Look at all you people looking for a purge. It's ridiculous.

[LostInAnomie]

You sound exactly like all the Repukes did after Romney got his ass handed to him.

"Romney lost because he wasn't conservative enough!"

"If Romney had stuck to conservative principles, he would have won!"

"We need to nominate REAL conservatives!"

It's the exact same myopic shit. Just interchange "third way", "blue dogs", or "moderate Dems" here and there and you've got the same nonsense. We didn't lose because of those groups. We lost because we didn't show up at the polls.

I know some on here are desperately trying to pass the buck to the "uninspiring candidates", but who nominated those candidates? Democrats did. If you aren't happy with the candidates you keep getting quit whining and work to nominate someone else. Take some personal responsibility for your party, for gawd's sake.

One last thing, quit blaming old people and white men for voting for their preferred candidate. Like it or not, they did what responsible, civic minded citizens are supposed to do: they voted. If we as liberals and Democrats had anywhere the same dedication we would have won easily.

[NYC_SKP]

1. I will say that Grimes didn't lose because of her reponse to the "vote for Obama" question.

I highly suspect illegal activities in the voting process.

Mitch had a lot to gain and quite the apparatus behind him to make this his win.

And in any event, I don't think Grimes' answer cost her many votes, if any.

[Ykcutnek]

2. The last poll to come out before election day says you're correct.

As for Grimes, she came under fire for refusing during a Courier-Journal editorial board meeting to say whether she voted for Obama in 2008 or 2012. But that doesn't seem to matter to Kentucky voters.

Just 39% of voters said she should have answered, while 62% said either that she shouldn't have or that they didn't care.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/10/30/mcconnell-pulls-ahead-of-grimes-in-kentucky-poll/18207783/

But I'm sure that information won't stop some from being butthurt about her answer.

[ollie4]

57. Denial is a betrayal of principles

Grimes did herself no favors by trying to keep secret the fact she voted for President Obama. Was it the only reason for her loss? Of course not.

At the very best, she made herself out to be a politician rather than a believable candidate. Everyone knew she voted for Obama...whom was she trying to kid?

She could have said....of course I voted for President Obama, and I am proud to say I was a delegate to the Convention! I couldn't have voted McCain/Palin or Romney/Ryan because....fill in the blank..... And although I have differences with President Obama I am proud of his record on the economy....millions of people now have health care including lots here in Kentucky. Millions more have jobs. The unemployment rate has dropped to 5.7%. The Dow Jones has doubled and sets a new record almost every day. etc etc etc

And the republicans? They have obstructed President Obama every step of the way, and one of the biggest obstacles to governance was my opponent Mr Turtle! etc etc etc

We need to turn Washington around, and that should start by throwing out the obstructive Repubs and start anew.....etc etc etc We still need change. Now more than ever! The opponents to change are following Mr Turtle's lead.....

She could have turned this into a speech. Instead she was trying to deny Obama even faster than three times before sunrise.

The Republicans were firing all their guns at the Obama administration, and these guns went unanswered. Dang it, it was her job to fire back,. She is the nominee. In the eyes of observers, Obama couldn't be worth defending if she couldn't brag about voting for him.....She was just giving them more bang for their buck. And it wasn't just about Obama....by not defending Obama, she passed up an opportunity to bring the improving economy into the picture as an issue......as it was, the gloom and doom portrayed by the Reps and the media went unanswered! What a lost opportunity. It IS the economy, stupid....

We can't sit around complaining about people not voting.

We have to give them a reason to believe in us. It would be a good start if we believed in ourselves! Our candidates have to stand up for Democratic principles. Not to do so makes it look like there are no principles we find worth fighting for. In Grime's case, she made herself a joke by not standing up for who she voted for.

We can do better.

[CountAllVotes]

3. *bingo*

COUNT ALL VOTES!!!!!!!!

[mother earth]

5. Absolutely, there's good reason when the polls are wrong, now multiply that across the board,

and bingo, we've got a GOP majority. Maddow commented on how full of confidence McConnell had been over the few weeks before the election. The fix was in, and he knew it.

We better stop the amnesia from 2000 and 2004, they are screwing us over with how they steal and manipulate elections. It's not as though there aren't safeguards, but they NEVER get put into place and then all we hear about is trash talk on the voters afterwards. Screw that, how about calling it for what it is when the polls, the safeguards of elections everywhere, point in the other direction from the tallies.

WTF? We let them get away with this time after time.

[mazzarro]

27. WTF? We let them get away with this time after time.

What is Democratic Party's response to most of the shenanigans? - nothing

[mother earth]

131. Yes, exactly, our party lets them get away with this and then through MSM the blame is placed on

people not voting. I don't think true blame lies with the voter, it lies with the manipulators and enablers.

[Scarsdale]

32. Exactly

McConnell had to PAY people to attend his rallys. The fix was definitely in. He loaned his own campaign $1.8 million. So many Democratic candidates were up in the polls, then lost, it is beyond belief. Before the next election, there should be a complete overhaul of how we vote, plus a drive to get EVERYONE signed up, and I.D.d. The gop does not win elections when all the rules are followed.

[still_one]

102. Of course not. She lost because KY is a red state, and they were worried about their Coal industry

[blkmusclmachine]

4. I like going Right. Maybe in 20 years we can nominate Bristol Palin for Prez! The Republican will be

worse, of course!

