Voters made a huge mistake by putting Repubs in charge of the House.

[kentuck]

Even Republicans should be able to recognize their mistake. The House of Representatives is there to represent the people, not one Party or special interests, but the people of each individual district in this nation. Moreso than the Senate or the Presidency, it is necessary to be speaking for the people at large. It is where laws are passed and money is appropriated for programs that we all need.

We have no choice but to struggle thru the next two years before we have the opportunity to change the House of Representatives. A Republican President can arguably do less damage, notwithstanding Geoge W Bush, than can a Republican House. As Americans, not as Democrats or Republicans, we need to put the House in Democratic hands, and let them fight it out for the Senate and the Presidency.

This is just my opinion, but we can all see the damage and the gridlock caused by a Republican House. That is the problem. It will not be fixed until we change it.

[frazzled]

1. Republicans are in charge of the House because

the voters in their (often well-defined and gerrymandered) districts voted for them. The "people of each individual district" supported them. That's why they're there. I live in a forever-safe-blue Congressional district. Others, however, live in very solidly red Congressional districts.

"We" can't change people in red districts from voting for Republicans. Unless, of course, you want to move there and vote for a Democrat. Personally, I don't.

[ReRe]

6. God, I hope you're wrong....

...are you saying we will never have a chance at winning back the house? How can we get a bunch of them to not vote in 2014?

[frazzled]

9. Well, if there are enough "purple" districts out there ...

that's where we could pick up gains. I don't know the facts on that, though.

Redistricting in 2010, after the Census and the elections, created a lot of new districts throughout the country. Here in Illinois, where Democrats control things, we gerrymandered a bunch of districts, too, making them more Democratic. That's how Tammy Duckworth took back Joe Walsh's seat, etc. Short of changing the boundaries, though, we have to seek out districts across the country that have a chance of going either way.

[tosh]

58. Truth.

I live in one of those "purple" districts.

I believe that we must do a MUCH better job with our message. Our convention this year was the first event in ages in which we defined ourselves in a way that can reach people. The right has been so successful in making us out to be EVIL. We must get beyond their noise and make voters see what we're really about.

[GoCubsGo]

7. Yep. The voters made their big mistake in 2010.

Instead of getting out and voting, many of them stayed home. In doing so, they handed over a large number of state legislatures to the GOP, who helped themselves to 10 years of GOP control of the House, barring some HUGE revolt.

[ReRe]

50. Well, I wasn't one of them...

...and I took 3 people with me in 2010. What was that about a huge revolt?

[n2doc]

10. Plus Gerrymandering

[KoKo]

52. Absolutely the Gerrymandering and in many cases it was "racial gerrymandering"

done and there were lawsuits in my state by NAACP and they went nowhere in the Obama Justice Department. We lost two Dem House members who were not Blue Dogs because of this Repug motivated (ALEC influenced) gerrymandering which left many of us with no one to vote for.

We lost Dennis Kucinich because of Gerrymandering him out of his disctrict, too. Plus many others in other states who had some seniority and stood for issues that Progressive Democrats believe in.

Thank you for that Chart!

[leftyohiolib]

12. yes and it got that way b/c of dems in 2010 decided they were going to "show them"

for the things the dems didnt do fast enough and sat out the 2010 election allowing the goop to take seats they wouldnt have gotten. that allowed gop govs to gerry-mander districts. so we, trying to "show them", did this to ourselves. now we're stuck

[kentuck]

14. I don't know that I agree with that ...?

Democrats traditionally vote in lesser numbers in off-year elections than do Republicans. Republicans were hyped to the max and angry over "Obamacare" and our Party did not inspire more voters to get to the polls. I don't think there was a concerted effort to "show them". I think there was a very energized vote from the right.

[Jackpine Radical]

37. It's always more comforting for the leadership

to diffuse the blame among the millions in the electorate rather than to take responsibility for their own failure to communicate et and motivate that electorate.

I've been trying to make this point since the 2010 Wisconsin debacle that took out Feingold & gave us Walker. "If the Democratic voters had come out…." Sure. But they would have been there if the leadership had seen the problem & motivated them to do so. I was phone banking for Feingold & Barrett & could feel the mood of the electorate from what they were telling me, and I knew it wasn't good. Afterward, the Party establishment blamed the voters for betraying them.

