Skip to main content

View Diary: 'We won't have the White House forever, folks!' (326 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Bingo! If he had led his majorities to kick the (12+ / 0-)

    living shit out of the repugs in the heritagecare fight, passed a bill in October with a Public Option, the repugs would have been taught that there was a new sheriff in town.

    Instead his constant concessions to the pugs made him look weak to most voters and dishonest to his base.

    •  Worse, he alienated his base in 2010 (3+ / 0-)

      The House is the disaster it is because much of the Democratic base stayed away from the polls in 2010. The enthusiasm from 2006 and 2008 was gone as Obama triangulated away health care, looking lame in the process and producing a compromise that nobody really likes, though it is progress vs. where things had been going.

      He seems to be trying to repeat that play:  Win the presidential election, then get the party's ass trounced in the mid-terms because he surrendered on the big issues.

      •  Does Obama know we want to help him? n/t (0+ / 0-)
      •  I guess this doesn't get the "zombie lie" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        treatment because you're blaming the prez lol.

        usually this

        because much of the Democratic base stayed away from the polls in 2010
        causes much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

        This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

        by mallyroyal on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 09:52:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The base didn't stay away from the polls, less (0+ / 0-)

          hardcore Democratic & Dem leaning independents did. It could be argued that the lack of enthusiasm of the base didn't inspire more voters to the turn out for Democrats, but that is all the blame we deserve.

          I didn't appoint Rahm as CoS or staff all the economic posts with Robert Rubin's hell spawn. Voters were disappointed in Obama's performance, and that is President Obama's fault.

        •  mally, you're absolutely right (0+ / 0-)

          It's the zombie lie, no matter where it pops up.

          Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
          ~ Jerry Garcia

          by DeadHead on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 12:24:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry, this indeed is the zombie lie (0+ / 0-)

        That prompted this response from MB:

        I am sick of this fucking goddamned lie...

        ...that continues to be spread about who exactly "failed to show up" for the Democrats in 2010. And I am going to HR it every time I see it from now on.

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 10:22:08 PM PST

        We can address the issue without perpetuating this nonsense.

        Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.
        ~ Jerry Garcia

        by DeadHead on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 12:20:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  No. For the umteenth time. (0+ / 0-)

        Lessons from 2008 and 2010

        The voting behavior of the typology groups in the past two election cycles is consistent with each group’s underlying partisan leanings, but also reveals how tenuously each party’s winning coalition depends on candidates and circumstances.

        Barack Obama won the 2008 presidential election by solidifying the backing of not only the Solid Liberal and Hard-Pressed Democratic groups, but also by activating and appealing to New Coalition Democrats and Post-Moderns. Fully 87% of Obama’s votes came from these four key coalition sources, though he attracted a respectable 13% of his overall vote total by reaching out to Disaffecteds, Libertarians and Main Street Republicans as well. (Obama won virtually no support from Staunch Conservatives.)

        The 2010 midterms revealed the fragility of this electoral base. While both Solid Liberals and Hard-Pressed Democrats remained solidly behind Democratic congressional candidates in 2010, support slipped substantially among New Coalition Democrats and Post-Moderns – not because Republicans made overwhelming gains in these groups, but because their turnout dropped so substantially. Where two-thirds of New Coalition Democrats came out to vote for Obama in 2008, just 50% came out to back Democrats in 2010. The drop-off in the Democratic vote was even more severe among Post-Moderns, 65% of whom backed Obama, but just 43% of whom came to the polls for Democrats in 2010.

        Equally important was the shoring up of center groups by the GOP in 2010. In particular, Disaffecteds favored McCain over Obama by a 16-point margin (41% to 25%) in 2008, but backed Republicans by nearly five-to-one (50% to 12%) in 2010. Libertarians, too, were more likely to back GOP candidates in 2010 (63%), than McCain in 2008 (53%).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site