[Niko]

6. Total bullshit, to a point

Yeah, you're right that they lost because people didn't show up at the polls.

You're wrong about placing the blame completely on the voters. They didn't vote because the Democrats didn't stand up for their principles. The Republicans you quote at the top of your post were absolutely right. Romney wasn't conservative enough for them. They didn't show up at the polls because of it. Same thing here.

Maybe Alison Grimes could've said "HELL YEAH I VOTED FOR OBAMA AND WOULD DO SO AGAIN!". That would've motivated Democrats to vote for her instead of staying home.

The Republicans stand up for their beliefs. The beliefs just happen to be completely wrong and evil and dangerous and hateful, but they fucking stand up for them, and their similar minded hateful assholes show up at the polls to vote for them because of it. Where were the Democrats. standing up for Obamacare, for Obama, for all that he has accomplished? They instead ran away from it all, and this is what happens.

People want LEADERSHIP. The Democrats don't have the courage of their convictions. It's pathetic.

[mazzarro]

31. +1000% - my friend! - n/t

[Scarsdale]

37. So true.

The gop walked in lockstep behind W, never saying a word publicly about him. The democrats should have done that for President Obama, put up a united front. He has LOTS to be admired for, shrinking deficit, lower unemployment, higher stock market. They should have spouted off about all those points. When President Obama was invited to campaign for someone, he drew enthusiastic crowds. I doubt this is an isolated case, but in Rockford, Illinois, they ran out of ballots.!!! Some people waited, then got tired and left. Things that make you go - hmm.

[mstinamotorcity2]

41. Yes

yes, yes.

[markpkessinger]

43. Spot on! n/t

[AtomicKitten]

45. exactly right

[I hate liars]

48. 100% agree

The root of poor Democratic turnout and Independent votes for Democrats in the midterms was a lack of courage and leadership by Democratic candidates.

Al Franken's re-election is a case in point. He was elected by a few hundred votes in his first election. This time, he won by more than 10%.

How many election cycles do we need to live through before that Democrats absorb that lesson?

[Art_from_Ark]

113. Al Franken was elected in a reliably Democratic state

He didn't have to put up with a lot of crap that Democratic candidates in states with >40% Obama voters had to put up with.

[ybbor]

72. Totally agree

The Dems and their leadership were walking on eggshells so as not to offend the independents while at the same time they were completely offending their base.

Instead of rallying around the major accomplishments made, although I feel they should have done more, they ignored, or worse denied, taking part in them. Shitty leadership and horrible, if any, strategy.

Dr. Dean's 50 state strategy was genius and successful. Why did the leadership abandon it again? We need to bring it back for 2016, and 2018, and especially 2020.

[IronLionZion]

103. Do red states have lots of liberals staying home?

I didn't know Kentucky had so many democrats! Damn, where were they hiding and why didn't they come out to beat the turtle and Rand Paul?

Begich in Alaska and Brown in Maryland were openly pro-Obama and lost big. Maryland was particularly painful as its a dark blue state.

[Niko]

134. Yes, they do have Democrats

While the majority of the population may be Republican, not all Republicans showed up to the polls, same as Democrats. Most people, Democrat OR Republican don't bother to vote. What was it, like a 36% turnout?

A state with a minority of Democrats can still have the Democratic candidate win if every single Democratic voter actually voted while the Republicans stayed home. The only way to get that done is for Democratic politicians to stand up for their principles and give their voters a reason to show up.

[still_one]

105. Then don't vote. They didn't vote for Grimes because they thought republicans would protect their

coal jobs better than Democrats in the coal industry

[mariawr]

115. No. They voted against the President.

Because the media twenty four seven told us over and over and over that his approval numbers were bad, never mentioned the good things he had accomplished and that he was evulll! And KY voted the way the RW media told them.

Our messaging sucked.

Running away from you leader didn't help either.

Need to prop up the progressive wing of the Dem Party....progressives have more in common with regular folks than calling yourself a "Clinton Democrat". Ditch the doc, New Democrat, whatever.

Good old fashioned populism and progressive platforms are what is needed .

[AngryOldDem]

123. So you don't think all the candidates distancing themselves from Obama didn't make a difference?

That is the point here. When elected officials and candidates can't seem to back the head of the party, what message does that send to the voters?

[still_one]

133. Not in the red states.

[Scuba]

116. + another

[AngryOldDem]

125. Spot. On. n/t

[JaneyVee]

7. Here's an idea:

Stop looking for leaders and be one.

I'm seriously considering putting my lucrative career on hold and either running for Congress/Senate of NY or trying to get a job for a political campaign that could lead to a WH job.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

12. I'm open to donating to bloggers.

One of the DK crowd got elected on Tuesday, I think to his town council, but you've got to start small.

[1StrongBlackMan]

28. What do you mean start small? ...

You mean I can't just run for president ... running my campaign from my couch?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

30. You can, just don't expect to win :) nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

34. Okay, then ...

I'm going down to my state Democratic Office and tell them I want to be in charge!

[Scarsdale]

38. Good idea.

How many jobs pay PENSIONS along with lifetime healthcare, after one short session? These clowns are NOT in it for the people, it is for themselves. Work a few days a year, lots of perks. Lobbyists with plenty of $$$$. What's not to like?

