The GOP strategy is to discourage Democrats from voting.

[Thinkingabout]

I read this on DailyKO

And once again we see that Republicans hope to win not by convincing swing voters to turn out for them but by making irregular voters so disgusted they stay home. All class, those guys.

They don't have anything in their platform to sell voters so they are planning personal attacks on our candidates and their families. Since they will be in the attack mode while they are running it will be an attack mode on working Americans when they are in office.

[Cosmic Kitten]

1. The REAL problem is the DNC doing NOTHING

We know the right-wing wins when
the left stays home on election day.

Why the hell the DNC and Democratic
party as a whole isn't doing EVERY
effing thing they can to fireup the base
and make voting as accessible as possible
is the REAL problem.

Where in the hell is the Democratic leadership?
The silence and apathy from the elected Dems
is pathetic. Feckless, milquetoast leadership!

[hopemountain]

5. because the heads of the dnc sit

on their pretty little high chairs collecting their huge checks and let the grassroots do all the work.

[Cosmic Kitten]

6. Yep. I suspect it's worse than that though

[n2doc]

15. Just like last year

Their strategy seemed to be " Scary Repubs! Give us money or the Scary Repubs win!". Nothing else.

[Cosmic Kitten]

17. YEP! +1000000

And that's the same tired rhetoric
we're getting about Hillary...

NO LEADERSHIP!

[Triana]

36. +1000

I gave nothing against her personally but DWS is useless as a party leader.

[Cosmic Kitten]

39. yep! maybe worse than useless?

[Triana]

40. Uh-huh.

That.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

2. That's nothing new.

Candidates on both sides are always 'in attack mode' because it works. Negative campaigning works better than positive campaigning. And Republicans are always about finding ways of preventing the Dem voter blocks from exercising their rights to vote. Really, we need a nationally-funded, concerted campaign that puts as much money or more into winning Secretary-of-State offices as we put into Senate seats.

[Thinkingabout]

3. Secretary of State serves the president, is nominated bybthe president and confirmed by the Senate.

The Secretary is on the presidents cabinet.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

4. I'm talking about national funding of campaigns for STATE level Secretaries of States.

Like John Husted, the Republican guy in Ohio atm who has been working diligently to make voting harder in Dem strongholds in the state.

[Cosmic Kitten]

7. Gee? Does the Party have an dept. to do such a thing?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

9. I doubt it, but it needs one.

Just as with Dean's 50 state strategy, it needs to get better coordinated at not simply running separate campaigns for every race, but at utilizing common resources to go after multiple races with a shared set of tactics under an overarching strategy. Letting every candidate essentially fend for themselves is rather pointless, when majorities are needed to achieve goals, and ignoring the very people who actually control the nuts and bolts of voting in each state is political malpractice.

[Cosmic Kitten]

11. I'm with you here...

...but shouldn't Pelosi, Reid, Wasserman-Schultz
and EVERY other effing elected Democrat
be working their asses off to WIN every election!

We seem to have few leaders and an
abundance of self-serving politicians.

There is NO visible top-down leadership.
Are they all being blackmailed?
Are they just milquetoast and feckless?
Maybe just unprincipled, self-interested opportunists?

Where is the Democratic leadership?

[Vincardog]

28. I bet you this election and every other one that if the Democratic Platform said 1 Raise SSI

Eliminate the cap over $250,000.
2 Code of ethics for the SCOTUS.
3 Single payor Health Care for ALL.
4 Guaranteed minimum income for all US Citizens
5 Outlaw all political payments and require all other contributions to be disclosed.
6 Free public education at every level to all US Citizens.
8 Legalize MJ and pardon everyone in jail for MJ offense.


That positive campaign would win.

[Cosmic Kitten]

41. Wooooo Hooooo you liberals!

[Vincardog]

43. ABSOFUCKIGN LUTELY

[kairos12]

8. Rethugs can win only with their 3 cornered strategy:

Gerrymandering, dark money, and voter suppression.

