Skip to main content

Offered without comment, Election Night by The Ks:


Bill Maher did a great take-down of "undecided voters" recently (see BruinKid's recent diary).  The real question is how to appeal to these people.  They obviously don't care a whit about the actual issues because if they did, they wouldn't be undecided.  They are typically vapid and shallow and want to appear to be principled with their "I vote for the candidate, not the party" BS.

As studies have shown, the more people actually learn about the issues and where the parties stand on those issues, the more likely they are to vote straight ticket.  Voting "for the candidate, not the party" is an intellectually bankrupt position, it is not at all principled.  But it betrays a sense of the importance placed on what others think of them.  They want others to think they are principled rather than uninformed, which is what they actually are.

So rather than try to appeal to them on the issues, that they clearly care nothing about, I think it makes more sense to exploit the importance they place on others' perception of them.

Markos has hit this nail right on the head repeatedly and I only wish to emphasize what he has already said numerous times.

We need to make the case to these people that Obama is going to win and Romney is going to lose, and at this point the only unknown is the margin of Obama's victory.  Pundits and political operatives on both sides have a vested interest in not revealing this information, despite the fact that they know it to be true.  Pundits want to reinforce the horse race narrative of a neck-and-neck race because that's what keeps viewers and listeners tuning in.  Once they admit the race is over, they lose their audience.

Operatives on Obama's side don't want their voters to become complacent while operatives on Romney's side want their voters to believe that Romney still has a chance to keep turnout on their side as high as possible.  But when you look at polling analysts like Nate Silver or look at site like Intrade, it becomes clear that Obama is going to win and probably win big, and Romney is going to lose.

And here's the rhetorical question that they need to be asked, simply: do you want to be on the winning team or the losing team?


This will be short, I hadn't seen mention of this elsewhere; Michele Bachmann has officially dropped out of the GOP race:

WEST DES MOINES, Iowa -- In the wake of a disappointing finish in Tuesday's Iowa caucuses, Rep. Michele Bachmann announced Wednesday that she is suspending her campaign for president.

"Last night, the people of Iowa spoke with a very clear voice, and so I have decided to stand aside," she said at a hastily-arranged news conference here.

"I have no regrets," she added. "None whatsoever. We never compromised our principles." She said she "looks forward to the next chapter in God's plan."


Fri Sep 23, 2011 at 07:29 AM PDT

Grand Old Tea Party w/Poll

by democracy inaction

May I humbly suggest that henceforth, whenever any of us refer to "the GOP" that instead, we refer to them specifically and deliberately as "the GOTP?"  Here's why; there is a widening rift within the Republican Party between the moderates and the extremists.  As the party gets more and more extremist by the day, moderate Republicans have no where to go.  They have fled their party and their ideological brethren now make up the Blue Dog Democratic caucus.  There is no longer any such thing as a "moderate Republican," yesterday's "moderate Republicans" are today's "Blue Dogs."

But among the electorate, lifelong Republicans that consider themselves moderates are increasingly turned off by the extremist Tea Party that has taken over their party.  This point was made poignantly recently when a Kossack wrote a diary (a little help here...I don't remember the author or the diary title so I'm not sure what to search for to find it to provide a link...) that discussed a response he received from a letter he wrote.


This is a...

78%25 votes
21%7 votes
0%0 votes
0%0 votes

| 32 votes | Vote | Results

Continue Reading

There are two competing diaries (here and here) on the rec list that get deep and technical into the cuts being proposed to Medicare and Social Security, one analyzing why they wouldn't be so bad, the other analyzing why they would.

Neither diary is on point.

Continue Reading

Wed Apr 06, 2011 at 06:29 PM PDT

Dear Kos,

by democracy inaction

It's your blog, do whatever the f*** you want with it, which after all is your prerogative.


PS - Though my opinion is inconsequential, I do like what you've done with the place.