[on point]

8. The rank and file didn't nominate these people. The insider leadership did

In fact when the people nominate true dems to run against the blue dogs the party goes out its way to shut them down. Perhaps the dem party leadership no longer represents the dems anymore at all. Only themselves. (Notable exceptions exist of course)

[1StrongBlackMan]

29. And how do these "insider leaderships" ...

become insider leaderships?

[NanceGreggs]

49. Well, that's typical of you, 1SBM ...

... asking a question you know no one here will answer.

[Odin2005]

56. Sucking capitalist dick.

[1StrongBlackMan]

69. Yeah, okay ...

I see you are destined for political greatness!

[treestar]

118. You've come round full circle

For example, explaining why people vote for those who will protect the coal industry. They make their living in it.

People voted for McConnell over their perception of how they could make a livelihood, which is more important to them than the environment or the planet. Like loggers voting to clear cut the forests.

People aren't going to volunteer to be the ones without a way to earn money. The Socialist Revolution is farther away than some people seem to think.

[Glitterati]

108. Can you say Ashley Judd?

Of course you can! She mentioned running instead of Allison Lundgren Grimes and the party insiders shut her down so fast, she's not uttered another word about politics.

Really! Do you think SHE would have denied voting for Obama? ROFL, I think not.

[treestar]

119. People like to blame everyone on "the leaders"

and we are to assume the "leaders" are the Evil Ones, because apparently they could get everyone else to be more liberal if they chose? Probably they talk to the people and get a gist of what the people want. Many people here, their true problem is that they don't want other people having a say, and are just grousing that the Power isn't in their hands. The Power to force others to do as they wish.

[magical thyme]

9. BS. I showed up. I hadn't had power for 3 days, hadn't showered for 3 days. Slept on the floor

for 2 nights ahead of the election. And after feeding the animals, putting emergency snow packs together to protect my food, I headed to town hall voted.

Turnout was very low for my tiny, very red village, which means that GOP voters didn't show up.

We still ended up stuck with LePage. I saw 3 LePage signs for every 1 Michaud sign in the common areas. I heard 3 LePage ads for every 1 Michaud ad on the radio.

Somebody threw a lot of money out there to bury us.

[Progressive dog]

10. Thanks

It is obvious that in order to be elected, candidates must cater to their constituents.
Many on here seem to have missed that part of how elections work.

[hedgehog]

21. I think what many here are saying is that if you want voters to show up at the polls,

you have to run candidates who will make a difference in their lives, not 3rd Way advocates who will cover for banks and Wall Street.

[Progressive dog]

25. The OP was dead on

[treestar]

126. How do you know what people who didn't bother to vote

would have voted for? They might have voted Republican.

To win you have to appeal to people who care enough to vote. Those are the only people worth governing, since they decided to be part of the process. People who chose to drop out deserve what they get.

Attempting to overcome apathy is not worth it. The apathetic will always "yeah but" and drag you down with their apathy and negativity. It would be very expensive, too. They require so much effort to drag them to the polls. It is only natural politicians reach out to those who care enough to participate on their own.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

11. The voters already handled the purge.

And, since the Senate is on a six year cycle, they'll finish up with it in 2016 and 2018. Those who fail at campaigning get purged. It is the way of politics.

[SomethingFishy]

13. Keep telling yourself it's all the fault of the voters..

and keep losing elections.

Obama got elected President.. TWICE, people show up when they want to see change. Obviously people wanted to see change, the WRONG people.

Quit blaming the voters or it will get worse, you want people to vote, give them something to vote for.

Oh and most of us on DU voted.

[heaven05]

23. Democrats DID have something to vote for!!!!!

Last edited Fri Nov 7, 2014, 11:01 AM - Edit history (1)

Other Democrats and they didn't. Plain bottom line TRUTH. And yes I'm sure 90 percent of DUers did vote. Maybe more. Wasn't enough. Now boner and turtle will be able to create havoc and mayhem with our political system virtually unopposed. Every democrat that did not vote has made this fact reality.

[Skidmore]

76. How the hell do you suppose candidates are nominated to begin with?

The voters are involved. Now if you do not want to get involved in the candidate selection process at the beginning as a voter, then don't complain. Voting starts way earlier than the general election. It starts with a bunch of people meeting and then trying to identify who will put their name foward, who to support.

[LostInAnomie]

88. Want a progressive candidate? Get one nominated.

Shouldn't be hard to do since you seem to think everyone that didn't vote wants.

[treestar]

121. True with turnout less then 50%

It should not be too hard to round up the majority with a candidate they would like.

Another thing is it is assumed these people would vote for a progressive liberal. That's a mighty big assumption.

[bhikkhu]

93. It wasn't the voter fault - it was the non-voters

I'm ready to congratulate anyone who voted, for either party - that's what makes democracy great. As for the great majority who didn't bother, I'm not sure what to say. I think there is a great deal of institutional disillusionment feeding that. It may come largely from the other side, but we certainly haven't got much going on as far as a working program to challenge it.

[treestar]

120. It is the voters

If it's not the voters, we are in big trouble. Who then has power in our country? If it's not the voters, things really are messed up.

And there is nothing that stops people from voting (except the suppression efforts, if they don't apply, no excuse) and nothing to stop them from voting for who they want to vote for. Why should they do otherwise?

