Skip to main content

Public Policy Polling (PDF) for Daily Kos. 8/14-15. Likely voters. MoE 3.73% (No trend lines)

Roy Blunt (R) 45
Robin Carnahan (D) 38
Jerry Beck (C) 5
Jonathan Dine (L) 3

Favorable/Unfavorable/Not sure

Blunt 41/41/17
Carnahan 41/50/9

Oof. Carnahan is getting hammered in the favorability department, but her situation isn't crazy out of whack once you compare the partisan crosstabs:

             Dem   Rep   Ind
Blunt
Favorable     14    68    37
Unfavorable   69    18    41

Carnahan
Favorable     84     7    36
Unfavorable   12    84    48

So what's going on? Our old friend, the intensity gap. I had PPP pollster Tom Jensen break it down:

Robin Carnahan is winning 78% of Barack Obama’s voters and Roy Blunt is winning 76% of John McCain’s voters so if the electorate this year was the same as in 2008 when Missouri was basically a tie, this race would be tied as well.  But we find a likely electorate this fall that voted for John McCain by 7 points.  This dropoff in Democratic interest is pretty reflective of what we’ve seen across the country so far this election cycle. In the Massachusetts Senate race we found those who showed up had voted for Obama by 20, in contrast to his 26 point victory in the state.  Our final Virginia poll last fall found a McCain +1 electorate when Obama won the state by 6 and our last New Jersey survey saw those voting at Obama +11 when he really took the state by 15.

Democrats are not doing badly this year because people who voted for Obama in 2008 are switching over to the Republicans.  There’s actually little of that happening in any race across the country.  Almost the entire problem for the party is their voters being disengaged.  And while there’s no doubt that’s going to hurt big time this November, it means the relevance of this fall’s results to the 2012 election is limited if the Obama machine can replicate its 2008 turnout operation when he’s back on the ballot. The GOP really isn’t growing support- it’s just benefiting from Democratic complacency.

That's the nut of it. If our people turn out, Republicans gains will be minimal. If we don't, we'll suffer accordingly. This poll makes that point clearly -- if our turnout matches our 2008 numbers, this is a tied race, a real nail biter. If the current malaise persists, it won't be so close.

Raw data here.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:46 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

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.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  THANK YOU KOS.. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bythesea, gas28man, ctkosh

    FINALLY Someone doing a Multi-Way

    IT's good to see others listed, even when they are of no consequence, and to see if they can be bumped up to be Balance-of-power.

    (I am not including FL-Gov in this, Crist may just run away with that, OR VT-Sen when Bernie's up, He'll take the Independent or Progressive Line)

    •  No Rooting Section! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aexia, askew, sandav

      The big problem I see is the fact that the Democrats have no big "rooting section" to influence the real voters.  The GOP blogs all toe the party line, regardless of who the idiot is that they nominated.

      Democrats, however, as evidenced by this blog, insist on "all or none" politics and go home and sulk if some little section of a piece of legislation that they like happens to fail to get into a bill.

      We need to root hard for Democrats -- in some cases even Blue Dogs -- since having any Republicans in charge of managing a right wing agenda would be a total disaster for this country.

      •  Well Said! Perhaps all the Dem bashing... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        liberalej

        from the left is contributing to the enthusiasm gap?

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

        by sandav on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 10:07:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The largest factor in the enthusiasm gap (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Detlef, Superribbie, Brian B, Willa Rogers

          Is that Barack Obama is NOT on the ballot. There were significant numbers of voters that came out in 2008 or registered for the first time or re-registered after not voting for a long time because Barack Obama was on the ballot. Further, there was a significant number of people that ONLY voted for Barack Obama and for no other candidates or issues on the ballot at all. One need only look at the differences in voting on the down ticket races to see those effects in action.

          This part of the electorate had little interest in the Democratic Party as a whole. And while it isn't massively large it is significant enough in size where elections that were close that Democrats pulled off in Red or Purple districts last time out might just go the other way.

          These are the voters that won't be showing up unless you can get to them and get them to the polls. These voters were not swayed in 2008 by any bashing of Democrats or of Barack Obama. They wouldn't be swayed by it now.

          The people you lament about ARE the ones engaged in politics. Some of them are activists. Almost all of them will be going to the polls in November. The same can't be said of those not actively following politics or have little to no interest whatsoever in politics at all.

          The Administration and Congressional Democrats moving legislation and policy to the right and attacking or ignoring the elements of the Left that were trying to hold the line or move legislation and policies to the left didn't help. Thus, there will also be some issues with turnout or even third party voting but you are more likely to see these in liberal strongholds rather than in contentious purple or red districts.

          That other group that is out there are the folks that voted Democratic last time but have had their enthusiasm sapped by the economy. The number one issue is jobs and, rightly or wrongly, the Administration and Congressional actions or inactions in this area are perceived to be a failure and are going to play a role in the November elections. This is something that the folks you lament about were warning about and, in some cases, trying to change.

          The problems for the Democrats aren't here. They are out there. If you aren't aware of that you haven't been paying attention.

      •  Independents Not Buying: Change We Can Believe In (0+ / 0-)

        We're losing ground to the Nihilist Party because Independents actually expected change from a party that frankly has enough corporate owned Dems in it, to prevent real, progressive change. Independents look for results. They see only "Bad Ones". We progressives can argue & argue about whatever, but too many Independents are flipping to the infamous "Party Out of Power". Of course the GOP is in power with its unending filibuster assault on all progressive legislation(More like ALL legislation). The Independents do not see that.

    •  Next up? (0+ / 0-)

      Illinois, pretty please.

      Corporations are people; money is speech.
      1984 - George Orwell

      by Frank Palmer on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:46:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  guess the dems never heard of red meat before. (9+ / 0-)

    take us for granted and then go on the talking heads shows and spew right wing talking points.

    great way to show you are a democrat.

    Republicans===the party of the 1% rich people in America. Or in other words..The Party of NO!

    by jalapeno on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:48:44 AM PDT

    •  Or bones (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      teknofyl, emsprater

      The only thing today's Dems know is:

      "Where ya gonna go?"

      or the Gibbs version:

      "Oh I think they will"

      Yet when asked on Wednesday whether progressives might stay home in November, Gibbs seemed casually confident that they would not.

      "The Obama administration seems to be feeling sorry for itself...Spare me. The country is a mess." --Bob Herbert

      by joanneleon on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:39:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Vote for the lesser evil... (11+ / 0-)
    isn't stimulating Democratic voters...who would have thought?

    I did campaign on the public option, and I'm proud of it! Corporat Democrats will not get my vote, hence I will not vote.

    by Jazzenterprises on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:49:57 AM PDT

    •  gee, the 'lesser evil' -- new concept? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      angeleyes
      Or reality?  Aren't WE the 'reality-based' party?  So if we reject the lesser evil and stay home, we elect the GREATER evil.  How is this better?  Does it make us feel righteous and pure?  

      What utter bullshit.  

      Andrew Mellon & GOP: 'In a Depression, assets return to their rightful owners'

      by Tuffie on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:58:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Everyone know MO Dems are the Professional Left.. (7+ / 0-)

    They have the nerve to care about DADT
    Endless War
    the Economy
    Etc..

    They should Sit Down, Shut, and be Drug tested

    Right Mr. Gibbs?

    Heck of a Job Rahm, Robert,

    And Sadly their boss too..

  •  Democratic "complacency" my ass (9+ / 1-)
    This is Democratic demoralization. Democrats aren't sitting on tehir asses because they think the Dems have it in the bag and there's no reason to vote. They are disgusted and demoralized by the fucking retards in Washington DC who call themseslves "Democrats." They are embarrassed to be associated with thsoe fucking idiots.
  •  The way to get our turnout up (5+ / 0-)

    May be to take a page from the Republicans and inspire fear and loathing of the opposition.

