigmatic]

23. It doesn't repubs won't vote for them and it pisses off the base.