Why vote?

[kentuck]

I think Democrats need a nationwide campaign explaining to folks why they should vote? It is unfortunate that the people that should vote don't bother to vote. The people that need government the most seldom make it to the polls.

My wife works at a community health center. Even though they have expanded, they still have a waiting list of about 9000 people. These people need government. Yet, most of them probably never vote. They don't have time to bother with it. They are too busy surviving.

This is a huge challenge for the Democratic Party. These are supporters of Democratic issues and they need to go to the polls. We have less than 14 months to reach these folks.

[TBF]

1. They don't vote because they know that neither party gives a crap about them.

Both are beholden to wall street.

[kentuck]

2. But one Party is trying to get healthcare for their children...

Don't they need to know that?

[Exilednight]

6. A small minority of the party is trying to get health care for their children, but I

wouldn't say that the entire party is fighting for it. Obama pissed away the biggest opportunity for the closest thing to universal health care that this country will see over the next 50 years.

[andlor]

13. +1

[bluestate10]

16. What Obama saw during the health care debate.

Was that blue dog democrats weren't going to support solutions like single payer. The alternative to getting something and moving from that point was getting nothing and having to fight the battle all over again years hence. Purists just can't wrap their heads around how much has been accomplished toward having a fair health care system. Without Obama getting a bill through Congress, there WOULDN'T be a Vermont attempting single payer coverage, or a Massachusetts developing a good health care mall for citizens, small companies, cities and towns to shop for health care plan.

Commonsense is always the victim of perfection if a person allows that to happen. President Obama took a stand and got an important ball rolling.

[Shagbark Hickory]

21. The compromise to single payer was the public option. As I recall, we were all ready to settle on

that.
As a compromise.

[bluestate10]

23. The public option was the only one of the two that could pass the Congress that existed.

I am back to my point. If you want progressive legislation, work your ass off to elect progressives at every level. Smother blue dogs to the point of where they either become irrelevant, or become true republicans. Until americans of your political bent understand that they have to get in the trenches and fight for the change that they dream of and relentless push that agenda, even in the face of disappointments and setbacks, there WON'T be progressive legislation getting passed.

[Exilednight]

25. Only because Obama pissed away a huge surge of popular support and allowed the tea party to

control the conversation. He was beaten by a bunch of illiterate morans.

[Shagbark Hickory]

36. Yeah and not only that, he was meeting behind closed doors with the insurance cartels.

Public option was off the table.

OBama never even brought it up again after teasing us with it on some bogus televised address.

[Exilednight]

37. He broke several campaign promises with the HCR bill. He could have

kept several promises that didn't require congressional approval and could have gone a long way to showing liberals that he was at least willing to listen to us.

Everyone knows that he didn't promise a single payer system, but he did promise everyone except lobbyist a seat at the table. It's funny how he gave lobbyist a seat at the table and excluded everyone else.

[Exilednight]

24. Obama failed and he failed big. If you notice, I said

the closest thing to universal health care. Latest census data shows that 900,000 more people are now without health insurance vs the previous year. Reform was suppose to close the gap, not widen it.

[moondust]

4. Pretty much.

U.S. Political Rule #1: Don't fail your Big Donors or they might give their Big Money to your opponent.

It's all about Big Money now (and maybe forever). Why bother to vote?

[kentuck]

5. If you get food stamps, unemployment, SSI, healthcare...

thank the Democrats. That's why you should vote. Protect those things that keep you alive.

[moondust]

11. That was then, this is now.

Do you really think those programs would have any chance of getting off the ground in today's Washington?

I do thank Democrats and some Republicans of the past for those things but they are now or soon will be under threat of reduction and possibly extinction thanks to the apparent need of politicians to serve their Big Money masters above all.

