Democrats Had Winning Issues, Just Not Winning Candidates

[applegrove]

Democrats Had Winning Issues, Just Not Winning Candidates

by Dave Jamieson and Samantha Lachman at the Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/05/democrats-midterm-election-_n_6108722.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

"SNIP.......................


Binding ballot initiatives that would raise the minimum wage passed by wide margins in four red states on Tuesday night. And yet the Democratic candidates who've been championing a minimum wage hike all year long got trounced in elections from coast to coast. The Republican Party, which has steadfastly opposed raising the federal minimum wage, took control of the Senate and picked up even more seats in the House.

This dichotomy didn't apply just to the minimum wage. On the whole, Democratic issues fared pretty well on Tuesday. It was the Democratic politicians who did not.

Whether it was the minimum wage, paid sick leave or reproductive rights, majorities of voters in states around the country made it clear they aren't on the same page as congressional Republicans on these issues -- even if they didn't show much love for Democratic candidates.

"Republicans scored major political victories, but I don't believe there's any mandate for what their governing philosophy is," said Brad Woodhouse, president of Americans United for Change, which supported Democrats. "Progressive issues continue to animate where the American people are."





.........................SNIP"

[Mass]

1. They did not have a overarching winning strategy or message.

They talked to different group separately and generally, it was to pander to them. Lousy messaging.

[Dwayne Hicks]

2. What issues?

All I heard was "we're not Obama" and constantly running away from the ACA and voting records. Throwing the president who happens to be your party leader under the bus is never a winning strategy. Unfortunately the country will now have to suffer the consequences.

[madamesilverspurs]

3. We had a terrific candidate for Congress.

Here in Colorado's 4th district, Vic Meyers personifies the region. But we were abusively gerrymandered in the last go 'round, ostensibly sacrificed by the party to protect a couple of 'safe' districts (including one that was lost last night, anyway). Meyers was endorsed by labor and veterans, while Ken Buck, his opponent, was endorsed by Citizens United. The seat, vacated by Cory Gardner, went to district attorney Buck (ethically challenged and rebuked by the state supreme court for constitutional violations).

Add to that mess the steaming pile that posed as the state party's rules for candidate support. Big donors wanted to support Meyers but were wanting to know he was supported by the party; and the party said they wouldn't support him until he brought the money. Deadly stupid catch-22 rule that cost us dearly. Absolutely no fault to Meyers, but a whole lot of Colorado's dems are rightfully furious with leadership that can't/won't see beyond the boundaries of Denver.

[KG]

4. yeah, right.

[Isoldeblue]

5. Some truth to that, but

I'm convinced that a few races (like in FL and Kansas) were NOT won fair and square. Add the fact that minorities stayed home, we didn't have a chance in hell of winning. Shame on those who didn't vote! And they are the ones with the most demands and the most needs. Go figure??????