Skip to main content

View Diary: GOP captures 30% of voters who want more spending to create jobs (368 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No it is not... (8+ / 0-)

    Voters are disgusted with Obama. He promised hope and change and delivered more corporate welfare and more war. Voters feel betrayed and they voted NO out of anger.

    •  The millions who sat it out, maybe. (19+ / 0-)
      But the people who did vote for Repubs while wanting more to be spent? Tell me how that's not just dumb.
      •  Well, it is not smart... (0+ / 0-)

        ...but that is not their primary motive for voting. It just means that they are more angry about their feelings of betrayal.

        Obama was really playing with fire when he did all the hope and change, I and the solution you've been waiting for stuff.  It got him elected, but it also set expectations very high. When he not only failed to deliver, but governed without even appearing to even try to fulfill his promises it just made people frustrated and feel taken in. That's why they are voting against him.

        •  this is truly a no-win argument because if he (6+ / 0-)

          had not offered the American people that hope and change possibility, without any guarantees by the way, then either Hillary Clinton would now be facing what the electorate is facing or John McCain and Sara Palin would be.

          would things be different? better? worse? if so, what? please list everything you think would be different if either Clinton or McCain had be President the past two years?

          I just don't get this kind of thinking at all.

          •  easy way to win (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MediaFreeze

            just do what you said you would in the campaign. McCain would have been worse but anyone would have beaten mccain, Obama or Hillary.

            •  I don't recall it as being an easy win? (5+ / 0-)
              •  well you said no win argument (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MediaFreeze

                I meant that it's not exactly a no win argument. Not an easy win argument though but yeah if Obama hadn't sold us out we wouldn't have lost all the house seats. The easy part was making all those campaign promises, fulfilling them would be hard with the fake 60 vote requirement but he could have at least tried.

                •  I think this is exactly it (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  soccergrandmom, PorridgeGun

                  Most of my family are independents. They all voted for Obama because they liked what he was saying during the campaign. When he got into office and didn't do any of the things he spoke so eloquently about they concluded that he was just a another politician willing to say anything to get elected. Now they want to punish him for lying to them.

                  •  well, I guess that is where we divert. (5+ / 0-)

                    I believe that all campaigns are about candidates explaining their vision to an electorate who have the obligation to choose between competing visions.

                    That is why I KNOW there is a wide abyss between hoping and doing. I do not believe that President Obama lied at all, he explained what his vision was. The najority of the people chose it over Clinton and McCain.

                    If the electorate is that ignorant of the balance if power in the American political system they believe that the winning candidate can just impose his vision over everyone else's vision then they don't understand the checks and balances built in to the system.

                    If anyone is to blame it is the electorate for their abysmal ignorance of the realities and very complex system. But that is the beauty of the system, basically it runs on that ignorance and gives the people the right to rectify their mistakes every two years.

                    If the Republicans don't fulfill their promises they will suffer the same fate as the Democrats did this cycle. Maybe? maybe not!!

                    •  Probably not. (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      soccergrandmom, Imhotepsings

                      If the Republicans don't fulfill their promises they will suffer the same fate as the Democrats did this cycle. Maybe? maybe not!!

                      They blamed this economy entirely on Obama. Like the poster says, with a picture of George W. Bush: "I Screwed You. Thanks For Blaming It On The Black Guy."

                      They'll blame any bad economy over the next two years on "obstructionism by the black guy." And Americans will say "okay, we think we can bend a little further forwards."

                      •  you are probably right. (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        wishingwell

                        Because actually i do think the underlying rivers of resentment in this election cycle is very cultural and racial and social and that's is not going away any time soon.

                        •  then democrats need to promote their own culture (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          wishingwell, isabelle hayes

                          The Tea party is behind the cultural war. And by one's "own", I mean the one that's more integrated, not segregated and monolithic like GOP/TP.

                          •  Democrats need to shore up their coalition. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            wishingwell

                            Demographic trends go in the right direction for a coalition based largely on non-white votes, women, LGBT, and younger voters, and Republican victories that have a racist, homophobic component will help with that. But Democrats need to actually deliver, or at least TRY to deliver, on the issues that affect those groups. They haven't been doing that effectively.

                          •  shore up includes getting more green/indep votes (0+ / 0-)

                            Harry Reid got the Latino vote, and Nate Silver/538 predicted him an 85% chance at losing. At least he knows how to find the support of minorities.

                            Not only that, but the Democrats need to deliver on jobs, because voters are under the impression that Republicans will help them with that. They need to show where they brought the jobs. The renewable energy sector, IMO, deserves one big grant for CCP/PWA to provide those jobs.