[bluestate10]

19. They may not have a chance of being started today.

But the reality is that they exist and republicans are trying to end them. Americans that get the services that are under attack from republicans can help their own cause by registering and voting. The claim of big money masters is pure bullshit when applied like a blanket to democrats. Yes, there are some democrats that are in the pockets of big money, but there are a much larger number of them that come to Congress determined to make a positive difference in the lives of everyday people. Purists have no filter and because of that, they create the conditions that they claim to hate. Purists claim there is no difference between the democratic and republican parties.

[bluestate10]

17. Exactly. Protect gains and set up things for a more progressive society to be crafted. nt

[elocs]

10. Ahhh, the 2000 meme. Both parties are alike. Now where did that get us? n/t

[hobbit709]

18. Delete

[TBF]

27. I'm not a Nadar supporter. I voted for Obama. And it has not helped working

class folks a bit, though it has helped the bankers. They got their bailouts and bonuses.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

39. TARP occured under Bush II

[TBF]

41. The very end of Jr's reign - and the bonuses came under Obama.

nt

[bluestate10]

12. The old Nader "there is no difference" bent again.

There IS a difference, a damned large difference! One party at least tries to provide health care and economic assistance to the americans that use community clinics,the other party obstructs and wishes that those people die off.

[Exilednight]

3. I view voting as more than a right, I believe it to be a

civic duty. As far as how do you get them to vote for the Democratic candidate, I'm not sure. The reality is that it would be much easier if the Democratic party could hang their hat on there not being 9000 people at your wife's clinic.

[bluestate10]

9. It is a catch-22 situation.

Before progressive democrats can be elected, people that those democrats will do the most for must vote. Many moderate democrats will vote for a progressive, but conservative democrats won't. The 9000 people on the waiting like for community clinic care present the type of numbers that can neutralize conservative democrats and put progressives into office. The issue is not that democrats have not made change, the issue is enabling them to make change with strong progressive representation that can control Congressional votes.

[Exilednight]

32. I'd argue that Democrats talk progressive to get elected, but once elected they change

to moderates. It goes from sound bites like "Yes we can" to "Shit, this is hard."

Obama is the prime example. Take for example his promise that he would publicly talk to "hostile" leaders without preconditions. This is something that can be done without congressional approval and is strictly within the rights of the executive branch. I have yet to see him talk to anyone that Bush called the "axis of evil".

[bluestate10]

7. The issue.

With getting people like the ones that your wife works with to the polls is that republicans will claim voter fraud and attempt to launch investigations and intimidate. Democrats must show backbone, make sure that every registered voter is registered by the rules and have proof of that. And leading up to and on election day, organizers must work to get those people out to vote.

[TBF]

31. I worked on the campaign here in TX in 2008 -

we got them out to vote. We called, we canvassed, we drove some to the polls. I worked at the caucus and saw folks come in who could barely read/write, and were thrilled to vote for the first African American president.

And he's an ok president, as far as that goes, better than the last one in many ways. But, still, most of the people in this country are suffering economically. Why is that?

[Exilednight]

42. In your own response you are already bending to the will of Republicans. n/t

[dkofos]

8. Because THEY don't want you to.

[bluestate10]

20. Who is "They"? nt

[elocs]

14. Why vote? Look at what happened here in WI when people didn't vote last November.

Republicans do not want people to vote, do whatever they can to suppress the vote.

So, not voting: Republicans love it when Democrats choose not to vote because it makes their job so much more easy.

[TBF]

28. Wrong again. They did vote. My mom was pulling her hair out over it.

All sorts of blue collar folks voting for Walker because they viewed him as a "family guy".

If dems want to win they need to figure out how to reach working class folks.

[elocs]

33. No, not wrong. I actually live here as well, as does Jackpine Radical who wrote this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=774784&mesg_id=774799

Yes, that's exactly what happened here.

I ran across a lot of anger & frustration among traditional Dems when I was phone banking for Feingold. They didn't vote for Johnson, they just stayed home.

Too many Democrats stayed home that day. Republicans managed to get out 90% of the votes that went to McCain while Democrats could only muster just over 60% of the number that voted for Obama.

