We got our asses handed to us.

[kentuck]

That is the reality.

What do we need to change to keep that from happening again? We are at a huge disadvantage in the House and the Repubs have a good majority in the Senate. They control almost all the State Houses in the country, the ones that draw the lines for gerrymandering.

Is this just a blip or does the Democratic Party need to change? And what ways should it change to compete with the Republicans and the Tea Party?

I have some ideas but I don't have the time or energy to go into it at the moment. But basically, our Democratic Party is no longer the big tent that it once was and we need to remedy that. We could learn a lot from the Republicans.

[Marrah_G]

1. as long as money rules politics the people will never win

[kentuck]

10. With our present numbers..

I don't think we are going to change anything soon?

[malaise]

32. Neither are the ReTHUGs

with their numbers

[flamingdem]

2. Yes, they're good strategists

and take no prisoners.

[underthematrix]

7. no they're not. they just understand white people's

most primitive fears and they play to them. my husband is white and he can see through shit

[flamingdem]

16. They work it, their strategy that is

and they communicate it, no matter how primitive.

Dems don't get out the message, they don't work it, enough to get people to understand.

[DebJ]

3. Like show up to vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! n/t

[SammyWinstonJack]

14. +1. Four Democratic voters in this household and only one -me- voted.

[maced666]

4. So sick of this cycle.

2010 was the end. There was dancing, the 2012 elections.
Then ass.
Kicked.
I don't want to 'learn' anything from repubs.

[BarackTheVote]

5. Run people to the left of Ronald Reagan n/t

[Dont call me Shirley]

11. +100,000,000

[tritsofme]

6. Hillary leading the ticket in 2016 will change everything

This midterm electorate is much more Republican than the one that will show up in 2016.

[oh08dem]

8. I guess some message discipline and some backbone will work wonders.

[muntrv]

9. The Dems need to embrace their base, not loathe it!

[Maedhros]

15. The Democratic Leadership 20 years ago determined to shed the "old" base and adopt a "new" one.

The "new" base would be developed by absorbing disgruntled Republicans. Meanwhile liberal platitudes would be served to the "old" base, to keep them from drifting off. The platitudes transitioned into threats - "vote for us, or THEY will win!"

What does the Democratic Party need to do to change? The rank and file need to hold the leadership accountable for their bullshit, rather than cover for it.

[kentuck]

24. No. The "base" needs to become independent of the present Party structure.

Still remain part of the voting process of the Democratic Party but separate from the present Party. We are a drag on the traditional Democratic Party.

[DonCoquixote]

33. in other words

show upt o vote,and thank them when they want to use our hands as ashtrays for their cigars that they bummed from their GOP friends.

[kentuck]

35. No. Not at all.

The traditionalists would need the progressives to pass anything or to even get elected. We would be in a more advantageous position rather than the present status of kowtowing to the moderates everytime there is an issue, in order to keep the Repubs from gaining power. Well, they have gained power and we are losing power. What else should we do? We are still Democrats but we would not put the weight of every controversial issue, such as guns, on our entire Party. Think of how the Republicans use the Tea Party to handle all their most extreme views so that they keep their hands clean and win elections.

[Codeine]

12. Old white guys have an expiration date.

Every year it gets a little closer, and I say that as an old white guy.

I think this could be the Last Great Hurrah for the 'pukes.

[Hoyt]

31. Definitely a bunch of old white guys, but there are a bunch of conservative younguns too.

Will be interested in seeing how under 35 voted (or didn't vote at all).

[BillZBubb]

13. The Democratic party needs big changes.

But I don't see them happening.

[kentuck]

19. I think it should start with the Congressional Black Caucus...

They should divorce themselves from the moderate DLC Democrats, the traditional Democrats. The progressives of our Party should follow the CBC. We should take every controversial issue, every progressive issue, and adopt it as part of the New Progressive Coalition. The traditional Democrats would not have to worry about the NRA, or abortion, or prayer in schools, or gay marriage, or gun control, or any controversial issues that might harm the traditional Democrats chances for electoral success. Democrats that love their guns can stay with the Democratic Party. Pro-life Democrats can stay with the traditionalists.

Think of how the Republicans were able to take all their "crazy extremists" and assign them to the Tea Party. But they kept the Tea Party in their fold for electoral purposes. They got the benefit without the burden of keeping them in the traditional Republican Party. The progressives in the Democratic Party are not extremists but are necessary for progress to occur in our country. We should leave the Democratic Party for voting purposes only. We can carry all the controversial issues that are necessary for progress and leave the traditional Democrats a larger tent whereby they can grow the Party.

