Skip to main content

View Diary: Independent voters are actually closet partisans (184 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Problems with turnout you mean (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, Oh Mary Oh

    or just problems with the party platform.

    ~a little change goes a long way~

    by missliberties on Sun Jul 17, 2011 at 08:07:22 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Turnout... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      radical simplicity

      ...most probably.

      Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

      by JeffW on Sun Jul 17, 2011 at 08:30:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe just me (not really at all) .. (3+ / 0-)

        .. but I'm more than a little disinclined to think the most frequent and often most identified posters here are AT ALL representative of the base.  Maybe in terms of generalized ideology, but I strongly doubt in terms of their virulent aversion to all things Barack Obama.

        He might have lagging poll numbers, for a number of reasons, but NOTHING like the animosity that exists here, is I think pervasive amongst the broader base ... always important to remember as we suffer through all the angst dKos subjects us to.

        •  This is just crap. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BradyB, pot

          First, a large portion of the "most identified posters here" have a pathological authoritarian-esque adoration of all things the President does.

          Second, virtually nobody, and I mean maybe a handful of people, on this site has an aversion to "all things Barack Obama."  Just because he pushes for policies that run against everything the "Solid Liberals" believe in, or fails to push for those values, does not mean they have an aversion to the person.  

          You want to get an idea of what the base thinks, go to the Pew write up, click on the second page, and take a look at the answers the various groups give to different questions.  As with most things that your group of "we" assumes, your gut is wrong.

          •  Haha, I know you ... (0+ / 0-)

            .. I also know how closely you fall into precisely the category of kossaks I was referring to.  You have your opinion, I have mine ... lets wait and see who's right next November when the dKos hysteria really ramps up and the President wins reelection  .. with his base well in tow .. by a landslide.

            •  So you admit you're a liar, and laugh about it. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              BradyB, Mindful Nature

              And the outcome of the next election will have little to do with either of our opinion.  

              Read the fucking diary.  The base voting for Obama isn't in doubt (your admission that "we" are the base is duly noted by the way).  What is in doubt is whether we will fund raise, canvass, phone bank and otherwise do the things that get the D leaners to the polls.

              But even without that, Obama will win, but you do know that it's only because the Republicans suck so bad, don't you?  It's certainly not that Obama has done anything that anyone (other than you fanboys and fangirls) is excited about.  

              I mean none of the 16% of unemployed and underemployed people are going to say say "hey, I don't have a job, but poor Obama was blocked by least he changed COLA to chained CPI so now mom gets a little less money every month"  and run off to the polls.

              •  You make me smile late at night .. (0+ / 0-)

                .. thank you for the bubbly sending-off-to-bed-feeling.  Even in my darkest hour, the most dreadful of days, I can turn to the cynicism and negativity of you and your ilk and realize ... I'm not NEARLY as miserable and discontented as I thought.   In all honesty, I'd probably prefer a modicum of intellectual and/or political sophistication, but I'll settle for the comforting, frustrated rants and the, admittedly, selfish flush of good fortune it brings.  Thank you.

        •  Actual voters disagree (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Oh Mary Oh, JeffW

          that 58% of New Coalition Dems who don't think Washington (including Obama) cares what people like them think.   The want real progressive policies and feel like they are being ignored (and maybe insulted) so they are disengaged and maybe pissed.  Sounds very much like what the obamasux people express.  If others weren't so busy trying to shut them up or ignore them, we might get a successful strategy.  When they see that the guy they elected isn't trying to get these changes in, they get frustrated   You may disagree, but Obamas campaign team ignores this at their peril

          And ours

          -7.79, -7.75 Gosh!

          by Mindful Nature on Mon Jul 18, 2011 at 12:52:06 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  as I have long said, Obama is not the problem. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Oh Mary Oh, Mindful Nature, JeffW

            The problem lies with the entire Democratic Party leadership.  The Dems simply are not a progressive party, and have zero interest in passing any progressive agenda. If God Himself took over as President, he'd not be able to make the Democratic Party support an agenda that it fundamentally does not want. And neither can Obama--even if he were the actual leader of the party (he's not).

            The entire Dem Party must be remade, from the grassroots up.

            •  That is what Chris Hedges (0+ / 0-)


              He also advocated voting for Ralph Nader, didn't he?

              He also preaches that to make progress with the dems is impossible, therefore the best strategy is to destroy the dem party to rebuild it.

               Sort of Grover Norquist strategy for progressives. Shrink it, and watch it blow up. That'll fix everything.