                          •  I would agree with that. (3+ / 0-)

                            The group that concerns me the most right now is educated whites (which, I would remind everyone, includes a lot of young people). They should be a natural fit for the Dems, but a lot of younger, college-educated people are seriously underemployed or unemployed right now. That's a bad problem that needs to be addressed if we want to keep them voting Democratic. The green jobs thing can help with that, but that's only part of the solution. We need to work on some of the deeper, fundamental issues with the American economy in order to help these people. Outsourcing policies would be a good place to start.

                          •  And by "concerns"... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            wishingwell

                            what I mean is that they're a group we could be in danger of losing for economic reasons.

                          •  The educated whites were certainly pivotal (0+ / 0-)
                             in electing democrats in 2008. In the midterms, the young were the only demographic that had voted democratic as a majority. So, I almost consider them a base. In addition to that, I would like to see more of the 29-40 age group also vote Democratic. That and older is much harder, but tthe first Baby Boomers are there retiring (1945-2010=65), and it's possible with that extra free-time from discrimination against hiring the elderly for insurance reasons, Republicans will try to court the old demographics with something similar to what Bush did in 2002 with his Medicare Prescription Plan. The Republican base (not the tea party) might not try to repeal the health-care, but rather they'll emphasize what they will do for existing Medicare plans.

                            Other obstacles will be redistricting/gerrymandering (just mentioned on PBS tonight-needing possibly an equivalent of 45 House votes over 30 to take over the House) which will require more attention to updates on demographics for getting those minority votes, and doing the best democrats can in face of being out-funded by anonymous donors.

                  •  He didn't do ANY of the things... (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    cato, soccergrandmom, Imhotepsings

                    He said he'd do??

                    In order not to believe in evolution you must either be ignorant, stupid or insane-- Richard Dawkins

                    by sandav on Thu Nov 04, 2010 at 10:08:30 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Your family makes no sense to me (3+ / 0-)

                    a.  what did they like in the campaign that Obama lied about?
                    b.  why did they think Republicans would deliver what Obama promised and failed to deliver?

                    Sorry, I just think it's way more likely that voters are very misinformed and so voted for the party whose agenda is overtly against what these voters say they want.

        •  I guess I recall things differntly (8+ / 0-)

          During his campaign he said he would end combat operations in Iraq....that happened.

          He said he would focus on Afghanistan and send moer troops there, he did. Even if we disagree with him on that and the amount of troops, he did say there would be a big focus on Afghanistan during the campaign.

          He said he wanted to pass healthcare reform, he did if was not exactly what he hoped to get passed or what we wanted to see pass.

          He said he would get Hate Crimes Legislation passed and he did.

          He said he would give a tax cut to the middle class. He did that. I wish it were larger so people would notice but he did that.

          Granted, he has stalled on a few things from the campaign..true.

          But several things he said he would do or try to do during the campaign, he has done at least part of it.

          The problem was I heard no Democratic candidate talking about ending combat operations in Iraq, the good things about HCR, and that Obama cut taxes for the middle class.

          I think think Democrats did not brag enough about the things they DID do and let the GOP frame it all plus the MSM and Rove's corporate funding ads.

          •  True, all true (4+ / 0-)

            but I think it's obvious that many of the people who voted last Tuesday voted in pretty appalling ignorance of the actual facts, like the anecdote about the woman who was voting against Russ Feingold because of his vote for TARP (sic):

            http://www.dailykos.com/...

            How many were angry at Obama for raising their taxes (sic)? Or "government run" health care (sic)? Or a host of other things that are counterfactual?

            Voting for a Republican because you want more government spending to create jobs is just part of this phenomenom. Like voting for more Republicans in Congress because you want the two parties to compromise and work together. Sure.

    •  you talk about disappointment of progressives ? (4+ / 0-)

      Mainly right? Independents have a different view. Don't mix this all up. Fox won the provaganda war in this country. And the White House did not fight back. This has to change.

      •  I don't think so... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        inclusiveheart, mr market

        I understand what you are saying about the propaganda war and the Fox narrative, but I don't think that that is the real reason that independents are abandoning Obama. It is certainly being spun that he didn't compromise enough etc., but think about how things would be different if Obama had come into office and had gotten us out of these wars instead of doubling down. If he had actually gone after the Bush era war criminals instead of giving them a free pass. If he had gone after the bankster robber barrons instead of showering them with unimaginable riches.