[Rex]

18. It won't work anymore, the Third Way minions can't play enough CYA this time.

The worst thing we ever did was listen to Reagan Democrats.

[Orsino]

137. Clearly, the only alternative is business as usual.

Surely, Comrade, you do not want Jones back?

[woo me with science]

15. Third Way talking points. Trashing thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025767160

[Zorra]

42. +1 nt

[RufusTFirefly]

51. Yup. And the tried-and-true fallacy of false equivalency to boot. n/t

[hifiguy]

61. i am with ya, woo.

[L0oniX]

82. They can't help it.

[LostInAnomie]

92. So brave.

Hard to argue with the brilliant strategy of plugging your ears and screaming "LALALLLALALALALALA! Can't hear you!"

The party's future is in great, wise hands.

[mmonk]

16. It's the Third Way that purged the coalition

LineNew Reply K&R
that made the Democratic Party a great party that lasted from the 30's to 1980. Now it's in trouble.

[Rex]

17. Amazing, people are doubling down on denial.

Creating fantasy out of whole cloth.

[JI7]

19. the internet attracts a lot of Drama

[heaven05]

20. bottom line

"we didn't show up at the polls" and got our asses handed to us. Simple as that. Nothing complicated.

[hedgehog]

22. Romney lost because most of the time he couldn't explain why he should be President -

except when he thought he was in private with "his" people. I think Democrats lost because we had too many candidates afraid to tell people how they were different from Republicans ( or else - they weren't different enough!)

[randome]

24. What's more unseemly is the delight of some to pile on Obama.

Tear him down as much as possible and then, maybe, people will vote differently. Way to practice teamwork, people! (By joining the GOP? I don't get it.)
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. I'm from Florida but now live in California

I believe Bill Nelson is the only statewide Democratic officeholder and that includes all the Cabinet positions. DUers would call him a DINO, a Third Wayer, a Blue Dog, et cetera...

Would the state of Florida be better off with a Republicant in his place?

BTW, Joe Manchin is a very conservative Democrat. Would the Democrats in West Virginia be better off with a Republican in his place?

[steve2470]

107. excellent point, at least Nelson votes with other Democrats vast majority of the time

Manchin probably does also. There's absolutely no way Bernie Sanders could get elected in Florida. Would I vote for him and love it ? Hell yes, and so would the other loyally Democratic voters here. He would be tarred as TEH COMMUNIST (a huge lie of course) and 99.999 % of the Republicans would vote against him and a large percentage of the independents would vote against him.

Politics is the art of the possible. Once Florida and WV move farther left, we can elect more liberal people.

[Maedhros]

33. It is the responsibilty of the Party to motivate the electorate to go to the polls

and vote for the Party's candidates. Failing to do so is the fault of the Party.

It is not the blood sworn duty of the electorate offer up their ballots by rote whenever the Party calls for them.

[randome]

39. Not really. It's the responsibility of the electorate to express themselves.

They didn't this time. Or rather 64% of them did not.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[jeff47]

74. They expressed themselves by not voting. (nt)

[treestar]

127. Amen! Geez, I cannot believe people really think

they are entitled to sit home and whine and complain when they have the chance to get involved. Then just blame the people who are involved for not doing what they, the stay at home, wanted! Talk about entitled. Even royalty doesn't get that today.

[valerief]

35. Fuck that. Voter suppression, media brainwashing, and fuck-all gerrymandering screwed the pooch! nt

[think]

36. Sure hope you're not referring to Allison Tant-Richard ......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017224941

[stupidicus]

40. my my, whatta devastating indictment

not

just because they didn't show up at the "polls" for the same reasons many cons didn't is merely a citing of similar behavior that in no way undermines their respective "Network Moment-like" rationales behind their decisions.

Convention has it that non-voters have only themselves to blame. “If you don’t vote, don’t complain.” The dictum assumes that voters are more virtuous, more entitled to democracy’s spoils, than non-voters. But voting is neither a virtue nor a responsibility. It is a neutral civil right, like the right to marry, have children, earn a graduate degree. Not voting like not marrying or not procreating future taxpayers is a right of equal weight, a choice as defensible as the choice to vote. Both are exercises in freedom. To blame a citizen for not voting is like blaming another for voting for a crook. The blame is sanctimonious either way, suggesting the existence of an ideal voter out there, prescient and unfailing. No such voter exists, but the cult of the voter as superior citizen persists. http://www.counterpunch.org/2002/10/28/in-defense-of-not-voting/

Furthermore, since when does a lack of membership or participation in a groups activity bar the moral and 1st Amendment right to declare something wrong -- a complaint?

ANd the idea that you have to make a time and effort commitment to effect change before you can complain about that in need of changing, is just plain silly.

And any political junkie should know that money chooses candidates these days, and has for quite some time.

Membership to that vote-owners’ association is a matter of money, that legal swindle euphemistically called campaign finance. One man, one vote is an ideal at a table rigged for high-rollers. If, as Benjamin Disraeli put it, “there is no gambling like politics,” one grand is ante for the game, one million is a congressman’s eternal friendship, a senator’s returned phone calls, a president’s earlobe for a few minutes. That cool million is also out of 200 million American voters’ league. The wonder is that 100 million Americans still have the heart to vote.