[Cosmic Kitten]

12. You left out DINOs and the 3rd-Way

[Thinkingabout]

18. Do you seriously thinks the GOP wins with Third Way?

I am not sure who you are classifying as DINO but it isn't those who are center left and left, we vote and we vote for Democrats. Since many of the beliefs of the Third Way are rooted in the DNC platform and they vote and they vote for Democrats.

[Vincardog]

29. I think the third way gave us NAFTA, helped destroy welfare and wants to pass TTP. Republican

Enough for you?

[Thinkingabout]

30. They are about much more but then so.e people do not worry about wage disparity, healhcare and

To name a few.

[jeff47]

66. Yes. Third way gives them small victories.

They obviously can't go as far when Third way wins, but they go in the same direction. So Republicans get small victories instead of large victories. They're still victories.

[Thinkingabout]

68. Yes the Third Way helpd Democrats to victory. Why trash those who helps the DNC.

[jeff47]

69. No, Third Way produced smaller Democratic losses.

Blue dogs didn't line up behind Democratic policies. They were the reason Democratic policies couldn't pass. They blocked the most egregious Republican goals, while also blocking most Democratic goals.

For example, we had to have this half-ass abortion language in the ACA to placate Third Way-style politicians.

Meanwhile, Third way-style politicians have not at all been interested in, say, expanding union representation.

[Thinkingabout]

71. Specially what abortion language in the ACA to placate the Third Way-style politicans are

you referring? The Third Way org has lots of information on the subject of abortion.

[Splinter Cell]

67. Nobody wins with "Third Way"

[Thinkingabout]

70. Read post #66, yes the Third Way helps the DNC win elections.

Have you read the Third Way on the issues? It would be a good read and then you will find they have many issues which are extremely in the Democratic Platform.

Here is their link on different subjects:

http://www.thirdway.org/

[erronis]

24. Don't forget poisoning the discourse

As we see here on DU. Lots of voices that are trying to undermine a democratic platform. Techniques include introducing tangential discussions, engaging in attack threads to hijack the conversation, making everyone sick-n-tired of the dung. (I guess I've flinged a couple of patties in my time.)

[99th_Monkey]

10. Yes, death by a thousand cuts

There are SO very many ways the GOP has devised to suppress the Democratic voters. Let's
count just a few of the ways ...

1) Onerous Voter ID laws,
2) gerrymandering,
3) publication & distribution of misleading or completely false information to Democratic voters
(re: saying election day was postponed for a day, or that the voters polling place had changed
to a false address, etv.
4) GOP employers not allowing workers time off to go to the polls and vote, etc. etc.
5) Mis-allocation of voting machines, so Democratic precincts have way-fewer machines, creating
impossibly long lines at the polls.

This is why EVERY state needs VOTE-by-MAIL, and automatic voter registration (unless
one chooses to opt out) when people get their state drivers license issued. I'm so happy to live in
Oregon where we have huge "turn out" because voters have weeks to sit at home and take
time to complete ballot without feeling rushed. et.

Vote-by-Mail (coupled with automatic registration) adroitly sidesteps 4 of the above 5 ways the GOP
suppresses Democratic voters ... with the sole exception of #2 gerrymandering.

[Cosmic Kitten]

14. Which Democrats are pushing for these ideas?

The Democratic leadership needs
to be supporting these ideas too!

[99th_Monkey]

21. A precious few, unfortunately.

This is one of the most egregious disconnects that hobbles Democratic campaigns at
every level of government; and yet the Democratic Leadership largely turns a blind
eye and pretends elections are "fair & square", when they clearly are not.

Oh there are a few congress critters who favor election reform as I suggested, like
ones from Oregon, Colorado & Washington (where vote-by-mail is already law)...

funny how those are also the states at forefront of pot legalization

[Cosmic Kitten]

23. Yep, very interesting...the apathy from the top.

Almost like they prefer the status quo?
And that they will tolerate change,
if it's unstoppable.

Oregon's is really inspiring with their
voting practices and progressive policies

[Thinkingabout]

20. These are some good points and we need to elect Democrats in states which are passing these laws

Unless the SC strikes down these unfair laws.