        If he had actually been the agent of hope and change that he promised on the campaign trail, this would be a very different environment.

        I think the lesson is that you can't just talk the talk. You need to do what you say you are going to do, or people will simply check out.

        •  That's true, but I think that the reason that (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wishingwell, MrJersey, verdeo

          Republicans captured such a huge portion of the people who wanted more spending is that Obama and the Democrats never really explained that the Republicans were the ones who were hellbent on stopping investments into jobs, infrastructure, stimulus, etc.

          The GOP is much better at framing our party's objectives.  Democrats rarely get on TV and explain exactly who people like Rand Paul are and exactly how devastating their agenda would be for people were they to be able to enact it.  They wouldn't even have to lie the way the Republicans have to.  All they have to do is tell the truth.

          But they Democratic Leadership had decided in January 2009 that they weren't going to go after the Republicans publicly and they never deviated from that plan - a plan that was really ill-conceived.

        •  Every time I see a Republican or Independent (12+ / 0-)

          talk or write about "the issues," they're so full of misinformation and GOP talking points that it's impossible to correct them.  I have seen journalist interviewing Republican lawmakers and politicians and completely allowing them to lie and create a myth without correcting them.  

          Are taxes higher now that when Obama took office?  NO. They're lower.  But I'll bet you 65% of the people in the country would say they're higher.

          Did the health care bill cost or save money?  85% of Americans would say it cost money, instead of saving $1.3 trillion over 10 years.

          "What about the headless bodies, Governor?" --- Members of the press yelling after a fleeing Jan Brewer, 9/1/2010

          by Pangloss on Thu Nov 04, 2010 at 09:02:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  his own security would have (0+ / 0-)

          gotten rid of him if he would have gone after war criminals

    •  Voted no or didn't bother to show up (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wishingwell, PsychoSavannah

      IMO - that's what happened in WI for Russ Feingold. The other side was super motivated and came out in very high numbers.

      "Your Actions Are So Loud, I Can't Hear a Word You're Saying" thanhdlu.com

      by toosinbeymen on Thu Nov 04, 2010 at 08:49:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hard to sqaure that with the data (9+ / 0-)

      According to the exit poll, 90% of liberals voted for the Democrats, and 92% of Democrats voted Democratic.  Those numbers are actually BETTER than in
      2008, when 89% of Democrats voted Obama and 89% of liberals voted for Obama.

      You can argue that those betrayed didn't vote.  But the turnout numbers were almost identical in some key groups than they were in 2006, a very good Democratic year:

      Age    '06  '08  '10
      18-29	12   18   11 
      30-44	24   29   22
      45-64	44   37   44
      65+	19   16   23

      Moreover, 75% of Democrats want to see Obama renominated.

      Doesn't sound like voters feld betrayed.

      Otto is right, this is about 9.6% unemployment.

      The bitter truth of deep inequality has been disguised by an era of cheap imported goods and the anyone-can-make-it celebrity myth - Polly Toynbee

      by fladem on Thu Nov 04, 2010 at 08:50:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Voters don't know what Democrats Passed (7+ / 0-)

      By far the most popular thing Democrats did was the new regulations regarding credit cards. Too bad most people don't know about them. When I list the new laws regarding come on rates, applying payments to lowest interest rates, etc. . . Even Republican friends and family liked it! The Democrats should have had the  government send out mailers to everybody explaining their new rights under this law, and under the health care law as well. Public announcement  pieces should have aired explaining your new rights. If the Democrats pass great legislation and nobody knows about it, what good is it?

      •  Yes I saw not one campaign ad , not one campaign (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        make a difference, johnva

        speech about credit card reform which I think most voters would like. I heard not one word about how what the Democrats have done benefit college students. I heard very little about how people under 26 can now stay on their parents insurance.

        Why did we not hear these good things?

        Granted, it did not fit the MSN narrative that Democrats were going to lose big because of the President and Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid.

        But if we could get more surrogates on ad if campaign ads highlighted these things..but none did.

        The thing that frustates me and my husband were the ads NOT talking about the accomplishments like with credit cards and college funding and so on.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (134)
  • Community (63)
  • 2016 (52)
  • Environment (42)
  • Elections (38)
  • Republicans (36)
  • Media (36)
  • Hillary Clinton (32)
  • Jeb Bush (30)
  • Iraq (30)
  • Barack Obama (30)
  • Law (29)
  • Climate Change (29)
  • Culture (28)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (26)
  • Civil Rights (26)
  • Labor (21)
  • Economy (21)
  • LGBT (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site