[izquierdista]

35. This is why the Repubs have been winning

For the last 40 years, working class folk have been thinking they get 3 or 4 or 5 chances to figure out what their self interest is and how to vote for it. Back in the '30s and '40s, they KNEW which party was going to regulate the banks, which party was going to provide jobs, and which party was going to support the poor, elderly, and marginalized of society. Once they got that house in the suburbs and some food in the pantry, they lost their focus and started thinking about family values, someone taking away their guns, gays, deductions from their paycheck (i.e. taxes they wanted cut), and began falling for every bullshit lie the Repubs threw out.

Now the upper classes, they have this figured out. That is why, as Warren Buffett said, they have been winning the class war. They know that just two things are required: lobbyists to push their agenda, and advertising to sell that agenda to the public. They have insinuated themselves into the political process, so that Congress no longer communicates with the people. The rich give Congress the money to advertise with, and then they make and broadcast the ads that go out over the airwaves. They can't lose!

Dems need to have a real simple message and pound it over and over. "Tax cuts for the rich don't work" is a good one. Repubs never tire of their "we need tax cuts" message; look how many suckers they conned with their $300 from Dubya, which was promptly spent on higher priced gasoline. "No foreign wars" is another good one. A little ironic, since that was a big Repub slogan from the '20s and '30s. Make them simple and to the point, so to highlight how much of a distraction the Repub "no gay marriage" slogan is. Do like Karl Rove says and hit them with their strength: "will you still care if Adam and Steve are married when you have no job?".

[Golden Raisin]

15. Most are simply

and in some cases desperately struggling to survive in this economy (keep a job, keep a house, keep food on the table, try to put money aside to educate their children). Some just don't know or care and stare blankly or enthusiastically at the Kardashians, Dancing With The Stars and football while the country and our democracy goes down the toilet. Some know very well the disastrous consequences of not voting but feel the corruption, purchased media propaganda machine, utter dysfunction in the Beltway, shift of both parties too far to the right, and manipulated/corrupted vote-counting has gotten so out of hand they have given up.

[bluestate10]

22. Some sit on DU and write drivel.

"Some know very well the disastrous consequences of not voting but feel the corruption, purchased media propaganda machine, utter dysfunction in the Beltway, shift of both parties too far to the right, and manipulated/corrupted vote-counting has gotten so out of hand they have given up."

Change happens for those that make change. If you don't like the political culture in Washington, organize progressives and have that group work to elect a progressive for every possible seat. If other political groups see progressives being disorganized, whining and sitting on their thumbs, why should any of those groups yield on centimeter to progressive causes? Change happens where votes exists to make change. Give Obama an overwhelmingly progressive Congress, you will see that Obama has no choice but to sign into law progressive legislation.

[TBF]

29. Voting for "progressives" is not going to force rich folks to do anything.

Getting in the streets and shutting down commerce - that may have an impact.

[nevergiveup]

26. It is a tough sell to those struggling to survive

but we have to keep trying. Voting is the one voice they have (fingers crossed). For those of you who don't see the difference between Democratic and Republican control at the state or federal level I feel terrible for you.

[TBF]

30. We've been voting for how many years now? And the gap between rich & poor is greater than ever.

It's fine to vote. I voted for Obama in 2008, and went back to the polls to vote straight dem ticket in 2010 (I may have been the only one in TX).

But I don't think this is something that voting or Obama can fix for us. We are voting for cultural issues at best (which is important - I like that DADT was overturned). Economics is different though. We need massive folks in the street - like Greece. It is the only thing capital notices.

[MedicalAdmin]

34. Citizens united ended democracy in america.

In a one dollar, one vote system I just don't have the votes to win. Without public financing of elections and an audit trail of votes...

[Claudia Jones]

38. you can have one or the other, not both

We can have either broader participation and interest - which always favors the Democratic party - or we can succumb to the aggressive efforts at suppression of dissent for the sake of narrow red versus blue partisanship. We cannot have both.

[treestar]

40. That's a good idea

Get people to realize they need to vote.