    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

    by blue aardvark on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:52:06 AM PDT

  •  A PPP poll on TPM website today (8+ / 0-)
    shows Toomey ahead of Sestak and gaining. It's easy to ridicule and expose the RW morons, but if Dems don't vote, they're going to win anyway. It's sick and sickening.

    Could go on forever.

    I'm tired of being the shovel brigade after those elephants. - Sen. Tom Harkin

    by RhodaA on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:52:33 AM PDT

  •  I'm not voting (3+ / 2-)
    Recommended by:
    TJ, ThatsNotFunny, Malumaureus
    Hidden by:
    fcvaguy, ezdidit

    I'm from the left and I'm not voting.  I think we need to send a clear message that democrats will not get the vote unless they represent truly progressive causes.  It may hurt short term as more republicans get elected.  But in the intermediate term we should get a rising progressive movement.

    Obama, Summers, et al. serve only to neuter the progressive movement.

    Join me in not voting this fall!!!

    Jim
    commentsongpe.wordpress.com

    •  I'm just as disgusted as you are ... (9+ / 0-)

      but I don't think that's going to help us either.

      If it's served to us and it's unpalatable but we smack our lips like it is the best thing we ever ate, how will the chef know to change the dish?

      by emsprater on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:54:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You win a gold star. (6+ / 0-)

      Sen. Reid is no different than the Republicans who demagogue the issue. He's no different than Sarah Palin, Steve King, Rush Limbaugh. Enjoy the company.

      by Jonze on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:55:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  This won't have the desired result (19+ / 0-)

      If dems don't turn out in this election the result will not be that elected officials decide that they should move further left; they will play more to the center, as they did after the 94 midterms.

      Not voting is not a solution.

    •  The only... (9+ / 0-)

      statement that forgoing the constitutional right to vote makes is idiocy.

      So many fought so hard to have it for themselves...what a slap in the face to them to discard your own.

      •  They fought for our current mediocrity. (0+ / 0-)

        When presented with two horrible options, refusing to partake in the process is a perfectly acceptable, patriotic statement to make.

        If I wanted to read how much Obama sucks, I'd be on RedState, not DailyKos.
        --@jameskass

        by ThatsNotFunny on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:02:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  and you... (6+ / 0-)

          surrender your right to complain about the consequences, but something tells me you'll try anyways...

        •  It's not acceptable (7+ / 0-)
          I've talked to people who don't vote.  They're mostly morons that don't know up from down.  Nice company.

          My grandparents would go out in a hurricane and crawl through mud if that's what they had to do to vote.  I think if I tried to convince them to not vote, they'd spend a good amount of time chewing me out and rightly so.

        •  There are more than two options. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          trashablanca, ezdidit

          I agree that failing to vote is a bankrupt choice.

          It immediately cuts the value of your vote in half.

          In the normal two-party math, a vote taken from 'D' goes to 'R'.  A vote merely taken from 'D'  has half the impact.

          In multi-party math, there isn't a giant difference between sitting home and voting for some "other" party, but there is a huge message difference in several ways:

          1. If, as in 1992, a significant vote goes to a third party with a clear political message, that message will be advanced as major party candidates seek to poach those voters.  Where do you think all of the deficit-cutting fervor came from during Clinton's tenure?  It was an effort to corral Perot voters.
          1.  At the very least, it identifies some number of people willing to vote, and votes that might be won.

          People who don't vote don't matter.

          LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

          by dinotrac on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:28:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And that attitude is why we'll lose big in Nov. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jakewaters

            Give me a reason to come out. Give me a reason to vote for the politicians I once believed in.

            Don't dismiss me or people like me who are disillusioned by the process and the bullshit.

            If I wanted to read how much Obama sucks, I'd be on RedState, not DailyKos.
            --@jameskass

            by ThatsNotFunny on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:30:49 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You COULD vote AGAINST them all (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ThatsNotFunny, trashablanca, dinotrac

              by writing in "None of the Above".

              That NEEDS to become a viable option, and it will do so only if people actually use it.

              If it's
              Not your body
              Then it's
              Not your choice
              AND it's
              None of your damn business!

              by TheOtherMaven on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:41:15 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That is better than not voting. (0+ / 0-)

                It's a distinct "I vote for something (or nothing) else", as oppposed to, "Oh, what the heck.  I'll just go along with what everybody else says".

                One is something you can try to win, the other is nothing.
                There's not much upside in trying to pitch your campaign to the lazy.

                LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                by dinotrac on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:04:42 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Bingo (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ThatsNotFunny

              How about some Presedential signing statements that fire up the base tacked on to some bills?  

              They may be viewed inside the White House as small political potatoes but don't you think that during a famine of dissillusionment maybe that starch is enough to nourish our folks to keep the faith?  

              And it frames the discussion to things that democrats want and most importantly, things that democrats and progressives want to talk about.  

              Yes it will upset the nut-sackers and wing-nutty types and yes, it is threatening for administrationers who are crouched in a defensive positions who will have to adopt a new attitude if not a new strategy.  

              Hope they haven't forgotten how to go on offense.  

              Rahm, Gibbs and the beltway boykins  seem to just dump it in from the blue line and start skating backwards.  Hell, even Caribou Barbie could beat that system.

              O, you powers that be, listen to this 'ThatsNotFunny' guy, you need his vote.  

              Give him a reason to go out and feel good that he's voting D, go on, I dare ya.

              "I'll press your flesh, you dimwitted sumbitch! " -Pappy O'Daniel

              by jakewaters on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 10:19:57 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  But you will be dismissed. (0+ / 0-)

              People who don't bother to vote are not high value targets.

              LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

              by dinotrac on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:05:35 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  People who don't bother to REGISTER are (0+ / 0-)

                not high value targets. I'm registered and can probably be convinced by November. I guess that makes me a Dem-leaning liberal small-i independent, despite never voting for a Republican in my life).

                I'm not lost yet. The party gives up on disillusioned unenthusiastic registered voters like me at their own peril.

                If I wanted to read how much Obama sucks, I'd be on RedState, not DailyKos.
                --@jameskass

                by ThatsNotFunny on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:22:13 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  That is not the purpose of this website. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Aexia, fcvaguy, trashablanca

          (Almost absurdly and, certainly, quixotically,) we are for More and Better Democrats here, and not necessarily in that order.

          Read the freaking FAQ. Staying home is Republican advocacy. You're on the wrong website if you think abstention is loyal to Dems:

          Daily Kos will be what Daily Kos is, and that oftentimes evolves. I know everyone wants their clearly defined rules, but nothing is that simple.

          This site is CERTAINLY NOT for all Democrats. Joe Lieberman learned that. Blanche Lincoln is about to learn it.

          This site is about more and better Democrats, not necessarily in that order.

          I were you, I would leave and read some more FOXNewsOnline. Then get your ass in gear back here and drive people to the polls!

          I'm sorry to insult a long-time member of this community like you with an HR, but even a newbie like me has more sense than to think it's an option on this website to urge leaving Republicans unopposed anywhere.

          No Quarter for REPukEs!

          TAX THE RICH! They have money! I'm a Democrat. That's why!

          by ezdidit on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:32:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't need to read Fox News Online (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Aexia

            I get enough Obama bashing right here on DailyKos.

            If I wanted to read how much Obama sucks, I'd be on RedState, not DailyKos.
            --@jameskass

            by ThatsNotFunny on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:34:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  That HR was unwarranted. (0+ / 0-)

            If I wanted to read how much Obama sucks, I'd be on RedState, not DailyKos.
            --@jameskass

            by ThatsNotFunny on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:37:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Take it up with moderators. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ThatsNotFunny

              I really wish you would reconsider in light of some of the principled argument above. Abstention makes no sense. period. ...not if you really are a Democrat...and I can see that you're alienated...but the alienated and disaffected are all the Repukes can count on this cycle.

