General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'd love to see Elizabeth or Bernie as Prez but outside of Vt and Ma they're too liberal, right?
Um, no.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/01/13-5
Most startling was the finding from those same national polls when respondents were asked which party was responsible for the economic crisis: Republicans were precisely as likely as Democrats to blame Wall Street bankers.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/08/17/706101/poll-republicans-oppose-paul-ryans-proposed-changes-to-medicare/
Americans opposition to the Republican tickets plan for Medicare is consistent across party lines. Two new polls from the Kaiser Family Foundation find that neither Democrats nor Republicans favor overhauling the government program, and a majority of Americans report they would trust Obama over Romney to make the right decisions about health care going forward.
...
Fifty eight percent of the total individuals surveyed favored the current system over Ryans plan, including a majority of the respondents in the Republican, Democrat, and independent groups.
http://www.ncpssm.org/pdf/poll.pdf
82% of Democrats, 73% of Independents and 58% Republicans, a majority, oppose cuts to Social Security and Medicare.
They would punish members of Congress and President Obama for supporting such cuts, and reward each for opposing them.
http://www.democracyjournal.org/arguments/2013/09/politicians-think-american-voters-are-more-conservative-than-they-really-are.php
Breaking down misperceptions by the leanings of legislators reveals further imbalances:
The typical conservative legislator overestimates his or her districts conservatism by a whopping 20 percentage points. Indeed, he or she believes the district is even more conservative than the most right-leaning district in the entire country.
Liberals also think their constituents views are more conservative than they really are, but are typically only off by about five percentage points.
Most conservative legislators believe their positions on same-sex marriage and health care command majority support in their districtsbut only two-fifths are correct. In contrast, liberal legislators usually share views with constituents, but one in five does not know it.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)The fastest-growing "party" in California is "no party affiliation." Since Hillary Clinton's ONLY support is from the Party Faithful, that leaves it wide open for Senator Warren.
I know your Thread title was tongue-in-cheek but IF Warren would run and IF she would stay as long as the California primaries, she could easily take "I-love-the-1%" Clinton.
On edit: Love taking this from polling data since that's what the Party Faithful use in their "Hillary is inevitable" posts.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Last edited Mon Nov 18, 2013, 10:13 AM - Edit history (1)
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Gman
(24,780 posts)Obama won in 08. I think its more an issue of being able to get their name out there and build a following nationally as Obama did. And just as importantly, having the ability to raise massive amounts of money.
The big money people, many of whom were behind Obama in 08 are now behind HIllary.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Gman
(24,780 posts)Sanders would be a better choice. But no one is more qualified than Hillary. Sorry, she's a Democrat. Deal with it.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I think as a people we need to rethink what qualified means.
Gman
(24,780 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)But as long as people are convinced that the status quo is the only viable choice then things will never change.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Joel thakkar
(363 posts)like california, washington, oregon, NY will go into her favor.
KG
(28,752 posts)Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)for the morning crowd. Good reading here.
ananda
(28,873 posts)It's the nominating process that's screwed.
librechik
(30,676 posts)Which are blatant in most polls. The trick for the polltakers is to make those results seem unimportant and confusing.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Here in TN the electorate is shockingly ignorant and right leaning-easily duped by the GOP.
K.O. Stradivarius
(115 posts)Most Americans are middle of the road/moderate on 'the issues', but it's all dependent on what those issues are.
Even after having been born in, and lived in and or around the Boston area for 56 years, MA is not nearly as Liberal as some would like to believe (including Republicans).
librechik
(30,676 posts)and they do. But it matters to the shadowy robots who actually choose and finance our candidates nowadays. And that's the end of it.
Thank goodness they let them live and operate in some crippled capacity, they don't have to do that. But they do, as long as the people's candidates are poor and powerless.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)Polling on specific issues tends to favor liberal positions time and time again, but as Dick Cheney said on reflecting the will of the people: "So?"
gtar100
(4,192 posts)And more specifically, progressive Democrats. If something actually got done in Washington that was of benefit to the people (instead of just the rich and powerful), then there would be a better understanding that Warren and Sanders really want what is in the people's best interest. It's harder to only run on promises; but if that's all we got to work with, we'll have to make do.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)Want you to believe that Warren is too liberal.
Why, Because, otherwise she would be elected to their detriment.
BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)with LARGE majorities in favour of:
- having expanded social security, even if it means higher taxes
- single payer healthcare
- heavily reducing military spending
- in favour of spending on education
and on & on.
The people at large are much more "liberal" than what the puppeteers, as you rightly point out, try to make us believe.
brooklynite
(94,684 posts)But you still have to win Red or Purple states which aren't quite as liberal.
Also, doesn't mean the same voters will reject a more centrist Democratic candidate (Hillary Clinton perhaps?)
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... because many in the base who would only vote for her holding their noses, and wont work hard for her. More importantly, Republicans hate her and will turn out in droves to vote against her.
Warren has a better chance as she will peel off lots of Republican votes thanks to her signature issue.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/01/13-5
brooklynite
(94,684 posts)A reminder that Hillary Clinton got 17 million votes in the 2008 Democratic Primary...and already has a lot of volunteer support lining up.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... are more liberal than 75% of DU members.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)So, if they are more liberal than 75% of DU members, it must mean Liberals want Hillary.
You kinda walked right into that one, didn't you?
http://www.argojournal.com/2013/10/poll-watch-marquette-university-law_29.html
Scuba
(53,475 posts)http://freewisconsinblog.com/?p=12398
Kind of walked right into that one, didn't you?
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)But it isn't, and you don't.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)They were wrong, and so are you.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)But you don't have to take my word for it, here's Ed Garvey on the topic ...
http://www.fightingbob.com/weblog.cfm?postID=4356
The poll released yesterday ignores the earlier unholy alliance between the Journal Sentinel and the Bradley Foundation's WPRI. Why raise that now since the partnership crashed and burned when they could not operate in scret? Well, guess who was with UW Political Science when we exposed their agreement with WPRI--Yes sir, Charles Franklin. Who directed the so-called Marquette University Law School poll? Yup. Charles Franklin.
If you're not familiar with the Bradley Foundation ....
http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2016875571_conservatives28.html?mid=53
It wasn't the Koch brothers the boogeymen for the American left.
On Nov. 8, 2010, the Walkers broke bread at an upscale restaurant with the board and senior staff members of the Milwaukee-based Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.
With more than $600 million in assets, the Bradley Foundation provides a cornerstone for the U.S. conservative movement. It has been the financial backer behind public-policy experiments that started in Wisconsin and spread across the nation including a welfare overhaul, public vouchers for private schools and, this year, cutbacks in public-employee benefits and collective bargaining.
Since you're a "Democratic Strategist" I'd have expected you to already know this.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Scuba
(53,475 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)They need more exposure. People will relate and like both Elizabeth and Bernie once they really get to hear them speak.
k&r
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)They don't look like presidential material. Sad, but true.
A liberal who looked like say, Ed Schultz, might have a chance.
But it's all moot until we get a strong liberal majority caucus into the house and senate anyway. Obama had a chance to push more populist policies, until he saw the scaredy cats he was going to have to work with in the '08 Congress who all lost their jobs anyway to the dumb, misinformed public whim.
Reformed Bully
(43 posts)Michelle & Jill
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)marmar
(77,088 posts)...... The neo-DLCers fail to grasp that. Trotting out another stilted, corporate, platitude-spouting candidate (that would be Hillary) isn't what we should be doing.