Thu Oct 14, 2010 at 08:21 AM PDT

Don't stop the ads!

by democracy inaction

Markos recently wanted to know how this community felt about the advertisements on Daily Kos, some of them from right-wing groups and candidates.  Personally, I think that Markos should keep taking their money and using it against them, which was the option I chose on the poll.

I don't have a Daily Kos subscription (yet) so I don't have the ability to turn the ads off, though if I did, I'd have missed the ad for, which turns out to be a site run by Health Care for America Now (HCAN) with a clever PR strategy using short YouTube videos featuring Jack Black that shine a light on right-wing misinformation campaigns.

Join me over the jump to see them...

Continue Reading

Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 08:24 AM PDT

Election 2010: Fear vs. ???

by democracy inaction

I would like to expand a bit on a comment I made that probably won't be seen but that I think makes a salient point that bears repeating.

In 2008, Barack Obama, our first black president, was elected on a wave of hope and promises of change.  Republicans ran a campaign, as they typically do, based on fear.

My comment was a response to another comment with a clip of Crazy Louie Gomert talking about Terror Babies™ on Anderson Cooper that said "If this doesn't motivate the Dems this fall, I don't know what will."  To be fair , I think the commenter made this comment with tongue firmly in cheek but it is indicative of a mindset that has become pervasive here, which is that Democrats will best be motivated to vote in November by fear.

Continue Reading

Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 11:40 AM PDT

Daily Kos - What is it?

by democracy inaction

(Meteor Blades forgive me for this meta...

I would like to preface this diary with the declaration that I do not in any way speak in any kind of official capacity for Daily Kos.  Though my viewpoint may be shared by others, my remarks represent my non-official opinion and my non-official opinion alone.)

There seems to be some confusion among Kossacks about what Daily Kos is.  From the FAQ, emphasis added:

This is a Democratic blog, a partisan blog. One that recognizes that Democrats run from left to right on the ideological spectrum, and yet we're all still in this fight together. We happily embrace centrists like NDN's Simon Rosenberg and Howard Dean, conservatives like Martin Frost and Brad Carson, and liberals like John Kerry and Barack Obama...

(continued over the jump)

Continue Reading

Tue Mar 30, 2010 at 01:10 PM PDT

Markos links to FDL

by democracy inaction

ZOMG!  Round up the troops!  FDL continues to invade DKos like one of those space aliens that grows in your gut except this one has infected the very mind of this site's proprietor, so much so that he friggin' linked to a story on FDL - the enemy! - in today's Midday Open Thread!

Normally this call would go out to the super-secret facebook group but there is no time, that thread will roll off the front page in a short matter of time and in order to use this for maximum effect to gin up some outrage, we need to get a Jane Hamsher and/or an FDL hit diary on the rec list, stat!

Continue Reading

I have seen scant attention paid to the substance of what should and/or will go into the proposed "sidecar" legislation, other than it will include the items that were being negotiated in the House/Senate conference on the health care bill.  I don't believe that the Public Option is among the items being negotiated and if it isn't, I'd like to know why.


Democrats should:

79%34 votes
4%2 votes
11%5 votes
4%2 votes

| 43 votes | Vote | Results

Continue Reading

Barack Obama has made "bipartisanship" a major goal of his presidency.  This goal trumps everything; we could have good health care reform legislation, but that wouldn't be "bipartisan".  We could have held the Bush administration to the same standards of justice that we hold all other Americans, but that wouldn't be "bipartisan".  We could have pulled our soldiers out of both Iraq and Afghanistan, but that wouldn't be "bipartisan".  We could have ended DADT and DOMA but that wouldn't be "bipartisan".  The list goes on and on and on and because "bipartisanship" trumps everything with this administration, we will always end up worse off than we would be without "bipartisanship".

But let's look at this from the Republicans' perspective; a Democratic president is elected and makes clear before the entire country that "bipartisanship" is his number one priority.  "Change the way Washington works," "disagree without being disagreeable" and all that.  The problem for Obama is that he can call for "bipartisanship" all he wants but he has no actual control over it, he represents only half of the equation and it takes two to Tango.

Continue Reading
You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.


Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site