Nobody's is contesting the simple math associated with the number of voters that showed up, so bury that strawman, and realize the reasons they didn't. Your silly demand that every voter become some sorta leader sounds remarkably like the "bootstrap" BS rightwingers peddle, that willfully and blindly ignores the many factors that makes it silly and simplistic and far from a viable solution as well, because it ignores all hurdles in the way.

Gee, does this mandate from you apply to all those burdened by 2-3 jobs and kids, etc, etc, etc, as well?

[Dragonfli]

60. Very well stated, but to no avail I'm afraid as you are responding to a talking point

being disseminated by one of many, rather than a posters original thought.

You are correct of course, but it's hard to discuss the message by addressing the messenger, You should perhaps send a letter to the think tanks where the indictment originates.

The only thing productive one can do with a messenger is to tip them if you feel they delivered it well.

[stupidicus]

77. I know

and in many ways that's (the futility) analogous to perhaps the most common denominator behind the abysmal voting percentages in this country.

It is also likely the same reason why so many here spewing this stuff don't engage rightwingers, even though that's the only means by which they have for changing their povs and finding/making allies.

The biggest reason I object to these efforts as a lesser of two evils voter who always votes for evil, is because of the who owns the moral highground component of them.

As a participant in the lesser of two evils effort, I find it impossible to claim it over those who reject participating in what can be reasonably construed as increasingly intolerable alternatives that will only escalate as long as the money is speech doctrine is the law of this political land.

[RKP5637]

44. Voting wins elections! Staying home loses them! Not a lot of cerebral work to see this, understand

it IMO!

[markpkessinger]

46. The Democratic Party has an existential choice to make . . .

Since the mid '90s, the party has courted the big money donors to be found in the financial/corporate sector, while simultaneously purporting to continue to retain its historical identity as a populist party of common people. Those two sets of interests are fundamentally at odds with each other, and ultimately cannot coexist in the same party. Those big, corporate donors will always expect their pound of flesh in return, and as recent elections have been demonstrating, voters are no longer willing to buy into a faux populism that tries to serve two masters. Whatever set of interests the party is going to represent, if it expects to have any success at the polls, it must represent those interests authentically. So long as we continue to try to have it both ways, we will continue to lose.

[RiverLover]

78. This is the root of the problem. Nicely stated.

[defacto7]

47. This election makes absolutely no logical sense.

But the real show is about to begin. Hold on to your asses... those who didn't vote for some ill-conceived ideological reason will begin to feel what they are responsible for. We all will.

[KT2000]

50. much of what is said here

should be enlightening for the Democratic Party. There are reasons we lost and they should be hashed out for future elections.
What motivated the old people to vote?
What did not motivate younger people to vote?
Is running away from Obama's record a winning strategy?
Are the Democratic politicians clear in stating their positions?
Do Democratic politicians know what the concerns of the electorate are?
etc.

You should not discount the fact that fox, Limbaugh, et. al. have whipped a certain segment of our population into a frenzy over the "evil Obama" and the liberals. They are extremely motivated to vote because Obama gave the Chinese our national parks, is going to take all of the guns, is training Homeland Security for a civil war, is training children to fight with Homeland Security, is setting up FEMA camps, is trying to turn the US into a suffering African nation, is going to turn the US into a Muslim nation etc.
You have the likes of Jerome Corsi and his peers generating paranoid emails that circulate in the online world for years - further angering the older white men.

Democrats need to figure out how to confront this idiocy because their numbers are growing and they ARE motivated to vote. They are also very motivated to share their paranoia with others and get them on board too. Apparently that is not so difficult to do.

We have to learn from this election and discussing it is one way to do that.

[yallerdawg]

53. I always blame the people who vote for Republicans.

No matter what you do, "You can't fix stoopid."

Unless you fund education at every level, which of course for some reason Republicans would like to get rid of - both funding and education.

[Odin2005]

54. The Pukes are able to craft a narrative that gets their people to the polls.

The Dems, with the exception of 2008, have not done that, mainly because any such narrative would risk scaring off corporate donors.

To paraphrase Napoleon (who was talking about how to get people to fight), if you want people to vote you have "to speak to the soul in order to electrify them".

FDR did that and acted on it. Obama did that in 2008, but then he pissed it all away.

[JEB]

90. +++++++++

3rd way are not inspiring. Except to corporate donors.

[NorthCarolina]

55. Keep running third-way candidates and you will continue to have low turnout. People

don't vote if they feel that their votes don't matter, and there's barely a plug nickels worth of difference between third-way and the GOP. Vote for Corporate Candidate A, or Corporate Candidate B.....thanks but no thanks.

[L0oniX]

84. +1

[LostInAnomie]

95. Then, maybe these morons that sat on their hands...

... should work to get a liberal nominated instead of sitting back and whining because one wasn't handed to them.

That would that some kind of actual effort though. Whining is so much easier.

[MisterP]

58. DU says, "we oughtta stop rewarding failure": you say, "nu-uh"

and the last time the 3wayers worried about a "purge" they purged Cegelis, Lamont, McKinney, Halter, Romanoff, Sestak, Grayson, Kucinich, Buono, Lutrin, Rev. Sykes, and Weiland

[LostInAnomie]

110. What exactly is your argument?

The line on DU is that people didn't turn out to vote because the candidates weren't "real" liberals. McKinney, Grayson, Kucinich, etc., are solid liberals that failed to get reelected.