              TAX THE RICH! They have money! I'm a Democrat. That's why!

              by ezdidit on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 10:43:47 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Please understand: (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                ezdidit

                I want to vote. I'm just not enthusiastic about it, and I'm not willing to vote for a candidate that has been working against the issues that matter to me. I will not reward bad governance with a vote that they did not earn.

                And truth be told, come November I probably will vote after all. But at this rate it's 50/50.

                As for the HR... Look, I'm not asking for a 4, but removing the HR would be a good-faith gesture in the spirit of healthy debate. Just sayin'. Until expressions of disillusionment with the candidates and the process are expressly forbidden in the FAQ, I think it's a little harsh. The issue of lack of enthusiasm cannot be addressed when the people who lack it are HR'd out of the discussion.

                If I wanted to read how much Obama sucks, I'd be on RedState, not DailyKos.
                --@jameskass

                by ThatsNotFunny on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:16:03 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  removed it earlier when you asked the 1st time. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ThatsNotFunny

                  Where are you? What district? I'm in NY's 9th - Weiner country!

                  imo, the only solution is to give Dems an irrefutable majority. When they see a coalescence of outright leftists socialists, Progressives, Liberals, Moderates and rank & file Labor Democrats backing them up, they will have to be held accountable to better standards moving left.

                  Sestak was a limited win against the DNC, but Halter's run against Lincoln - should Lincoln lose - will be held up to ridicule the DNC as out of step. This is an insurgent campaign season, and I like being called an underdog insurgent!

                  I will NOT be alienated! And in NC, where I'm planning to move, I really have some work cut out for me winning hearts & minds to force Heath Shuler to vote like a Democrat. (Elaine Marshall should win against Burr, but it's no slam dunk at all.)

                  TAX THE RICH! They have money! I'm a Democrat. That's why!

                  by ezdidit on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:49:17 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I thank you for that. (0+ / 0-)

                    I'm registered in NJ-12, represented by Rush Holt. I haven't checked any polling but it's a pretty safe D district.

                    The area is fairly Blue but getting redder by the day. I held my nose and voted for Corzine, but was seriously considering sitting that one out. In the end, I'm glad I didn't even though it wasn't enough to get him into office. He should've never won the primary.

                    We need more like Rep Weiner, for sure. I'd trudge through the snow uphill both ways to vote for a progressive like him!

                    If I wanted to read how much Obama sucks, I'd be on RedState, not DailyKos.
                    --@jameskass

                    by ThatsNotFunny on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 12:12:04 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Weiner runs unopposed... (0+ / 0-)

                      He doesn't need any more encouragement...he'll even run for NYC mayor when it suits him. He may even win! He used to talk about his constituents as "the middle class and those struggling to make it."

                      (He'll need a super-long bumper sticker. He's Schumer's protege, so he ought to print it on a cartoon of Schumer's coattails. May even run for the Senate in ten years...God-willing!)

                      Anyway, NJ 12 can use strong Progressive influence in the district, and you're more important than you know!

                      TAX THE RICH! They have money! I'm a Democrat. That's why!

                      by ezdidit on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 12:25:35 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

    •  Here's My Question To You (15+ / 0-)
      If Republicans take control of the House let's say... who is actually WORSE OFF for that happening... the party insiders you're upset with, or YOU and EVERYONE ELSE who will have to deal with the consequences of all the shit they do for the next hundred years?
    •  Our leaders need confidence that they can win (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Davidsfr, BruinKid, trashablanca, ezdidit

      the next election after what politicking and leading they've done...so you're going to help kick them out when you feel they've not been 'progressive' enough? THAT will instill confidence for sure.

      Too big to fail = too big to exist.

      by Liberaltarianish on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:01:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Because This Worked So Well (13+ / 0-)
      In 2000... or 1994... or 1980... or 1968! Keep it up, I'm sure it'll work this time!
      •  Do these people really prefer right-wing (9+ / 0-)

        governance?

        I've lived through Carter, Clinton, and now Obama. It is always the same: They aren't perfect so let's punish them by withholding support. It hasn't resulted in more progressive government yet.

        •  Yes, they do... (9+ / 0-)

          Naderites prefer right wing government, so they can complain without actually having to DO anything.

          DARTH SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
          LANDO REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

          by LordMike on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:11:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Let's face it: opposition is fun (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            infojunkie

            Being in a political movement when you're out of power can be exhilarating. Sure, there's anger about the state of things, but when so many people are feeling the same righteous indignation, there's some perverse enthusiasm. Everyone on "your side" can criticize the incumbents and there's very little disagreement, since you all agree the status quo isn't tenable.

            And campaigns are fun. Because everyone can simply put their hopes and project their own personal desires onto a candidate. Everything seems possible, because it's all in the future and all hypothetical.

            Then you win power. And then the coalition frays. Because people forget that "change" means different things to different people. And suddenly big problems -- even ones that aren't our fault -- become our responsibility, and derail other items on the agenda.

            It's the same old story. And it affects both the right and the left. But personally, I wonder if it hurts the left more. It's easy to dislike the status quo, as all liberals/progressives do. It's another thing to agree on what needs to change.

            If liberals need to learn one thing it's to accept that change is a long, hard slog. Neither the halycon days of the New Deal or Great Society were anywhere near as exciting as people make them out to be. And the changes they enacted took the better part of three decades. People here want instant gratification, and seem incapable of accepting that, yes, politicians screw up, but ultimately every political race comes down to two choices.

            (And yes, that's even true in multiparty countries, where you can vote for whoever you like, but then have to accept that it can usually only come down to one of two coalitions, where compromises will have to be made and changes kept limited.)

        •  They also prefer rectal-cranial inversion (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ezdidit

          given their pathetic lack of judgment.

          "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." John Lennon

          by trashablanca on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:24:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Except... (9+ / 0-)

      the message they'll get is that they weren't conservative enough, and they'll go even FARTHER away from progressive values.

      Simply not voting is one of the dumbest things an activist can do.

    •  That's not the message they will get... (10+ / 0-)

      ...in fact, the message will be the opposite... liberals are unreliable voters, so it is pointless to cater to them.  

      You will drive the caucus right.... way right with such a strategy.

      I strongly urge you to reconsider.  If progressives don't and vote, the Democratic party will never cater to progressives again, and the right will take over everything.

      Do you really want to cut off your nose to spite your face?

      DARTH SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
      LANDO REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

      by LordMike on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:06:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  HR'd for Republican subversion! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aquarius40, trashablanca, gas28man

      Take it or leave it: Your position is indefensibly arrogant and stupidly wrong.

      Not voting should be hidden, unseen.

      TAX THE RICH! They have money! I'm a Democrat. That's why!

      by ezdidit on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:10:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  if you do that (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BruinKid, trashablanca, ezdidit

      they will run to the center, because they will realize that they can't rely on progressives to win.

      People panic too much on this site.

      by thematt523 on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:30:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not voting (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BruinKid, trashablanca, ezdidit

      Will not send any message except Dems don't care and will live with whatever crap the Republicans do.

      The old cliche about taking the ball and going home is immature at best and stupid at worst.

      Not voting ensures the Republicans another decade of ruining this country.

      But knock yourself out complaining and staying home.

      Just remember - if you do not vote, you have essentially given up your right to complain.

      Republicans will vote even if they hate their candidates. Democrats never know when to get off their high horse and do what's best for the Party.

      Democrats have been screwing this up forever. That's why they are never in power long enough to anything done.

      The older I get, the less I am able to deal with stupid.

