... "progressives" will have stayed home.

Because certainly you know no amount of proclaiming your progressiveness will turn red voters blue. It's the same old argument - there must be some secret progressive majority waiting to rise up when the right candidate comes along. BS.

messages they hear from our Party:

39 percent of unmarried women who are eligible are not registered, representing 28 percent of all unregistered citizens
51 percent of young people between 18 and 29 who are eligible are not registered, representing 31 percent of all unregistered citizens
37 percent of African Americans who are eligible are not registered, representing 12 percent of all unregistered citizens
48 percent of Latinos who are eligible are not registered, representing 12 percent of all unregistered citizens.


That's a boat load of Americans who simply don't have enough interest to even register to vote. Why do you think they are not all registered and voting like mad for the current choices? Do you think such extreme apathy is a healthy sign in a society?

that they just don't care about politics and/or are otherwise engaged in life.

The fact is, very few people of any nation are actually engaged in or care about politics ... the vast majority of people of the world are happy to work, hang out with their family and friends and buy some toys.

Guess what? People aren't going to vote when the two top candidates = Republican Hardcore and Republican Lite. They will vote when the two candidates show contrasting POV's.

... Tammy Baldwin, won what had been Herb Kohl's seat.

Run a progressive, win.

I think it's more simple than what you posted. Republicans show up at the polls on off year elections while many Democrats do not.

In off year elections, more people are more apathetic. So it takes more work to make the apathetic people enthused enough to come out. Repubs are great at using fear and hate to get the nuts out to vote in off years, but Dems have to go positive, which is harder, and actually requires them to be willing to be even more strongly different than Repubs to inspire the wishy washy.

vote for Democrats only when there is a presidential election. I bet they would be able to identify their own U.S. Representative.

It doesn't matter, Democrat or Republican, if there aren't extenuating circumstances. The only President to buck the trend between 1910 and 1998 was FDR, and even then it was only in 1934 (he lost seats in 1938 and 1942). Reagan (R) lost seats in both the 1982 and 1986 mid-terms (he actually lost the Senate in 1986), Bu$h Sr.(R) lost seats in 1990, Clinton (D) lost the House in 1994, but gained a few seats in 1998 due to backlash from the impeachment circus. Bu$h Jr.(R) gained a few seats in 2002 because of his War on Terror crap, but lost lots of seats in 2006. Obama lost lots of seats in 2010.

As the electorate is more polarized than ever and there are fewer and fewer persuadable voters.

That being said, we're (probably) going to lose the Senate this November just due to geography. The ideology of the candidates matters quite little. Red states voters are unhappy with Obama and they're going to vent that frustration by voting against anyone with a D after their name.

These states simply don't have either enough progressives to turn out nor enough swing voters to convince that it will make any difference.

SUPREME COURT. ANY JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS WHATSOEVER.

Healthcare.

Women's rights.

Minimum wage.

One party will kill you. The other gives you a fighting chance if you aren't too dumb to take it.

... corporations while advocating for draconian stances on social issues.

The other party works for Wall Street, Big Oil and other corporations while advocating for more reasonable stances on social issues.

SUPREME COURT. ANY JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS WHATSOEVER.

Healthcare.

Women's rights.

Minimum wage.

One party will kill you. The other gives you a fighting chance if you aren't too dumb to take it.

But rather than support the Progressive Dem running for Gov., the Dems ENDORSED CHRISTIE. In a BLUE STATE. They did NOT support the Progressive Dem at a time when Christie, in NJ was extremely VULNERABLE due to the way he had mishandled Sandy.

Practically ALL the elected Dems in NJ ENDORSED THE REPUBLICAN and the Dem Party provided no help to the PROGRESSIVE DEM, no money, while Christie was swimming in money.

The message you are delivering here is the one delivered by the Dems to BLUE VOTERS in NJ was 'the progressive cannot win, so you may as well vote for Christie, who they were told, 'is a moderate candidated'.

So forget RED STATES, we are told the exact same thing no matter whether it is a Blue or Red State. And now we know WHY. So you can drop that particular talking point, NJ is just ONE of many examples over the past few election cycles where the Dem leadership refused to support Progressive Dems in favor of either actual Republicans or fake Dems, sometimes LOSING because of it.

Talking points not working this time. Either they fight for the Dems or they don't get to wave fingers at the voters who WANT Dems, not Republicans which they are not providing for whatever reason.

In a blue state, nonetheless.
Totally Gobsmacked.

to his advantage, posing with some of them, sending out robo calls of Dems gushing over what a great guy he was etc.

Democrats Who Endorsed Christie now Appearing in Mailers with the Governor

Progresives don't stay home. They hold their noses and vote.