[baldguy]

59. Authoritarians do purges.

Funny that the people screaming at the highest volume for a purge of "third way", "blue dogs", & "moderate Dems" - basically anyone understands that we have to win elections before we can do anything - are the ones whining the most about authoritarians.

[Number23]

67. They're also the main ones that keep doing exactly what's in this OP

Screaming that it's because Obama/the Dems weren't liberal enough. They're the flip side of the Tea Party and just as ignorant of the sentiment of the majority of Americans as well as reality.

Conventional Wisdom: "Dems lost because they ran from the success of their own damn party, particularly its leader. And they did that because Obama and the Democratic party are viewed as too liberal by large swaths of Americans, despite their successes."

DU "Wisdom": "Obama and the Dems' crypto-fascist Republican-lite policies caused voters to elect people even more conservative!1"

You just gotta

[FSogol]

70. +1 n/t

[tammywammy]

79. +1 n/t

[LostInAnomie]

97. Exactly

[treestar]

124. Yep. And a purge of a party in a free country is impossible

How are they going to force the people they don't agree with out?

[baldguy]

130. By buckling down, starting **NOW** to lay the groundwork for 2016, 2018 & 2020 and beyond

And actually find & promote candidates that they agree with who can also win primaries & election campaigns.

But of course that would require a little more effort than typing on a computer keyboard over the morning coffee. And anyone who points out that a great deal of work would be involved - well they're just RW trolls who hate Democrats.

[AverageJoe90]

62. Though I disagree with some of the wording, there is indeed some truth to that.

With that said, however, it does appear that there was indeed also a problem of Democrats sometimes really not doing enough to defend liberal and/or progressive issues.....which may help explain why several progressive measures otherwise passed, even as our candidates lost. After all, it was Harry Truman who said that people will choose Republicans who sound genuine over seemingly phony Democrats, even if the actual truth is the other way around(and these days, it really is, quite often).

[vlakitti]

63. I found this quote over at Hullabaloo

It's from a site called Down With Tyranny.

It reads:

"One trend that was interesting last night is that clear, strong progressives like Jeff Merkley (OR), Tom Udall (NM), Brian Schatz (HI) and Al Franken (MN)-- who had massive right-wing money thrown at them-- won, while conservative Democrats like Mark Warner, Mary Landrieu, Mark Udall, and Kay Hagan stumbled and the most conservative Democrat of all, Mark Pryor, lost badly. In the House, conservative Democrats-- Blue Dogs and New Dems-- lost everywhere, even in Democratic districts. Almost all of Israel's Red-to-Blue recruits lost, as did many of his Frontline incumbents....

"The Blue Dogs were effectively wiped out and this was a very bad cycle for the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. More analysis for the rest of the week. - See more at: http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2014/11/a-very-bad-cycle-for-republican-wing-of.html#sthash.vtzyhuFH.dpuf"

It seemed relevant for here.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

64. Funny how the Republicans get to have the likes of Bachmann but we can't have a Kucinich.

[adirondacker]

98. Get back in the attic where you belong! This discussion is for seasoned Bullshit artists, er I mean

politicians.

in case you didn't get the attic reference...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016105284

[Spitfire of ATJ]

99. I'm treated more like a bat in the belfry.

[adirondacker]

100. Sounds fairly "middle class". You should be happy you have a roof over your head.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

101. True,...but it's the noise around here. It's like clockwork.

[adirondacker]

106. Is it a Ding Ding Ding or Loud Dong?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

111. I do what I can with the occasional tinkle.

[treestar]

122. They get out and vote for Bachmann

That's one thing we have to give them.

They believe the shit right wingers spew.

We aren't simply entitled to our Bachmann, we'd have to get out and vote for them, or believe in their proclamations.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

136. Bachmann is an example of a generation of Republicans raised to believe their own lies....

Things like:

Reagan was the greatest President in History
Tax Cuts increase revenue, create jobs, clear up your pimples, etc.
Business is over-regulated.
Schools only got bad when they stopped school prayer.
If abortion is outlawed than women will stop being sluts because Rome fell because of orgies and God hates sex.
Gays are an abomination.

Oh,...and Marcus is straight.

[7962]

65. THANK YOU!!! Although it didnt take long before the "it was fixed" brigade to show up.

And your second sentence says it ALL. I did hear the exact same from the right in '12. And how many of them stayed home?

[RoverSuswade]

66. The timing was right for the "gop wave."

We can point to many reasons the GOP won. The national Democratic party did not have a coherent message. It was mainly bashing the republican party (ie Debbie Wasserman Schultz). Democrats just weren't motivated. When I went to vote the people ahead of me were only in the booth for less than 5 minutes. That means they probably just punched the vote straight ticket button (Republican). There were about 50 people in the voting place and I only saw one person under the age of 30 - a college kid that looked like one of the Romney kids. Maybe all the old white people there were wistfully thinking "how nice it would be to go back to the peaceful jolly Reagan era." I have no answer why we didn't see more TV campaigning by POTUS. It would have helped. And running away from him didn't help Pryor, Hagan and others. I have a feeling the next two years will be excruciating with Senate hearings a la Issa, votes for impeachment, and stalemate. Pelosi and Reid will come off as obstuctionists. Thus the GOP will be clamoring for a Repub president to be elected to allow Congress to "Finish the job the "amurcan people' want. I hope I am wrong. As much as I admire Nancy and Harry I wish new leadership would emerge for minority leaders (Warren, Franken, Booker). And we are wasting the best organizer around by not restoring Howard Dean to chaiman of the election committee. The Democratic Party BEGS for enthusiastic leadership.