[Cosmic Kitten]

50. Which laws are "unfair"?

[navarth]

13. They will fail with this Liberal Atheist Democrat

But that doesn't mean I'm thrilled with my choices so far. But those assholes will never discourage me from voting; it's my duty.

[PatrynXX]

16. I never stay home

no matter how many jury summons they send to get my to avoid voting. it's a question of who I vote for. Certainly not Hillary.

[Cosmic Kitten]

19. I love jury duty!

Been on a few interesting jury's.
It's always an adventure in Social Studies.

The things you can learn from jury duty
are nearly priceless! Always worth the effort.

[Hortensis]

22. Oh, yes. In the 1970s, GOP leaders realized the FEWER AMERICANS WHO VOTED, of any party,

the more seats they would win in general.

As you say, they understood that the more disillusioned and disgusted voters were with politics in general, the less likely they were to vote. The more likely they were to turn off and refuse to pay attention to what was happening.

They also learned that widespread enthusiasm on any issue could be turned to their advantage by, at very least, dragging out any action as long as possible (extremely easy to do). Enthusiasm met with lack of action has lead very reliably to voter apathy.

They know that the President in power will be handed the blame for virtually all dissatisfaction during his term. Literally. He is, after all, the only politician many turned-off voters know by name. (This, of course, does not apply to the authoritarian right during GOP administrations.) And this syndrome is the reason why when Obama was elected and the entire planet was battling the real threat of economic collapse, the GOP leadership agreed to do their best to keep the President from accomplishing anything all -- 6+ hard, destructive years now and counting.

Today, after decades of ruinous demoralization, the only group of voters reliably engaged is that angry hard right. Cynical manipulators can always keep them frightened and worked up enough about various issues to bring them to the polls to support the continued transfer of wealth and power from the many to the few.

This strategy has been so successful that this now-dangerous degree of transfer of power and the corruption taking over all levels of government are met with resigned acceptance and determined ignorance by much of the electorate who could stop it, accepting and acceding on the right, passively disapproving on the left, and is a genuine threat to the stability of our democratic republic.

[blkmusclmachine]

25. The GOP can always rig the vote "counting" machines...

[whereisjustice]

26. lol - well thank goodness the DNC has is very good about nuturing a good selection of candidates

with a strong populist message to motivate Democratic voters and make them feel represented!

Oh wait...

It's Hillary.

We are so fucked.

[Thinkingabout]

27. You would never think about staying home for the GOP would you?

[whereisjustice]

32. I would never run a candidate so synthetically formulated by Wall Street that they would

risk keeping millions of voters at home in a deliberate attempt to help the GOP. Would you?

[Thinkingabout]

37. Elections require lots of funding, I personally do not have the funds required to get a candidate

Elected and do not know enough people in the 90% who has the funds. You complain about Wall Street funding and my question to you is do you have the ability to fund a campaign without corporations donating any money. Now if this is going to keep voters home because the 90% does not have the money where do you think this is going to leave working Americans? It is about electing Democrats and denying the GOP to continue to run us deeper in the hole. Now you would not like to go deeper would you?

[whereisjustice]

46. So, how about those blue dogs with all that corporate cash?

Didn't do so well, did they? No. They didn't. Resonating with voters is far more important. Hillary is so synthetic that her Wall Street backers are throwing (wasting) tons of money and political capital to make up for her lack of charisma. It won't work.

LEVITT: When a candidate doubled their spending, holding everything else constant, they only got an extra one percent of the popular vote. It’s the same if you cut your spending in half, you only lose one percent of the popular vote. So we’re talking about really large swings in campaign spending with almost trivial changes in the vote.

And take a look at the Iowa caucuses last week. Rick Perry was the top spender, buying $4.3 million worth of ads — which got him only 10 percent of the vote. Santorum, meanwhile, spent only $30,000 on ads (the least of any candidate) and practically tied Romney — who spent $1.5 million this time around on Iowa ads, versus $10 million in 2008.

In this podcast, you’ll also hear from one former big-spending presidential candidate who’s now convinced that money isn’t what matters most: Rudy Giuliani.