What the fuck do they think the concept of "leader" entails, anyway?

It's like blaming the ocean when your faulty boat sinks.

[kentuck]

39. A very important point Jackpine...

But the Republicans had a very emotional, hot-button issue to get their people to the polls. Barack Obama and "Obamacare". However misguided, they were able to get their people to the polls. Democrats need to study from the same playbook.

People go to the polls for emotional and passionate reasons. They do not vote, as a general Party vote, just because there is a "D" or an "R" by their name. This is something that has smitten the Democratic Party and no matter how much the Republicans screw up this country, we are lucky to win in a squeaker.

We need to win back the House in 2014 and we need to figure out how to do it. Don't worry about who is going to be our President in 2016 - worry about the House. That would be my advice.

[heaven05]

43. we

progressives, liberals need to come out in great numbers in off season elections. 2014 will be the time to show our muscle. I'm I am still alive, I'll be in line. People have to vote. I think.

[flpoljunkie]

48. Perhaps our president could educate our voters on the importance off mid-term elections.

He has the clout with the base to get them out.

[Doctor_J]

21. and because the president and congressional Dems didn't represent the droves

who voted in 2008. We repudiated the far right in 2008, and as soon as the Congress convened Obama and Reid started negotiating with them. Hopefully THEY won't make the same mistake this time

[musiclawyer]

54. Yours is the best post

This clusterf-ck started with POTUS tracking right instead of left the moment he picked his advisers. If POTUS does real prosecution of bankers, real financial reform , real mortgage fraud relief ... the people do not become disillusioned and house would not have flipped in 2010. Then the gerrymandering would not have happened and we would have a Huge majority in the house right now

When your treasonous enemy is down, do not pick them up. POTUS was naive. I hope he has learned ....So yeah. We have to endure two more years of gridlock. The only thing good that can happen in the interim is filibuster reform. That way the last two years can be glorious.

[xtraxritical]

40. I seriously think it was "independents" not Democrats that blew 2010.

[HereSince1628]

18. Well I just flat out disagree. Dems should provide rural people meaningful political choices

We really don't need to be the party of urban areas. We are the party of compassion. And poor and needy occur in our cities and our countrysides.

The poorest of people in rural counties live the farthest from food, education and healthcare. They benefit least from social advances such as cellphones and internet. Access to food, education, medical care, communications and reliable energy (think rural electrification) are CLASSIC PROGRESSIVE THEMES that democrats SHOULD support in ALL areas of the nation.

Issues of importance to low-population areas aren't just guns and guts and libertine yeomanism. People in rural areas also desire:

Productive, decently remunerated work, although in contrast to urban areas that emphasizes very small businesses (family-owned producers and family owned retailers)

Access to Quality Education

Access to Healthcare

Food security

Support for transportation improvements that facilitate freedom of movement to education, healthcare, food, etc

Access to affordable and sustainable energy

Practical Immigration Reform and support that facilitates full social participation of recent immigrants

Improved access to advanced telecommunications services already typical of populated areas.

Protection of environmental quality from abuses imposed by populated areas.

[Doctor_J]

22. Provide them how? every single radio station in the country

broadcasts Repuke propaganda 24/7. Good luck getting through that.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

28. Well, it's the Dems' own fault for sleeping through the 1980s

and trying to play yuppie politics.

But it's not too late.

They need to nurture local candidates who really understand their neighbors.

Remember the story of Huey Long of Louisiana? In those days, most politicians ran on segregation and keeping the "nigras" in their place. Huey Long had been a traveling salesman, and in the course of his travels, he learned that Louisiana had almost no paved roads and charged schoolchildren for textbooks, which forced many poor families to keep their kids out of school.

He ran on a simple platform: paving the roads and providing free textbooks for all schoolchildren. He proposed solutions for real problems that everyone could understand. He was the only candidate who didn't appeal to racism, too.