[DCBob]

68. There is no need to purge the party.

The problem is with GOP lies, RW media, big money in politics and apathetic voters. We don't need to throw out our people.. but we do need to throw out our strategy. We need to focus on how they beat us and figure out how to counter it. Purging the party will do more harm than good and that's exactly what the Republicans want us to do.

[FSogol]

71. K&R. Well said. n/t

[whereisjustice]

73. hahahah - the 3rd way is circling the wagons. Funniest post mortem ever.

Let's talk about this:

spying, destructive fracking, torture, wall street crime, jobs to asia, police brutality, run away health care and education costs:

It's hard to get people excited when you have two political parties enthusiastically endorsing these polices. These are important, seminal issues to the young, minorities and anyone with an intellect who gives a damn about the world around them.

Even Democratic candidates ran away from Obama and ACA - two issues that clearly differentiate the Democratic Party from Republicans.

How fucking lame! People saw that! They saw the Dem Party acting like a bunch of chickenshits.

To the history books as one of the most colossal fuckups in modern US history.

DNC should be thankful it wasn't worse.

Don't fall for this "who me?" bullshit. 3rd way should be flushed down the toilet for the septic waste it is.

If you want people to vote, give them something to vote for and then give it to them when you are elected.

[workinclasszero]

80. You are so right!

Did the democratic party push for jail sentences for the wall street thieves that destroyed the economy? HAHAHAHAHA!

So now Joe Blow thinks the lousy economy is all President Obama and the democratic party's fault! The inaction is all the proof he needs. That and fox bagger party 24/7 365 days a year propaganda is the cherry on top.

And look at the federal response to Mike Brown's execution by the racist militarized Ferguson MO police force...oh wait.

Did the party really expect to motivate its base by turning a blind eye to horrible injustice like that?


Did the party stand up for President Obama's record which is a million times better than the drunk frat boy's was before him! Or how about the ACA...marijuana legalization...raising the minimum wage..NO..NO..NO!

I mean it takes a real genius to see what the hell happened. The democratic party and their candidates told their constituents to FUCK OFF!

So they stayed home!!! DUH!

And why did the democratic party commit this heinous act of possible suicide?

Because...fox news won't like us?!?!?!?!?

[L0oniX]

81. ^^^THIS^^^

[NaturalHigh]

83. People need to realize that a left-wing candidate can't win everywhere.

Trust me - a liberal Democrat will never be sent to Washington by my home state (Oklahoma) in my lifetime. If a conservative Democrat can win a district here (which is still a long shot), that's one more vote in the Democratic caucus.

Tom Coburn got his political start by beating a conservative Democrat incumbent in my congressional district. Before then, a Republican had never won this district, but none of the Democratic congressmen I remember could ever be called liberal, at least not by DU standards. Personally I like President Obama, but any politician trying to get elected to national office here is committing political suicide by embracing the president. Hell, we had a very conservative Democratic candidate in the governor's race, and he got blown away by Mary Fallin. Liberal ideology just won't go over here.

I'm pretty sure Oklahoma is not unique in this fact. Yes, in a large state like Texas, there are probably some representatives from blue districts who could be called liberal, but do you really think a true liberal is going to be elected to the U.S. senate by Texans?

If the best you can get is a conservative Democrat, then harping on about ideological purity is a waste of time and guaranteed to elect a Republican.

[whereisjustice]

86. Purity again. Well, only a purity extremist thinks it's best if NSA spies on their children.

[steve2470]

109. +1 nt

[Scootaloo]

85. No, it's really not the same

When teh Republicans say "well, we need to move to the right," it's ridiculous becuase one wonders just how much more "right" there is left for the mto move into.

When Democrats say "we ought to move left," well holy shit, there is a lot of space there - Because the Democrats are a center-right party. The left is a fallow field, untouched by ANYTHING from the democratic party.

My advice to you, LostInAnomie, is that if you're content with shitty halfassed conservative neoliberal candidates... Swap parties.

[LostInAnomie]

87. Horseshit.

Want a lefty? Get a lefty nominated. Shouldn't be hard to do since you seem to think that's what potential voters are stomping their feet and pouting for. Until then, it's pointless whining.

My advice to you, Scootaloo, is that if you are content with a Republican House and Senate keep up with the apologetics for the purists that didn't vote. If you're fine with constant attempts to dismantle the ACA, blocking Obama's nominees, attacks on right to choose, and attempts to roll back marriage rights for gays, keep doing what you're doing. It's been remarkably successful.

[Scootaloo]

89. Yup, I plan to.

Just as I always do. I always aim for the mot liberal candidate on a ballot.

Maybe you should do the same, instead of bitching about their existence.

Until then, enjoy trying to get Republican'ts elected. It worked out so well Tuesday, after all.

[LostInAnomie]

91. Right... Voting Dem is helping to get Repubs elected.

Since, apparently, you're living in some kind of bizzaro dimension, I'll say this: Your last post made complete logical sense and in no way betrays a complete lack of depth about basic political realities. You are clearly a brilliant scholar.