    •  I'm sick ... no really, I mean physically sick (7+ / 0-)
      I don't write diaries here. I mostly lurk and then sometimes write comments. I once even got trusted user status - swoon - but I have to tell you, for the past 6 months this site has been making me physically sick. All the little anxiety/nervous disorders I used to suffer have started to return, because of the rhetoric on this site.
      I've been coming to DK for about 3yrs. I used to love coming here and reading about the enthusiasm for our party, and President Obama. I thought that with enough of us fighting, over time we could eventually get the things we were after.
      I phone-banked and canvassed in Iowa and Illinois for President Obama. I was won over by what I naively thought would be his ability to "get things done". And now? Yes, I've been sorely disappointed by many of the same things many of you are disappointed by.  I don't need to list them.
      But now I'm sick. I am SO worried about this "enthusiasm gap", and all the angry declarations of "I'm not voting", that I am losing sleep worrying about what will happen if the GOP gets the majority in one or both houses. And seriously, I get it. I know you're angry. But when I look at the platform of the GOP, and what they are promising to do if they get the majority, it literally makes me shake. I'm scared. So many people have and will write more eloquently about the corporatocracy our government has become. Messing with social security, Medicare, gay rights, climate legislation etc. are at the top of the GOP list of things to wreck havoc with. And the super rich will win.
      So please, for my health's sake and the sake of our democracy, don't stay home. We can't afford it as a nation.

      The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. Plato

      by manneckdesign on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:36:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not this (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BruinKid, trashablanca, ezdidit

      I'm pretty far left Progressive, and I'm as disgusted as anyone else about the kowtowing to the Rethugs, Blue Dogs, and Corporacrats, if not even more so. But I'll still come out and vote in November. I'll be holding my nose as I do, but I'll vote Dem all the way unless I can vote Green without allowing a Rethug win.

      That said, I won't be lifting so much as a finger or giving so much as a penny to the Rethug-Lite Corporacrat B-Team.

      We really need to focus on growing Progressive candidates from the school board on up, and a long-term strategy to re-make and re-brand the Democratic party from the bottom up and the outside in. I'm sick to effing death of being given the "choice" between voting for either the lesser of two evils or the evil of two lessers.

      Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

      by drewfromct on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:36:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I will be voting (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew, BruinKid, trashablanca, ezdidit, QES

      What's with so many Sarah Palins here? quitters.

    •  You're not sending ANY message (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BruinKid, trashablanca

      You've just rendered yourself irrelevant and invisible.

      De-orangify Congress: Justin Coussoule for Oh-08 http://www.coussouleforcongress.com/

      by anastasia p on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:23:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Understand the feelings but ... (0+ / 0-)

      I understand the feelings and it's not easy to advocate not voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

      But I think it's become very plain that the center and right of the democratic party fully take the left for granted.  The democrats haven't done too much for the average Joe in quite some time - you'd have to go back to Johnson.

      Prior to Obama getting elected (and prior to Clinton getting elected) we had a budding progressive movement.  In both cases, the progressive movement was neutered.  I think it's safe to say that many (most?) of the democratic elite hate the left.

      The only way any democrat is going to move to the left and support policies that go against big money is if they feel pressure.  If they know they have our vote in the bag no matter what they do and we forever accept the argument that we should vote for them because they're better than republicans, then we'll never have progressive politics.

      I think we need to take a longer term viewpoint.  In this era of globalization, neither Carter, Clinton, or Obama have actively pursued progressive policies.  

      I'll vote if there's a progressive candidate.  Otherwise I won't.  And I think we need to start working on an alternative to democrats.

      If that kicks me off dailykos, so be it.

      Jim
      commentsongpe.wordpress.com

  •  One more time ... for clarity ... (9+ / 0-)

    if you want the voters you consider to be 'your people' to turn out, you have to give them something to inspire them to 'turn out'.

    Being the party of 'hey, at least we're not them' or of 'we're not as bad as them' isn't inspiring.  Rachel put this out in the open the other night, yes, the politics of 'fear' works on both sides, but it doesn't work as well as the politics of giving folks something positive to vote for.

    There's been change, there's been progress.  But there's also been a ton more capitulation, triangulation and downright near symphonic overtures from our leaders to the opposition party to inspire the intensity needed to get 'our people' out to vote in the same numbers as in the fall of 2008.

    If it's served to us and it's unpalatable but we smack our lips like it is the best thing we ever ate, how will the chef know to change the dish?

    by emsprater on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:53:32 AM PDT

  •  This is the state that sent Truman to the Senate (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, drewfromct, ezdidit
    Albeit, via the Pendergast political machine. You'd think a Democrat would proudly embrace that tradition in order to motivate their fucking base voters to show up.
    •  That was 70 years ago (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew, duckhunter

      when Democrats dominated Missouri on a state level, and when Democrats in Missouri were rural social conservatives. Missouri has changed too much today to make that comparison.

      People panic too much on this site.

      by thematt523 on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:44:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Conservatives in MO and maybe elsewhere lay claim (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hesiod, icebergslim

        to HST's legacy.  I remember during Claire's campaign against Talent for what was HST's seat both claimed to be more like HST than the other.

        Speaking of rural voters, Claire made Talent campaign to choir by focusing on outstate rather than the to major metro areas.  She made talent work to keep votes that were his and every vote she picked up outstate was gravy.

        "[Tea Party]Patriot: The person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about." Mark Twain

        by duckhunter on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 10:03:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  are we starting to see reasons (7+ / 0-)

    why democrats can't govern?

    I remember Kos on here after the election saying if the dems can't govern they will have losses in 2010.

    Republicans===the party of the 1% rich people in America. Or in other words..The Party of NO!

    by jalapeno on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:54:12 AM PDT

  •  That's why alienating the left is so dumb. (7+ / 0-)
    Comments about the "professional left" are only the last straw.  When your base is turned off and voting for you because the alternative is far worse, it doesn't exactly lead to enthusiasm.
    •  Part of "your base"... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew, drewfromct, dotster

      At least Gibbs solved unemployment. So many damn folks are not claiming to be employed as part of the professional left.  

      Sen. Reid is no different than the Republicans who demagogue the issue. He's no different than Sarah Palin, Steve King, Rush Limbaugh. Enjoy the company.

      by Jonze on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:57:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Parse away. (0+ / 0-)

        Whether he was talking to 'us' or not, he was being a douchebag.

        But parse away.  Maybe you can parse away the enthusiasm gap as well.  Fuck, may as well parse away all the bullshit policy issues as well.

  •  One good thing: Lots of L's and C's (0+ / 0-)
    in the polls about the qualified candidates, and very few G's and the like.

    Too big to fail = too big to exist.

    by Liberaltarianish on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:55:47 AM PDT

  •  Malaise is a good (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, drewfromct
    name for it, but not quite exact.

    I think 90% of the problem is between our ears.

    Louis CK has this great line about people spending all day complaining about the 20 minutes their plane sat on the runway in a delay, but don't at all appreciate that after the 20 minute delay they spent then next several house in a chair flying through the sky across the country.

  •  "I'm a Harry Truman Democrat." (5+ / 0-)
    Should be Carnahan's campaign theme. Tout the ways you agree with popular native son, Harry S. Truman. Divorce yourself from the stank of Washington, D.C. Democrats.
  •  One would think a story (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    like this would encourage Missouri Dems to head to the polls: Victorious GOPer Allegedly Flashes Gun At Defeated Rival's Staffer Over Sex Allegations

    There is no more important struggle for American democracy than ensuring a diverse, independent and free media. - Bill Moyers

    by StepLeftStepForward on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 08:59:59 AM PDT

  •  OFA is calling now!! (10+ / 0-)

    With plans to reach everyone four times. Here in NC we have ambitious goals and I have been calling for voting commitment for weeks. Most folk are willing and glad to hear of the urgency.
    So instead of blogging get to a phone bank...put your head down and support your candidate.
    We have Elaine Marshall who is tirelessly crossing the state.

  •  That is what Plouffe is working on... (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jim J, askew, LordMike, TomP, dotster

    with his grass roots organization.  So the Admin is on top of this with the best guy for the job.