GIULIANI: I tell candidates, it’s always better to be the candidate with the most money, but you can win without it.

http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/12/does-money-really-buy-elections-a-new-marketplace-podcast/


Democrats Lost Because They Wasted Their Most Valuable Weapon in the Midterms
Nearly two-thirds of voters think the U.S. economic system unfairly favors the wealthy who have taken the lion’s share of the recovery. Well over half say their own family’s financial situation has not improved over the past two years, and a fourth say it has gotten much worse. Even the people who said health care is their top issue were more likely to say the President’s Affordable Care Act did not go far enough as to say it went too far.

These are the themes that all Democratic candidates did not run boldly on and, worse, failed miserably to relate them to the President’s agenda or campaign on supporting his policies to help more Americans. Whether it was immigration reform, climate change, healthcare, women’s choice, or addressing income inequality, all important issues to voters and the President, every Democrat running for office should have embraced the President instead of running the other way toward Republicans.

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/11/06/democrats-wasted-valuable-weapon-midterms.html

(emphasis mine)

[Thinkingabout]

48. Democrats lost in mid term with 36% voter turn out. The angry old men voted, they will vote next

Time. So far I have not seen a candidate on the Democrat side who has the credentials to win the primary and to win in the general election. Elizabeth Warren spent $42 m on a senator race, got money from corporations because she is smart enough to know campaigns cost lots of money.

[Cosmic Kitten]

52. "the credentials to win" ? lol

So it's credentials that
move the general electorate?

I did not know that!

Credentials!?! huh?

So if Hillary has the "credentials"
she will win? interesting idea

[Thinkingabout]

56. Well stated, that is why the GOP is trying to stop her win.

[whereisjustice]

53. lol - speaking of angry - have you seen Hillary's war posturing? She's looking more like McCain

every day.

Bill Clinton was equally revered. Few looked past their worship and the money to understand what he did in office,

welfare reform, banking deregulation, trade agreements - set the stage for future disasters. It was bad enough that his personal arrogance set us back a decade, his "reaching across the aisle" set us back a generation.

Romney and Obama raised similar amounts of cash - each about $1 billion dollars. Romney lost because he was a cold insensitive jerk.

Hillary hasn't convinced me she is more than that at this point. Her tone deaf personality and private bubble is a liability and when she actually has to talk to REAL people, this weakness will become her downfall.

And like Bill Clinton, she will drag the rest of us down with her for another decade. Hell, she isn't even smart enough to keep her own goddamn email out of harms way.

[Thinkingabout]

57. She hasn't convinced me she is hell bent on starting a war. She knows there needs to be an exit

Point before starting a war. Do I think she is capable of making a decision, hell yes, she has the ability to listen to security briefings and make moves. It may not be to the liking of everyone but those who are willing to move when the briefings indicate the situation will probably get worse concerns me. There are a lot of dangers lurking, we have to be on guard.

[whereisjustice]

59. She's very much a neo-con based on her self-described favor of military action as a means to

assert influence. Drones, Israel, etc. I don't think she has a monopoly on good decision making. If she had done a better job of protecting historical state department documents perhaps I'd trust her decision making ability a bit better.

As it stands, I do not.

Lol @ "lot of dangers lurking". I agree Hillary brings a lot of danger to the Democratic Party.

If she wanted to help, she should run as a Republican, forcing them to move left instead of the other way around.

Makes me wonder what the end game is for Democratic Party conservatives in next decades.

How much farther right would satisfy you?

And as a corporate conservative, I believe she would appoint a corporate conservative to the Supreme Court. Do we really need another one of those?

I'm pretty sure there are more qualified candidates who would fight for women and without all the corporate baggage to set us back on every other front.

[Thinkingabout]

60. Hillary isn't republican, not even close. Put up a candidate and we will determine

Who is too far right. You are not presenting valid reasons except for more RW points.

[Cosmic Kitten]

51. where does all that money go?

Why does it cost billions to win an election?
Who reaps all that cash?