              ~a little change goes a long way~

              by missliberties on Mon Jul 18, 2011 at 01:20:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Obama is certainly not the problem ... (0+ / 0-)

              but I disagree to a degree with your condemnation of the entire Democratic party.  I think it is far more accurate to simply say that the progressive agenda is a FAR more difficult bundle of policies to push than centrist or even moderately conservative agendas.  That doesn't mean at all that on individual issues the electorate isn't in favor of progressive policies, only that when push comes to shove, when ideology meets actual political, when policy meets the press, actually selling single payer healthcare, or gun control, or climate control, or financial regulations, or any number of other sacred progressive positions is FAR more difficult than sabotaging those same policies.

              Almost every aspect of the progressive agenda involves some degree of sacrifice (we like to call it "shared" sacrifice), or some degree of significant change to the fundamental way we engage an issue, and the sad truth is that people are much more prone to fear, and greed, and ignorance  than they are to hope, or even to courage.  It puts us and our policy positions at a severe disadvantage to the Republicans who TRAFFIC in all of the above, and who have become masters at manipulating and misinforming the populace towards their ends, and away from our collective benefit, hell even our individual benefit.

              And that doesn't even get into lobbying money and the DC powerbrokers and their influence, or the fact that our entire political structure from the electoral system to parliamentary procedures is rigged to ensure no sudden disruptions or radical changes in the status quo, or the fact that the current opposition party has almost literally lost their sense of civic sanity and responsibility, or the fact that no one in this fucking country, especially the younger, typically more Democratic electorate ACTUALLY VOTES.

    •  Boycotting elections? (4+ / 0-)

      That is hardly an effective tactic to get what you want. It elected an increasingly radical bunch of Republicans last year. You do not elect None of the Above by sitting out an election. If you are dissatisfied with Democrats, vote in your primary, run if no one else will. You will have to start with races like the House, because Obama is the best President you will get until 2016.

      •  But the average voter doesn't use it as a tactic (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wsexson, pgm 01, Oh Mary Oh, Odysseus, pot

        They simply aren't motivated enough to care about the outcome. If they haven't seen anything that really appeals to them, they just don't bother.

        Strategic voting is a foreign concept to the average voter. It's a critical mistake to think otherwise.

        •  amen (5+ / 0-)

          Too many of us here assume that because we're political junkies, everyone else is too.  They're not. Most people in the US cannot even name the Vice President.

        •  But I am not motivated (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Oh Mary Oh

          I am unconditionally committed to voting in every election.
          If someone does not vote, their vote is not counted. It matters not whether they are consciously boycotting an election, or simply not voting.
          We liberals need a larger body of committed voters.

          •  no shit. (7+ / 0-)

            But you don't get committed voters by selling a pale imitation of the other party.

            When voters have a hard time telling which party is which, they conclude that it doesn't matter which party they vote for--and therefore there's no point in voting at all.

          •  Be more proactive (3+ / 0-)

            At the very least, you live in a House district and you can play a part in who is the Democratic nominee there.
            I have been happy to be represented by Sheila Jackson Lee, but I am getting moved into Ted Poe's district. I want to see someone in the D column beside his name even if the district votes only 30 % Democratic.
            We Democrats are too dependent on people who only vote when they are fired up. We need a more stable base.

          •  "We liberals" (6+ / 0-)

            are the largest group of registered voters in the country according to this polling.

            Just because our views are marginalized by the media, even though a majority of Americans agree with liberals on almost every single issue, doesn't mean we have a small body of committed voters.  

            As BBB alludes to, we have an intensely committed body of voters.  The problem comes when we aren't motivated to convince the Post Moderns and Hard Pressed to vote for the Democrats, which is usually the result when Democrats act too much like Republicans.

            In other words, we vote, but we don't fund raise, canvass, phone bank, poll watch, or otherwise volunteer unless Democrats are acting like Democrats, or at least giving us the false hope that they will act like Democrats.

            •  The 2010 election (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              radical simplicity

              I spread some $600 among a lot of candidates, especially House members across the country. I lost a lot of races. My own House member is Sheila Jackson Lee, who won 67 % in the primary and 70 % last November.
              I did not donate to Bill White for Governor but every Tuesday I did phoning at the HQ. I was invited to do so by someone in the Human Rights Campaign. btw some people did not like Rick Perry and others did not like Bill White.
              Now I have less money to donate.
              I think I am getting put into Ted Poe's district, which would be safely Republican. I want to see a Democrat who runs anyway and I want to see Democrats who vote anyway.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site