    However, they are not magicians.  If the Dems don't grow a pair on the local level and come out swinging they are playing with fire.  It's not like they don't have any ammo.  There is more than enough crazy coming out of the GOP to take issue with!

    I mean come on.  All the Dem candidate has to say is "the Repukes want to take away your medicare and social security and what to let Wall Street do whtaever they want even if it bankrupts us".  I mean what could be a better issue to campaign on?

    But, unfortunately so far I just don't see Dems doing ANY of that.  I hope they are just waiting for Sept. and not letting a golden opportunity pass them by.

  •  It doesn't help when the (7+ / 0-)

    media treats Democrats and Democratic ideals with contempt and derision while always putting a positive spin on even the most egregious Republican and Tea Party antics.  It isn't that Democrats will all of a sudden turn Republican - but the constant negativity toward their beliefs make people withdraw.  

    •  What do you expect (0+ / 0-)

      from a Corporate "liberal" media run by a consortium of five giant corporations?

      We need to break up the big media monopolies and restore the Fairness Doctrine. In the meantime, we need to recognize the corporate media as the enemy it is, and use other means to disseminate our message.

      Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

      by drewfromct on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:44:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This will be a VERY difficult race (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    icebergslim

    In any other year -- even in a neutral year -- Carnahan would have this in the bag.

    But the political climate is bleak, and Obama's numbers have tanked in Missouri to a far worse extent than the rest of the Midwest. I mean even in Ohio and Indiana, he's in the mid-40s. In Missouri, he's in the mid-30s.

    This may well close to a very tight race, as highly-contested statewide races in Missouri tend to be. But I'm not really optimistic.

    •  don't be so sure (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aexia, askew, LordMike

      Caranhan was elected to her current position by the most votes ever for a SoS.

      •  SoS ≠ Senator (0+ / 0-)

        Robin is quite talented. And yes, she was elected to her current position by the most votes ever for an SoS.

        But voters have much less interest and are much less divided by partisan loyalties on lower-statewide offices. In a high-profile, nationalized Senate race in a conservative state in a GOP year -- well, I'd venture to say her electoral successes as SoS don't matter much.

        Again, in any other year, she'd be favored. She'd have easily won in '08. She'd have won in '06 by more than McCaskill. And even if she loses, she'll probably stick around and get elected governor or senator in 2016 or 2018. But this year?

        Now, statewide races in Missouri tend to be quite close. So yes, I expect it close to a 3-4 point race or closer. And YES, she MAY win, especially given what a corrupt sleazebag Roy Blunt is. We should be glad that he muscled Jim Talent out of the race, because Talent would be a much stronger candidate for the Republicans. (Yes, he lost in '06, but he doesn't really evoke the kind of negative passions Blunt does.)

        But I'm not optimistic, just given the political climate.

        •  I live in MO (0+ / 0-)

          and I'm telling you that you are somewhat being overly pessimistic.

          Blunt is going full nuts here with ads blasting Caranhan as a 'rubber stamp for the Reid-Pelosi-Obama agenda' and his decesion to not vote for state aid is not helping not with the firefighters and police I know. And that's what both sides of my family are.

  •  All this BS I read on this site (8+ / 0-)
    about not voting for the Democrats to teach them a lesson is about as worthy as cutting off your nose to spite your face.  

    The only difference is, these people who doesn't return to office will find other work and make more money.  And those of you sitting the election out and let Republicans win will lose even more.  

    If you think the Bush years were bad, look to see what happens when the Republicans take over.

    You may not appreciate the progress the Obama administration has done for the good of this county and you may not be patient enough to give them his whole 4 year first term to get much of what he wants to do for you, but just wait until it gets taken away. Then you'll wish you hadn't been so disgruntled.

    I wonder sometimes if most of the people writing their outrage are not really Democrats, but Republicans trying to discourage you people from supporting the only progressive president you'll have for a while.

    •  People are behaivng like spoiled brats... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew, liberalej, dotster, yorkiedoglover

      ...can't have my way, so I'll take my ball and go home.  That's all good and fine for you, but there are a lot of people who will be affected by your temper tantrum.

      DARTH SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
      LANDO REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

      by LordMike on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:17:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The people stating they are not voting (0+ / 0-)

      on this site is minuscule, believe me most will VOTE, you need to worry about who got us over the finish line in 2008.  All those new voters, independents, etc.  They are not excited now and don't like EITHER party.  And when you have 10% unemployment and close to 20% overall what do you expect?  Folks expected more from the Democrats and definitely expected them to perform on fixing this economy better than what they have seen.  Lastly to run on vote for the lesser of two evils does not make one want to get up off their couch and vote for you.  Sorry, it just doesn't.  Put this on lack of communication from the White House and Democrats.  For all they want folks to cheer about, the public just are not feelin' them and that is the major problem.

  •  pretty much same as rasmussen (0+ / 0-)
    He of course had no undecided or other candidates polled. Looks like the democrats probably won'y pick up any republican seats this year.
    The problem is the democratic base doesn't vote heavily in midtems but does show up in presidential years.
    My guess is if republicans win back the house they could just lose it again in 2012.
  •  Defending Social Security - not (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drewfromct, teknofyl, Willa Rogers
    When we read about defending Social Security in a column from Paul Krugman and their is a deafening silence from all Democrats from Obama on down the line, one wonders why nobody can figure out why there is an intensity gap.
  •  I think your kidding yourself if you believe (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jim J, Aexia, icebergslim
    that it is all about intensity.  

    "Ominously for Democrats, independents trust Republicans more on the economy by a modest but telling 42 percent to 36 percent. That's bad news for the party that controls the White House and Congress at a time of near 10 percent unemployment and the slow economic recovery"

    http://news.yahoo.com/...

    In addition Obama's numbers are way down.

    http://www.politico.com/...

  •  Of course, if turnout is low (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    icebergslim

    it's all the fault of bloggers who dare, at times, to criticize Democrats.

    "If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

    by Sagebrush Bob on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:05:23 AM PDT

  •  vote doesnt count more if you push lever harder (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    when voting. My guess, more dems will vote unenthusiastically than gopers will vote mad

  •  Mythic "intensity gap" in midterms.... (5+ / 0-)

    Real Activists - wary of polls like me - just hang up the f**king telephone.

    I refuse to waste my time. Age and gender in the polling numbers suggests that older people will vote....but active, younger people will GOTV and organize. They aren't even home to take the pollster calls. And the young have an exponential factor that oldsters do not have.

    Owe college loans?

    Have credit card debt?

    Need a job when you get out of school?

    Decisions are made by those who show up. We have to Rock the Vote...and if just half of the unemployed, under-employed and part-time employed with no benefits struggling out there show up, it will be a great thing to see!!!

    Sure, I'm disillusioned as hell, and I don't see the point of voting for a bunch of elite Democratic assholes in D.C. who mostly can't find their way past their "comity" to attack Republicans on the real common-sense, bread and butter issues, but I sure as hell will drive any Democrat to the polls like I do every other freaking year - two times for primaries!

    And I live in Weiner's district, and he runs unopposed! Election's are just for City Council members, state reps and state senators around here, but it's worth every penny of gas. Plus, we have Cuomo to elect as Governor this year, so a lot of oldsters need the driving help. In NY, we're switching systems - no more big heavy levers to pull this year.

    TAX THE RICH! They have money! I'm a Democrat. That's why!

    by ezdidit on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:06:52 AM PDT

  •  "If our turnout matches our 2008 numbers"?! (7+ / 0-)

    You mean that virtually unprecedented turnout we had because everyone, even some of the most jaded and cynical among us, were fired up at the thought of electing a president who might actually put the people ahead of the corporations for once and actually help to move the country not only just back from the brink, but in a truly positive direction?

    Now obviously we can argue endlessly about whether or not he technically has done that. But the fact remains that there are a helluva lot of folks out there who feel let down by what's transpired over the past year and a half, and who aren't going to be particularly fired up this time around.