He had his problems later on, but he provides an example of how to win in rural districts. Find out what people's REAL problems are and propose easily understandable solutions that at least start to fix the problem.

[HereSince1628]

29. The same way the Democrat Farm League (the dems in MN) do.

Why should what has been become what must be? Who said this wouldn't take effort?

The point is progressive solutions are valuable to people beyond urban areas. Most of the issues of rural areas are immediately recognizable as variations on the needs of city-dwellers.

Rolling over because there currently aren't enough progressive megawatts of broadcast power seems like surrender and abandonment.

[Jackpine Radical]

38. "Song of the South"--Alabama nailed it, in my book.

Alabama

Song Of The South Lyrics

Written by Bob McDill

Chorus
Song, song of the south.
Sweet potato pie and I shut my mouth.
Gone, gone with the wind.
There ain't nobody looking back again.

Cotton on the roadside, cotton in the ditch.
We all picked the cotton but we never got rich.
Daddy was a veteran, a southern democrat.
They oughta get a rich man to vote like that.

Sing it...
Chorus

Well somebody told us Wall Street fell
But we were so poor that we couldn't tell.
Cotton was short and the weeds were tall
But Mr. Roosevelt's a gonna save us all.

Well momma got sick and daddy got down.
The county got the farm and they moved to town.
Pappa got a job with the TVA
He bought a washing machine and then a Chevrolet.

Sing it...
Chorus

Play it...

Sing it...
Chorus

Song, song of the south...
Gone, gone with the wind...

Song, song of the south.
Sweet potato pie and I shut my mouth.
Song, song of the south.
Sweet potato pie and I shut my mouth.

Sing it...
Chorus 2X

[aggiesal]

59. I sure hope your wrong . . .

Besides, these gerrymandered districts will not stay that way for the next 10 years.

Some, like Texas have already been ruled to be racial in their makeup.
The latino voter had the largest increase in Texas during the 2000's.

When the 2010 census was published, in theory, there should have been another
half-dozen democratic districts, maybe more. But the Texas legislature (mostly
republican) gerrymandered the state so badly that latinos are not equally represented.

It was taken to court and in fact was found to be anti-hispanic,
http://open.salon.com/blog/steve_klingaman/2012/08/29/anti-hispanic_gerrymandering_struck_down_in_texas

The same was being done in Colorado, that when they went to court,
the court actually selected the version of the map the Democrats had proposed.

It's happening in Georgia as well. So hopefully, with the help of an honest court,
Republican Gerrymandering will be stricken down and some semblance of a more
democratic districts will emerge in time for the 2014 elections.

[Yupy]

2. Yes, but also it has to do with the REPIGS Governor and how the voting is counted

with divided districts. I wonder how this can be fixed???

[bluestate10]

26. Keep winning elections, including Mid-terms. The 2020 Midterm is key because that election

happens during a census year and just before the next re-districting. Our side need to take back red Governor's seats and state legislatures during 2014, 2016, 2018 and especially during 2020.

[kentuck]

27. We were to busy to notice that it was a census year in 2010...

and the Republicans cleaned our clock. We were busy trying to get Obamacare passed and defending the status quo. Unbelievable!

[Jim Lane]

35. 2020 is not a midterm election but you're right about its importance

A related question is: What if, between now and then, Democrats retake control in some state with gerrymandered districts? I don't think we should rule out a between-census redistricting. DeLay and the gang got away with it in Texas.

[leftstreet]

3. Did the Democrats run genuine Democrats in all races?

We'd need to see a state by state breakdown to know if they did

[bluestate10]

23. Lots of republicans were unopposed. We need to put good candidates up against republicans and

support those candidates.

[leftstreet]

25. Why would the Democrats let GOPers run unopposed?

(Rhetorical question)

Unbelievable. Then they sit back wringing their hands and mewling about having to compromise

[Lydia Leftcoast]

30. There was a state legislative district in Oregon where the Dems never bothered to run anyone

It was in a suburb of Portland, and the Republicanites always ran unopposed.

Then, in 1998, a Socialist (a real one) ran against the Republican and got 20% of the vote. That made the Dems sit up and take notice.