[Scootaloo]

132. If you back a Republican't in the primaries, you know they'll lose to a Republican

Every time. Every time. Democrats cannot out-conservative the Republicans, nor should htey try.

Instead of sniffing your fingers and getting snarky that I should support "lefties" (what, would 'pinko' be too big of a tell for where you stand?) maybe you should join me in doing so. Help me put the most liberal, left-leaning fuckers we can on those ballots.

[Eko]

94. Im with you fellas.

We need better candidates and to turn up at the polls more. The fault lies with both, pretty simple. A purge would be addressing only one part of the problem and seems infantile and 3rd way Democrats aren't going to win much for us except for a few times.

[IronLionZion]

96. We can have a 50 state party or a purged party

but we can't have both. Even where I live, in the bluest part of a dark blue state, our liberal dumbass candidate decided it wasn't worth campaigning much or doing much GOTV, and lost big in a surprise upset. I wasted my time and money on liberals who take my vote for granted.

Say what you want about red state moderates' policy positions, but they go all over their states and work for each vote like its their job.

[BrotherIvan]

142. If you are speaking about Coakley, isn't that something else really?

Why would they run a candidate that the voters have already rejected? They voted for Scott freaking Brown over her. They don't like her. I don't think anyone was thinking about her policies. I don't know her entirely well, but she seems too aloof for MA.

If it's someone else, I do understand, as a person from California, I am shocked at who we sometimes produce from this deep blue state. It shows how deep the machinations truly go that run this party. I mean, why was Dianne Feinstein never opposed? I'm hoping when she retires, we can get some new blood int there, but there is no doubt they will be party approved and bought by Silicon Valley.

[IronLionZion]

146. Anthony Brown, Maryland

Not a bad candidate on policy positions, but he just didn't work very hard to get votes. He's not a great public speaker either.

[BrotherIvan]

147. That was a surprise

I hope your state doesn't suffer too much before you can throw the republican bum out.

[AgingAmerican]

112. Where is your, "Stop trying to purge liberals and the left from the party" OP?

I must have missed that one.

[Eko]

144. Thats the ol

"when did you quit beating your wife?" argument.

[LadyHawkAZ]

114. Everyone loves a scapegoat, nobody likes a mirror.

This thread has gone much as I predicted.

[treestar]

117. +1 zillion

As you said, take some responsibility. People love to blame others in this country. And why do they expect to be "inspired" by the candidates? This is a republican form of government, of the people and by the people, we should be willing to elect someone to do these jobs, since we get to do that, unlike tyrannical countries. Why do the people have to be charismatic and inspiring? Boring people might be best to get the job done. Geez. Hollywood disease, or something.

[GeorgeGist]

128. Did you notice that the after the Romney purge ...

The Republicants kicked our ass?

[simak]

129. It's not about turnout.

"We lost because we didn't show up at the polls."

Are you saying there's not a mass of non-partisan voters who express individual preference for one candidate or party or the other in each race?

Campaigns are a multifaceted prospect, and the concept of majority cannot rely on turnout of "our" voters alone. We do currently appear to be getting only a minority of "independents". Why is this?

Stock market aside, I do not agree that the economy is getting substantially better. Where I work, we are facing enormous pressure from offshore. The office adjacent to mine let four good people go last week due to declining sales.

Health-wise, this has been a good year for me, yet I paid more in premiums and out-of-pocket than ever before. Crap, my out-of-pocket was higher this year than my entire year of premiums used to be, and I didn't even get sick. Arguing that we slowed healthcare inflation is just saying "it could have been even worse". That's not comforting - I want things to be *better*. PPACA was supposed to make things *better*.

My mortgage is still upside down, and I bought my home years before the bubble burst.

We're gonna have to really nail this turnout thing if you hope to make up for everyone in the middle who thinks things have been getting worse.

"One last thing, quit blaming old people and white men for voting for their preferred candidate."

You're right - we can't blame them for doing their civic duty. But you know what? A lot of those people used to vote for us. Say what you want about turnout, but we have to increase turnout by two people for every independent who starts voting for the other side. I wonder if we have abandoned the middle.

[RedCappedBandit]

135. Why didn't we show up at the polls?

[Stellar]

138. Yep....Steal the vote, works all the time if you're a Repukes!

[ncjustice80]

139. If you vote for Repukes, it is neither responsible nor civic minded.

Fuck every one of them.

[Erose999]

140. Please tell us more about Tuesdays electoral victories by centrist Turd Way Dem candidates. Grimes,

Nunn, Carter, John Barrow, and the rest.

[MadDAsHell]

141. I generally agree with you, but at least the purge is an idea for change...

I'd rather have us coming up with ideas of how to win future elections than 1) assuming that every election we lose was stolen and/or 2) referring to half of the electorate as "fucking idiots" for not voting for our candidate (posts that wouldn't show us in a very good light if a fencesitter/independent were to read this board).

Neither of those actions make meaningful progress towards winning future elections. Even if a purge isn't the answer, at least it's a proactive attempt at coming up with a solution.

[grahamhgreen]

143. Lie. We are looking for Dems who support the policies of the American people.

[LostInAnomie]

145. Well geez! Who could disagree with a well formed platitude like that?