    Plus, it's a midterm election. Those are NEVER as compelling as even a half-assed presidential election, let alone the rock-star stuff we had with Obama in 2008.

    No way do we get our 2008 numbers in November. There are some major factors working strongly against that, and they aren't the kind of thing you change in a couple of months.

    I'm not just blithely trying to whiz in anyone's Wheaties here, but it's just not at all realistic to expect anything like 2008 numbers this election. Not that we shouldn't get as many folks out as possible, of course, but let's also not kid ourselves. A comparable turnout to what we had in 2008 would be tantamount to defying the laws of physics.

    •  Exactly (5+ / 0-)

      Now that Obama is in office, it's apparently his fault that the Dem base has historically stayed home during the mid-terms.

    •  I don't think that (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aexia, askew, drewfromct
      people were "were fired up at the thought of electing a president who might actually put the people ahead of the corporations for once and actually help to move the country not only just back from the brink, but in a truly positive direction?"

      At least where Kos is concerned, Obama was never the first choice around here until later in the primary, specifically because he was young and not an attack dog and had centrist tendencies.

      I think most here can't accept what can't be changed.

      •  Most people voted (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        askew, boofdah

        for Obama because they liked him. Only at DKos do we have unrealistic expectations. Most people do not worship politicians...or hate them as much as we do. DK might have a huge role in activism, but they do not comprise of the majority of voters, even among the Democrats. And I can even say not even among the Democrats who volunteer and work for politicians. We are a rare breed.

      •  You don't get record voter turnout... (0+ / 0-)

        ...simply for having centrist tendencies and not being an attack dog.

        That might inspire political geeks like us, but we aren't what wins elections numbers-wise.

        HUGE numbers of people turned out to vote for Obama because they felt something very positive about him. It wasn't just people coming out to vote defensively. You don't get massive numbers that way. What it was, was people coming out specifically to vote FOR something. That's what energized them, and that's what pushed turnout over the top.

        Show me where there is anything hugely positive in the upcoming election to inspire people to come out and vote FOR something. At most right now, you've got the people who feel compelled to vote against Republican takeover of the House and/or Senate. And I'm not even sure how strong THAT is these days.

        Fear will only drive so many people to the polls. Genuine excitement over a candidate is what we had in 2008, and there's simply nothing like that happening this time.

        Plus, again, it's a midterm election. Expecting a big turnout for that is like expecting people to line up around the block at the local Barnes and Noble on the day that a new accounting book is released.

  •  It's All on Us (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, dotster
    The media obviously is doing nothing to call out Republicans on their BS.

    We must start asap to get out the vote, warn Democratic voters of the consequences should Republicans make gains and that they are registered for November!

  •  It's not complacency (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    majcmb1

    The GOP really isn’t growing support- it’s just benefiting from Democratic complacency.

    "The Obama administration seems to be feeling sorry for itself...Spare me. The country is a mess." --Bob Herbert

    by joanneleon on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:08:09 AM PDT

  •  gee (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drewfromct

    maybe the dems should try something besides insulting and pissing all over their base.

    nah, that makes too much sense.

  •  This is why "the left" doesn't win (11+ / 0-)

    I'm sorry, but people saying they aren't going to vote in protest are pissing me off. And what really pisses me off is this ridiculous notion that "Dems pissed away their mandate, let's let the Republicans back in so things REALLY get bad! Then people will see the error of their ways and progressives will storm in!"

    This. Is. Insane. It is the EXACT same logic that lots of left-leaning voters said when they voted for Nader in 2000. And guess what?! It worked! We wound up winning landslides in 2006 and 2008 based on how badly the Republicans screwed up! And all we had to pay for it was bankruptcy, two wars, and an economic collapse!

    I'm not saying everything Obama and the Democrats have done is fine and dandy. They've made mistakes, and I don't agree with their approach in everything.

    But c'mon, guys. We've been dealt one of the worst hands in history -- this is the equivalent to FDR coming into office, not in 1933 when things had hit a nadir, but in 1930, right before the bottom hit. Financial crises are notoriously difficult to climb out of, and while I think there are grounds to criticize the Administration's response, given the magnitude of what they confronted, they've done a decent job. Between the stimulus, the auto bailouts, and, yes, TARP, the economy has stabilized and several million jobs were saved. If McCain had been elected, had passed a far smaller stimulus, not saved the auto industry, etc., we'd be at 15% unemployment.

    The biggest problem the center-left has -- throughout the world -- is an inability to think long-term. Instead -- in virtually every developed country -- the left is more divided than the right, bickers constantly when in power, and then splits when their more left-wing voters decide the pace of change isn't fast enough.

    •  But long-term we are just as screwed. (0+ / 0-)

      Blue Dogs dominate the caucus... not in numbers, but in policy outcomes.

      If you care about progressive outcomes, then voting for more Blue Dogs doesn't solve this problem.

      I'm not saying the answer is not voting, but just voting Dems also doesn't address that issue.  Becasue when Blue Dogs win, everyone says, "See, conservative Dems are so dang electable."

      Basically, structurally we have a situation where progressive outcomes are disallowed no matter how we vote.  We are expected (as progressives) to vote for conservative bullshitter policies to be implemented by Democrats rather than Republicans.  Supposedly this will be less odious that the GOP implementation.  But it's a given that we are NOT to expect any progressive outcomes.

      •  Vote for progressives in primaries, then (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        teknofyl

        Vote for the most progressive candidate in the primary, then vote Dem in the GE.

        Vote third-party left IF you're in a strongly blue district.

        If you're in a Fusion Voting state (i.e. NY) vote on the Working Families line.

        And vote for Democratic State Reps. so that redistricting won't make Republican-leaning districts which can only elect conservative Dems at best.

        Donate to progressive candidates and causes.

        Any of those things can help move things left.

        And although many don't see it, Democrats HAVE moved left. Seriously, as maddening as the current Democratic Congress is, it's by far the most progressive and coherent Democratic caucus ever. Seriously. Bill Clinton's Democratic Congress was WAY more conservative and included not just dozens of Blue Dogs, but tens of dozens of way more conservative Dixiecrats. It was the same story in the Senate - Richard Shelby was a Democrat, for God's sake.

        Same story with Carter. And, yes, with LBJ and FDR, who had to contend with a vast block of RW Dixiecrats but could sometimes pass liberal legislation with the help of (now extinct) liberal Republicans.

        Take the long view.

    •  don't blame me (0+ / 0-)

      for policy failure in the executive branch.

      I'm all for thinking long term.  I didn't vote Nader in 2000. Yes, Obama was dealt a crap hand (although he chose to sit down at the table of his own free will).

      I will not support Obama because I refuse to support ANYONE, dem, republican or whatever, who condones kidnapping and assassination and torture and secret prisons and domestic spying, all those Bush era atrocities that Obama has either let stand or expanded.

      That's a black and white issue for me.
      And anyone genuinely thinking long term wouldn't be so eager to handwave it away.  Those issues are fundamental to the continuance of this country as a Democracy in any meaningful sense.

      And even if you do choose to ignore Obama's vile filling of Bush's shoes on those issues, "hold your nose and vote Dem because the other guys are worse!" isn't a slogan that any company in the world would choose as their slogan.  It's their responsibility to make the case for their programs and they're FAILING.

  •  The first pin prick to deflate (5+ / 0-)
    Democrats was Obama and Congresses cave in on the public option.  That was what they risked and they got what they asked for.  Drill baby drill Obama  style and failure to slam Wall Street, among other weak-kneed responses, reinforced the deflation.

    At the rate Obama is going the lack of enthusiasm will be seen in 2012 as well.  His get out the vote operation can't overcome the disappointment people feel about him and his administration.  Look for fewer campaign volunteers, less small contributions and fewer voters.