I could explain the theory in more detail because I know it is blowing some minds but I am tired right now.

[Man from Pickens]

17. New leadership that speaks to the majority of voters' needs

Prosecutions of Wall Street crooks.

Ending the perpetual war machine.

Ending the police state.

Ending the drug war.

Stopping the corporate lobbyist gravy train.

Make the legal system accessible to the middle class and the poor again.

Loosen the crushing vise on the middle class and give the poor a real path to rise above perpetual poverty.

etc. etc. there are so many things that can be done that will get overwhelming support from everybody but the tiny elite who have been squeezing the life out of the country to increase the numbers in their bank accounts WITHOUT getting mired in the 50%+1 hot-button issues that divide everyone into neat halves to be conquered by whoever has the money to influence a tiny deciding percent.

And when elected, do it. Don't fail us like so many others have.

[Psephos]

20. All excellent suggestions. n/t

[Zorra]

28. +1 nt

[Puzzledtraveller]

21. stop the condescention

not from you Kentuck, I mean the lib-elite et al. People tire of being called yokels and rednecks. I am a Kentuckian btw.

[Puzzledtraveller]

27. I said, not from Kentuck

Yu kan reed?

[davidpdx]

29. Sorry

bad mood

[davidpdx]

22. I agree, we did all the way around

Senate, House, and Governor's races. I really thought we'd end up picking up governor's seats and hold the senate. This has been the nightmare scenario we hoped wouldn't happen. We are fucked!

[MFM008]

23. They cheat- they steal- they lie

they keep you from voting, they rig voting machines, they make stuff up, they managed to blame Obama for ISIS and Ebola, they keep you stupid, unemployed, without health care, without hope.
My dad told me Americans were the stupidest people on the face of the planet. This coming from a 25 year USAF vet. Until we become more like them I guess we will continue to lose.

The Koch whores got their moneys worth today.

[underthematrix]

34. Thank you and thank you again - Americans are so stupid

they do not know there are 3 branches of government with set, enact and interpret law. Americans would rather watch reality TV and shop til they drop further enslaving themselves they claim to feel oppressed by. We are a stupid people and what is even more horrifying is our celebration of our ignorance and stupidity. Iowa just elected a US Senator who advocates shooting federal employees and of course this dangerous person will become a federal employee in January 2015. Americans are so stupid they elect people who rail against the gov't who want to dismantle it and destroy while collecting annual salaries from 175,000 to 225,000 a year. A smart informed citizenry does not elect people like that to represent them.

[qanda]

26. Stop being Republican-lite

Obviously, if people want a Republican, they will vote for them.

[kentuck]

30. Here is a thread from KingCharlemagne a couple of days ago...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025717948

Here is one of my responses to his premise about the battle being between the "centist Dems" and the "progressive Dems"...

That is where the real battle is and it divides the Democratic Party, in my opinion. We would be a much stronger Party if were to differentiate between the two for voting purposes. The traditional Democrats would support labor issues, such as increase in minimum wage and organizing unions, defending Social Security and Medicare, and equal rights for all workers, support for the 2nd Amendment, and protecting the privacy of Americans.

On the other hand, we would have the Progressive Democrats, which must always be a branch of the Democratic Party, because neither of them could exist on their own as a viable Party. They allow the traditional Democratic Party to always have room for growth. We grow in areas like civil rights, gay rights and gay marriage, equal pay for women, questioning the voracious appetite of the defense industry, at the expense of others, that may be more needy, in our society.

The Progressives would also call for more strict gun laws. We have to find a way to keep these guns out of the hands of mentally-deranged people. It is to the benefit of us all.

Progressives would be the part of the Democratic Party that would fight for progress, in order to keep growing as a people and as a Party. In doing so, they would not separate from the Democratic Party but would be the second arm, next to the traditional Democrats.

Why? What purpose would it serve? Because it represents the reality of the present Democratic Party. There are Democrats that support the 2nd Amendment and do not always agree with the Progressive branch of the Party on some social issues. We may not like that. We might say they do not belong in the Democratic Party? But that is exactly the point. That is the reality - not what we would dream it to be.

But your question being why does Republican Party enjoy such high support, year in and year out? And I would argue that many Democrats leave our Party because they don't feel comfortable, either about the 2nd Amendment or something else entirely. They will not fit in the Progressive branch of our Party. We should still permit them to be part of the traditional Democratic Party. The reality being what it is.