They ran someone in 2000. He came within a couple of percentage points of winning.

They ran him again in 2002. He won.

[leftstreet]

51. Same thing in WA

3 !! unopposed statewide

Can't find a link for nationwide results

[ProSense]

4. Lesson learned.

The title of your other thread says it all:

Just 4 weeks ago, Republicans were blaming Democrats for cutting $716 billion from Medicare.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021930783

They successfully used that argument in 2010.

Oh, and for all those older Americans who voted GOP last year because those nasty Democrats were going to cut Medicare, I have just one word: suckers!

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/04/privatizing-medicare/

Luckily people didn't buy it this time around. Yes, Mitt was pushing the same tired argument hoping for a repeat: sucker!

[leftyohiolib]

15. i have a different wordfor them and it's not as pleasant as yours'

[99Forever]

5. I agree with all you said, however...

... we don't have another two years to wait for our government to do the right things. We needed relief two years ago, instead, we got excuses why it was more important to kiss Republican ass than to beat them to the ground and act in the peoples interest.

[Lugnut]

8. I tried to get rid of one Republican in PA.

I voted for the Democratic candidate but he lost. The newly drawn congressional district will make it difficult for a Democrat to win in future elections.

[kentuck]

11. It won't be easy.

Either they will be challenged by one of their extremists and will be divided in the general election or Republican voters will come to their senses. I will not hold my breath for the latter.

[DefenseLawyer]

13. In the long run, more Republicans are dying than there are new ones to replace them

But it's still going to take a long, long time, given the way districts are drawn.

[bluestate10]

16. Kentuck. That is the very reason why the democratic Left, Center and Right can't spend

their energies fighting each other in the lead-up to the 2014 midterms. We should have our primaries, stay on issues and back democrat that wins. There is a larger enemy to defeat.

[kentuck]

17. That is easier said than done.

I understand where you are coming from but it is not possible to get these different folks to unite just because the Republicans are "evil". They must have a reason to vote. They must be inspired to vote. They must emboldened to go to the polls. Their hearts must be touched. They do not think in the black and white terms that we wish they would. Unfortunately.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

32. Yes, most voters are not informed enough to hate the Republicans

They just tend to vote for the status quo.

I saw this in 2004. The informed people hated Bush, and even those of us who were unenthusiastic about Kerry worked ourselves silly trying to get him elected. But for uninformed people--well, frankly, Kerry didn't give uninformed people any reason to vote FOR him instead of just AGAINST Bush.

Obama promised to reform health care and get the U.S. troops out of Iraq. These were two things that people positively wanted. Then he blew his chances by being too eager to compromise with the Republicans and letting the Blue Dogs boss the much larger Progressive Caucus instead of the other way around on health care.

The Dems have to offer them something positive, something that meets people's real needs in an obvious and unmistakable way. They need to listen to local activists.

They can't let isolated, out-of-touch Beltway strategists who schmooze with Republicans at DC cocktail parties call the shots.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

41. There is way too much hatred in this world. Vote against them, don't hate them. Ultimately hatred

There is way too much hatred in this world. Vote against them, work against them, block their policies, but don't hate them. Ultimately hatred hurts the hater more than the hated.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

45. I meant the policies, not the people

Many of the people are simply oblivious.

But my point stands. We have to promote reasons to vote FOR the Democrats instead of AGAINST the Republicans. The party needs to ask grassroots activists about local needs instead of listening to out-of-touch conventional "wisdom" from the Beltway pundits.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

47. Agree with your point: positive reasons to vote Democrat trump negatives against Republicans.

Ultimately positives win, despite the short term effects of negative advertising.

Positives get out the vote. Negatives keep it home.

[Baitball Blogger]

19. The crazy thing is how Republican voters think that Obama DIDN'T win a major

election because they still retain the House.

[Cleita]

20. It seems it was the gerrymandering that accomplished that.

Some experts (?) so I heard on the TeeVee, said if we still had the old districts, it would have gone Democratic.

[CakeGrrl]

24. Some Republicans "see" what Fox News tells them.

Don't think that demographic is about to come to its senses anytime soon.