    What a difference it would make had he come out swinging.  He occasionally jabs, but no combinations and no sustained attack.  Now he's talking against Republicans he hopes in time for November.  Too little, too late.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:12:36 AM PDT

  •  Does the constant drone of negativity here.. (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kitty, Aexia, askew, itskevin, TomP, dotster

    effect the energy gap?  There was a helluva lot more energy and action diaries here in 2008.

    Negativity is very contagious.

    Sen. Reid is no different than the Republicans who demagogue the issue. He's no different than Sarah Palin, Steve King, Rush Limbaugh. Enjoy the company.

    by Jonze on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:12:39 AM PDT

  •  Time to turn our thinking around (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, brn2bwild, Davidsfr, ezdidit
    What's done is done.  Let's start looking at the glass as half-full, or it will be fully empty after November.  It's up to us.  Egos on the shelf!  Think of the children!

    Fake News has us all confused!

    by Fury on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:13:06 AM PDT

    •  Race to the Top. :) (0+ / 0-)

      I can't stand Obama's education policies.

      The best way to oppose them is to reelect a Congress that opposes Obama's education policies.

      That means we need a Congress as close to the current makeup as is possible.

      If we lose the House, Obama will have a Republican majority to pass charter schools, merit pay, centralization of education in Washington and other anti-public education policies.

      If the Senate goes Republican, it probably means that the filibuster is the only way to stop Obama.

      Oppose Obama.  Vote Democrat.

      Do it for the children.

      http://twitter.com/mikeingels

      by DingellDem on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 02:25:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Democratic voters have always been less (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, LordMike

    likely to vote in midterm elections.

    "Because I am a river to my people."

    by lordcopper on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:16:34 AM PDT

  •  Excuse me -- Massachusetts? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drewfromct

    Scott Brown winning an Obama+20 electorate doesn't represent some Democrats (or, at the very least, Obama supporters) switching sides?

    Yeah, +20 is less than +26, but that's still a pretty damned serious "D" edge.

    Must be the new math.

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:21:00 AM PDT

    •  That was more anti-Coakley than anti-Obama (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aexia, askew

      She was SOOOOO stupid that she pissed off Massachusetts voters bigtime by not knowing the Red Sox from her pantyhose and by dissing both Fenway Park and active campaigning in the same sentence.

      You can't DO that and win in Massachusetts.

      If it's
      Not your body
      Then it's
      Not your choice
      AND it's
      None of your damn business!

      by TheOtherMaven on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:50:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Regardless of why, that's a bunch of (0+ / 0-)

        Democratic (or Obama) votes switching sides, and, if it can happen in Massachusetts, it can happen pretty much anywhere that the candidate fails to impress.

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:06:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  You didn't mention the Indepndents, kos.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dotster

    That 12 point deficit for Carnahan in the Indy column -
                     Dem   Rep   Ind
    Carnahan
    Favorable      84     7     36
    Unfavorable   12    84    48

    Did the Independents really have those same numbers for Obama in '08?  That's kinda hard to believe.

    Seems to me it is both Dem turnout and Independent votes that will be the deciding factors.

    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." - G. Marx

    by Skeptical Bastard on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:24:56 AM PDT

  •  More worried about PA. (0+ / 0-)

    The latest Rassmussen poll is an outlier but how could a lunatic like Toomey be likely to win?

    The Raptor of Spain: A Webserial
    From Muslim Prince to Christian King (Updated Nov. 24)

    by MNPundit on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:33:34 AM PDT

    •  Don't look at PPP (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew

      If you don't want to get depressed.

      PPP's numbers are taking a big turn for the worse for Dems because they're shifting to a Likely Voter model.

      It looks like Pennsylvania may well be a bloodbath. Not only does "Sen. Toomey" seem like a very real prospect, both the governor's race and the House races in the state look especially bleak.

      Could it change? Sure. PPP even says that Sestak's probably at a low-point right now. And Dems did win the PA-12 special election which everyone expected them to lose.

      But it's not a pretty picture.

  •  What the hell kind of sample is this? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    I usually concentrate on 2008 votes with PPP (don't get me wrong, this is way off too with 51/44 McCain), but what the hell is up with the Liberal/Moderate/Conservative breakdown?

    15/35/50, or +35 Con over Lib. Where the hell is that coming from?

    Just to compare, check out what the Lib/Mod/Con breakdowns were for previous elections (in Missouri):

    1. 19/45/36 (+17 Con over Lib)
    1. 20/43/37 (+17 Con over Lib)
    1. 19/45/37 (+18 Con over Lib)

    Where is the evidence that Conservatives have gained +14 and Moderates -10 in just two years? Really?

    PPP needs to stick with RV screens because this is just an absolutely atrocious sample which is skewing the results by something like, no joke, 20 points.

  •  MO is an odd state (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aexia, askew, LordMike

    I would be willing to bet just about anyone that regardless of what the polling says the actual race comes within 3 to 4 points.

    Obama was polling really badly in MO too and then came within a couple thousand.

  •  Again, ALL THOSE OTHER PEOPLE, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    teknofyl

    that voted Obama are not engaged.  They were the ones to push us over the top, Dems have a huge amount of work to do in less than 90 days.

  •  One other factor specific to Missouri: Jay Nixon (0+ / 0-)

    Our newly elected "Democratic" Governor Jay Nixon is doing nothing to help Democrats get motivated.  He seems to think that by sticking it to the urban, Democratic base areas of St. Louis and Kansas City with budget cuts he'll gain political points with increasingly Republican out-state voters. Those policies, coupled with his already center-right leanings on social issues, have made it increasingly frustrating to be a liberal here in Missouri.

  •  Re-doubling effort comes easy to the GOP (0+ / 0-)

    We tie ourselves in knots trying to figure out if maintaining majorities on Capital Hill will "reward" Rahm, Geithner, Summers, Nelson, Lincoln, etc. for being counter-productive, and we lose sight that TEPID REFORM is an improvement over the past 30 years.

    I'm really sorry if "we're not as bad as the other guys" simply isn't enough for some of us. But that really assumes that things cannot get worse than they are now.

    THEY CAN.

    On the other hand, denying the GOP a majority in either wing of Congress will inflict untold disarray on their coalition. It may not appear that way because they are very good at papering over their fractures with "Ground Zero Mosque" and "BP slush fund", but if Boehner and his leadership will be turned out by their peers if they don't gain Majority.

    We have them on the ropes and most of us don't know it. We have to hustle, beg, plead, and cajole our "casual voters" to make this happen, but enthusiasm doesn't have to begin with results from DC. In fact, if we have a real movement it SHOULDN'T depend on results from DC. We ultra activists (because if you post or simply read and regularly comment here, that is you) can get excited about putting the GOP on its back for more than just one election cycle.

    Then we can go about the business of "making" Team Obama toe a more Progressive line. That CANNOT happen with Speaker Boehner or Leader McConnell.

    "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." -- Frederick Douglass

    by Egalitare on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:54:00 AM PDT

  •  PPP and Ras have released (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew
    some pretty tough polls for Dems in PA, OH and MO.  I am skeptical of the voter intensity gap theory.  It's really about whether the candidates themselves are running good campaigns and not being defensive about the environment. In Massachusetts, there was a Coakley intensity gap.  In PA, it seems that Sestak is not on tv as much as Toomey and is not as intense. Same is true in OH and MO.  

    The votes are there. Democratic voters would be foolish to stay home, and I think the Dem machine needs to get cranking on getting voters to the polls.  If they do, then I think this election can be a wash.  But it starts with the candidates.  They need to be more present, aggressive and show Dem voters that they will fight for Obama's agenda and that the other guy is a nut job.

    Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

    by khyber900 on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:54:14 AM PDT

  •  I don't understand the raw data. (0+ / 0-)

    According to the Google Sheet only 4% of respondents hit response 2 in Q14, which means that they're African-American. According to PPP 12% of the electorate is African-American. Did you guys really weight the responses of 27 people so heavily that they now make up 12% of the responses? Maybe you should have gotten an extra sample.

    Support Dennis McDonald and Montana Democrats in the 2010 election!

    by twohundertseventy on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 09:55:25 AM PDT

  •  TL;DR: (0+ / 0-)

    When Democrats vote, Democrats WIN! Vote, dammit!

  •  Playing around with the raw data: (0+ / 0-)

    Crosstabs for people who see both Carnahan AND Blunt unfavorably:
    (raw count)
    Blunt 29
    Undecided 16
    one of the two small party candidates (I don't know who's 4 and who's 5) 11
    Carnahan 9
    other small candidate 8

    (percentages)

    Blunt 40%
    Undecided 22%
    Third-Party Dude 1 15%
    Carnahan 12%
    Third-Party Dude 2 11%.

    Since both third-parties Dudes are right-wingers, those 26% of people who hate both will more likely come home to Blunt than to Carnahan, I think.

    Support Dennis McDonald and Montana Democrats in the 2010 election!

    by twohundertseventy on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 10:04:11 AM PDT

  •  Obama's voters... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, boofdah, teknofyl

    were full of people who traditionally do not vote, especially in midterm elections, namely young people and African Americans. I would guess that except for the small number of very liberal voters who are protesting by not voting, the majority of people who typically vote during midterm are voting mostly democrat...although local politics probably is a huge factor. Sometimes, the Democrat candidate is no better than the Republican or Independent.

    Comparing a presidential election, especially one like 2008 where we had a candidate who directly appealed to people who rarely vote, to a midterm election is like comparing apples to oranges.

    I realize a lot of people would like to blame Obama this time, but not sure that is fair. If we were to separate out the people who voted in 2008 who ordinarily never vote in midterms, they you would have a valid comparison. I will admit, that until 2000, I rarely voted in midterms. I felt I didn't know enough about the local candidates so didn't bother. I did, however, vote in every presidential election since 1980. I think I was a pretty typical voter.

    Also...we don't have a Fox News. You should hear my mother..and she voted for Obama. While she still likes Obama, Fox News has really messed with her mind. She does like Alex Sink though...go figure. I imagine she won't vote at all when the time comes because she is just so confused and upset by it all.

    •  How about some Presedential signing statements (0+ / 0-)

      that fire up the base get tacked on to some bills?  

      They may be viewed inside the White House as small political potatoes but don't you think that during a famine of dissillusionment maybe that starch is enough to nourish our folks to keep the faith?  

      And it frames the discussion to things that democrats want and most importantly, things that democrats and progressives want to talk about.  

      Yes it will upset the nut-sackers and wing-nutty types and yes, it is threatening for administrationers who are crouched in defensive positions who will have to adopt a new attitude if not a new strategy.  

      Hope they haven't forgotten how to go on offense.  

      Rahm, Gibbs and the beltway boykins  seem to just dump it in from the blue line and start skating backwards.  Hell, even Caribou Barbie could beat that system.

      O, you powers that be, listen to  'ThatsNotFunny' and our other disillusioned brothers and sisters, you need their votes.  

      Give him a reason to go out and feel good that he's voting D, go on, I dare ya.

      "I'll press your flesh, you dimwitted sumbitch! " -Pappy O'Daniel

      by jakewaters on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 10:24:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not one pithy add-on in a signing statement? (0+ / 0-)

        Why on earth not?  

        Sure, GWB's signing statements were excessive but, come on, not one noble gesture toward one extraneous thing that our side would applaud in almost 2 years?

        Could these be the missing messages, a huge cache of political capital that has not been tapped, the real stimulus we are in need of?

        Would our highly principled administration rather be remembered for 4 years of being holier- than-thou than for haveing spent 8 years  using every bit of leverage and avenue for good that they could?  

         

        "I'll press your flesh, you dimwitted sumbitch! " -Pappy O'Daniel

        by jakewaters on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 10:55:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  That is really true. Obama turned out (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      boofdah

      a lot of first-time and infrequent voters who are very unlikely to vote in the midterms. However, OFA is doing its best to get these voters to turnout. They have dedicated $50mm to the project.

  •  Carnahan's first ad was bashing Blunt on the (0+ / 0-)

    bailout.

    Let's go to the numbers

    McCain voters are less likely to vote for a bailout supporter by an 87-5 margin.
    Obama voters are more likely to vote for a bailout supporter by an 54-29 margin.

    Of course, keeping in mind that those 87% of McCain supporters who dislike bailouts voted for a bailout supporter in 2008 and that 76% of McCain voters are voting for Blunt.

    So, will one ad cause people who have consistently opposed bailouts and supported pro-bailout Republicans to actually stop doing that? Nope.

    It'd be nice to get some sort of inspiring theme, because I don't think many voters are pumped for the "get us 60 votes" drive and they're getting close to allowing the people who screwed it up before another shot at power.

    "Our country right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right" - Carl Schurz

    by RBH on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 10:26:41 AM PDT

  •  Well, our numbers WON'T match 2008 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew

    because off-year numbers NEVER match presidential years. So I guess we're totally screwed and should give up.

    De-orangify Congress: Justin Coussoule for Oh-08 http://www.coussouleforcongress.com/

    by anastasia p on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:19:44 AM PDT

  •  random comment (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maryb2004

    if the poll is gonna have the same order of candidates for every call, shouldn't the order be Carnahan/Blunt/Dine/Beck/DK? because that's the order on the Missouri ballot. The question makes it seem like it's Blunt/Carnahan/Beck/Dine/DK. When the reality of the ballot is that the Democrats have the top line, thanks to having the Governor's office.

    And for those of you working the raw data, here's the area code splits

    314 (128 people): 52/34 Carnahan
    417 (117 people): 57/25 Blunt
    573 (137 people): 54/24 Blunt
    636 (98 people): 53/34 Blunt
    660 (49 people): 55/33 Blunt
    816 (161 people): 42/40 Carnahan

    And for reference

    "Our country right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right" - Carl Schurz

    by RBH on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:25:07 AM PDT

    •  Yup, thanks. (0+ / 0-)

      Allow me to pimp my completely ignored diary on the raw data here: http://www.dailykos.com/...
      As for my gut feeling, African-American turnout must be really shitty when St.Louis goes for the Dems only by a 52-34 margin.

      But, then again, PPP's poll only reached 4% African-Americans and weighted those responses several times as much as the others to reach their 12% quota, so there's much more Margin of Error than one might think.

      Support Dennis McDonald and Montana Democrats in the 2010 election!

      by twohundertseventy on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 01:37:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Where's the ACTION LINK? AND DONATE BUTTON? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew

    You have this brilliant forum.......but if you don't ask, you don't get.

    Surely you can give us more than data.

    Please PLEASE PLEASE always INCLUDE LINKS so we can DO SOMETHING.

    Where best to contribute? Candidate's campaign? State Democratic organization? League of Women Voters?
    ACORN equivalent?

    MISSOURI PEOPLE, PLEASE OFFER YOUR SUGGESTIONS AND ADVICE?

    Media Reform Action Link http://stopbigmedia.com/

    by LNK on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:28:06 AM PDT

  •  Intensity gap? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew

    Those of you who are planning to stay home out of spite, consider what your face is going to look like without a nose.

    Better yet, have a look at this face:

    This is your new House Speaker. Here is is in action:

    I think I've had enough of his kind of "intensity."

    It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness - Eleanor Roosevelt

    by Fish in Illinois on Tue Aug 17, 2010 at 11:43:27 AM PDT

  •  I supported Carnahan, with money even, until she (0+ / 0-)

    took a sharp turn to the right.  I don't support Republicans, even the ones masquerading as Democrats.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site