[Andy823]

31. The sad thing is

The same old right wing memes are being pushed here on DU. "Both parties are the same, don't vote if your favorite candidate doesn't win the primary, it's a waste of time to vote because both candidates will screw us over, etc." I guess the GOP strategy is working since so many here have fallen for it?

[whereisjustice]

33. Represent popular policies that benefit the non-rich or say hello to Pres. Bush. It's our choice.

[1StrongBlackMan]

72. And don't forget the all time favorite ...

"Vote for/write in {Insert the candidate without a shot of winning here} to send the Party a message!"

I heard glen beck say that just the other day, as he was doing his "I quit the republican party" bit.

And it dawned on me how similar the rw and DU election time talking points have become.

[DrBulldog]

34. Correct. That's how the GOP dominated the 2010 and 2014 mid-terms.

Those mid-terms were lost primarily because over 20% of the young white women (predominantly Democratic) who voted in the Presidential elections failed to show up to vote.

[Scootaloo]

35. Maybe the Democrats need a GOTV strategy beyond "we're not Republicans!"

Though granted, even that's a step up from the "we're not democrats, either!" campaigning from some in the midterms...

[Thinkingabout]

38. Classify yourself however you want, this crap about we are not republicans has

Tainted the barrel, I am a life long Democrat, will remain a Democrat. I am not a socialists.

[Scootaloo]

42. What you are or are not is not relevant to what i said

The democrats need a stronger message than "we're not Republicans" if they want turnout.

Maybe you're happy with the party of Rahm Emmanuel. Me, i'd rather go back to the party of FDR.

[Thinkingabout]

45. I do not classify myself as "we're not Republican", never. Most do not understand FDR, he did what

He needed to do at the time he was president.

[Cosmic Kitten]

49. lol yeah social security wasn't "socialist".

So what do YOU represent?

[bvar22]

44. All tyhe Republicans need to do to discourage Democrats from voting...

...is to make sure that Hillary wins the Democratic nomination....by hook or crook.

[Thinkingabout]

47. The GOP is working overtime to keep Hillary from being the DNC nominee, in fact Bill Kristol said

A few days ago "Run Elizabeth Warren", he knows the GOP does not have an answer for Hillary.

[Cosmocat]

64. That defies reality

I genuinely get that Hillary ain't great shakes.

And, yeah, I would rather have a stronger progressive candidate on the democratic ticket.

But, the republicans have spent most of the last 25 years demonizing and trying to destroy her, and to this day, their biggest fear is her being the democratic candidate.

[Dems to Win]

54. A Clinton-Bush race will disgust LOTS of voters into staying home

Many people are turned off by 2 families repeatedly vying for the top office in the land. I predict it will be the lowest turnout ever in a presidential year.

Since Democrats need high turnout in order to win, I expect Clinton will lose. Hope I'm wrong, of course.

[Thinkingabout]

58. You better hope it is the angry old white men getting turned off and staying home or the next

President will be a Bush.

[RandySF]

55. And Democratic Underground is aiding in that task.

[Historic NY]

61. Its working if using DU is a gauge....

because there are lots of propagators here.

[Thinkingabout]

62. If the rules remain this too will change. They repeat the same talking points over and

over, don't present anything new and do not present another candidate. If I was interested in having another candidate I would identify the candidate and spend my time posting why this person is suited to perform the functions of the president. I don't even see this.

[1StrongBlackMan]

73. And the sad thing is ...

DU has a "Group" that is supposedly for that exact purpose ... and what do you find there? Thread upon Anti-HRC thread, including an thread casting O'Mally, as a HRC conspiracy candidate!

So I don't think it is JUST the gop's strategy.

[Thinkingabout]

74. It is sad some seems to think if they trash Hillary often enough a new candidate

will appear. It does not happen this way. Get a candidate, give their stand on the issues, promote the candidate, a no candidate does not present any option.

[4dsc]

63. Yet we are not good at selling our platform to the people either

As long as the centrists and 3rd Way are running the campaigns of most members of the Democratic PArty we are lost.

[Sunlei]

65. because republicans know the most important thing is to get the win. Once elected it doesn't matter

if the little people complain forever. The only democracy 'we the people' get is our one vote.