And don't discount those on the Left who were instructed by 'Big Ed' to stay home and teach President Obama a lesson in 2010. How'd that work out for the American people?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

42. 49 % of Republicans think ACORN stole the 2012 election, despite not existing for a few years.

49 %. That's down only three from 52 % in 2008.

[Avalux]

31. It's not that simple. GOP has House control due to redistricting.

So....according to the article below, Dems won the popular vote. The majority of voters did not put the GOP in charge.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/11/09/democratic-house-candidates-winning-the-popular-vote-despite-big-gop-majority/

[Lydia Leftcoast]

34. Michelle Bachmann's district is a case in point

It's a combination of white flight working class suburbs (the prime audience for right-wing hate radio) and rural towns full of conservative Catholics, who would vote for Nicolae Ceausescu because he banned abortion.

The hope there is that those white flight suburbs are becoming less white as large numbers of Liberian and other African immigrants move in. However, many of them are not yet citizens.

[KamaAina]

33. One voter in particular

Jerry Mander.

There were actually more votes cast for Dem House candidates than repukes. But so many Dems have been corralled into Dem ghettos in places like Texas that we never had a chance.

[athena]

36. Exactly.

If you care about gerrymandering, please consider signing this petition:
http://signon.org/sign/an-end-to-gerrymandering?source=s.icn.em.cr&r_by=6192830&mailing_id=6987

[DallasNE]

44. Gerrymandering

It was the 2010 election that was the problem, especially at the statewide level. This was the first election after redistricting following the 2010 census. Pennsylvania is exhibit A. Pennsylvania elected 18 Republicans and 5 Democrats to the House making it one of the most red delegations in the House, yet Obama won the State by about 6 points. And we have to live with these highly gerrymandered districts until the 2022 election. Also, the election of 2018 will mostly determine the makeup of the legislatures that redraw the new districts in most cases as the 2020 election is actually the mid-term election in most States.

Democratic bickering allowed States like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin to be completely taken over at the State level by Republicans and it virtually assures that Republicans will control the House for the entire decade. That is the kind of consequences a single election can have. More people voted for the Democrat in House races this year than voted for the Republican yet the Republicans have a 25 seat majority. Republicans had the perfect storm in 2010.

[nolabels]

55. In the end, the gerrymandering will bite them in the ass

They were somehow able to get away with it for decades here in California. Now we have ordinary citizens drawing up the districts here (thanks to Proposition 11) and that was the final nail in the coffin for the republicans here.

[DallasNE]

56. Iowa Is Another State That Does It Fairly

And for the same reason. In the new House they will have 2 Republicans and 2 Democrats, reflecting the battleground status of that State. Where I live we are not so lucky. Gerrymandering saved one Republican seat and one Electoral College vote for Romney. (The old lines would have resulted in the seat flipping Democratic).

[judesedit]

46. I never wished this on anyone until now. I hope the greedy old GOP bastards drop dead real soon.

So this country can get progressing. The GOP losers have been hoarding $$$$$ thinking they can buy us...sorry charlie. You're sol. Go eat some dirt, please, the sooner the better for all of us.

[kentuck]

49. Basically, we need to fire up our voters.

When people are about to get screwed, it is not enough just to tell them they are going to get screwed by the Republicans. But you have to tell them with a passion that they can do something about it. They don't have to put up with it. They deserve better. We are Democrats! We believe in equality and a growing middle-class and a progressive tax base. We have the power to make it happen! You are not hopeless! We are America, by God, and we can change it!

[madrchsod]

53. my district has been republican for a thousand years but...

for two years we had a democrat house critter that forked over 4 million dollars to my city. why?it`s the hometown of ronald reagan and a good chunk of that money went to a waterfront project where rr`s statue is. other money went to area road projects and federalizing of two city block street that runs directly to the statue.

since then the republicans fear the teaparty zealots the latest republican returned 0 dollars and i expect the new guy to do the same.

[daa]

57. They didn't, gerrymandering did. Nt.

[Coyotl]

60. Exactly. The Dems won the trifecta, solid majority of votes in House, Senate, President.

It is an immense freaking MANDATE for the Dems.