Who stays home? The apathetic first time or sometime voters, the wishy washy middle who don't find any inspiration in candidates who won't help them economically, no matter what party those candidates claim to represent.

despite being shown evidence that progressives are highly reliable voters.

Hmmmm, who else likes to tell lies again and again despite being shown evidence to the contrary?

All these years political strategists have been courting the wrong voters. If they'd only spoken to you, you would have set them straight.

continue to get paid. Almost as if it doesn't actually matter to them who wins, as long as the paychecks keep rolling in.

so they stray further and further away from doing any of the "people's business," concentrating instead on their various owners...

The DEMS love to compromise, because they are in fact compromised.

I was saying. Guess I wasn't clear.

Maybe the other poster misread something in your OP, but his point and your OP look pretty much identical to me.

Georgia etc would follow his lead they too would be leading by a huge amount.

Just curious

Just curious-er.

They dissolved in early 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council


Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren exist. If you think about, we do have lots of liberals and liberal policy initiatives, and unfortunately tea party controlled house blocks it all. Spending and revenue is controlled by the house.

The reason that even when Dems have control of everything they claim they are unable to get anything done is because so many of them vote with Republicans on important issues all the time. Why is that??

and what are you doing to get us towards "lots of liberals" and win a majority in the house? Do you need to "punish" the party first?

Two is not lots of liberals. You listed two elected officials. I could add a handful of others. There are HUNDREDS of elected officials, a handful of Liberals is not 'lots' according to my math. When the Dem party begins to support the Progressive Dems I support in order to increase that handful of Liberals, then maybe it WILL increase.

I'm flattered you think I am so powerful I can 'punish' the Dem Party. Wish it were true, we would have way, way more than a handful of Liberals in Congress. But sadly it isn't.

voting record. I see approx ten people there whose VOTING RECORDS say they are Progressive Dems.

Do NOT tell ME to vote for Dems. Tell the Dem Party Leadership to SUPPORT Progressive Dems. All those names you just listed are THERE BECAUSE Dems, like me, did NOT, like many of our Elected Dems, ENDORSE REPUBLICANS like CHRIS CHRISTIE. You are talking to the wrong people here. You need to ask why elected Dems ENDORSE Republicans like Christie over good Progressive Dems like Buono. Have you DONE THAT YET??

I am still waiting to hear why the Dem Leadership refused to help NJ Dem Buono in a BLUE STATE when Christie was already so vulnerable and a majority of voters there are DEMS. Why? Why are you here talking to people who have NEVER voted for a Republican and definitely never gushed over one like Dems did over Christie.

Go talk to those who HAVE helped Republicans win, talk to those elected DEMS and the leadership who over and over again refused to help PROGRESSIVE DEMS like Buono among others.

They are the ones you need to lecture.

the progressive wing of our party as to what happened in 2010. To danm many Dem's decided that for what ever lame reason to stay home. Remember Progressives tend to see the big picture and despite what the monied elite want you to believe,they will be at polls. BTW,early voting starts tomorrow here in Vegas. See you Nevadan's at the polls.

Did liberals really stay home and cause the 2010 rout?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/06/1003805/-Did-liberals-really-stay-home-and-cause-the-2010-rout
“So I went back to the exit polls and the picture I see shows nothing like that. If you are a proponent of this claim, I challenge you for empirical proof that some set of activist liberals "took their ball and went home" or whatever metaphor you prefer to make Obama's leftward critics appear childish and immature. Inside, the evidence I found that shows this just ain't so.”

http://blogforarizona.net/do-progressives-even-sit-out-elections-the-numbers-say-no/
“As you can see, Democrats did slightly better with liberals in 2010 than in 2006. Had there really been a collective we’re-sitting-out-the-election-to-spite-Obama pout going on, then there should have been a sharp drop in the liberal participation percentage. Yet notice the 9% in moderate voter participation and the concomitant 10% increase in conservative turnout. Republicans were pumped for that election but their turnout tends to be higher in midterms anyway. Millions of moderate voters either flipped to conservative or stayed home in 2010.”
“As you can see, all the Democratic groups dropped, but the liberal Democrats dropped least of all”

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/progressive-movement/news/2012/11/08/44348/the-return-of-the-obama-coalition/
Ideology. Liberals were 25 percent of voters in 2012, up from 22 percent in 2008. Since 1992 the percent of liberals among presidential voters has varied in a narrow band between 20 percent and 22 percent, so the figure for this year is quite unusual. Conservatives, at 35 percent, were up one point from the 2008 level, but down a massive 7 points since 2010.
Ideology. Obama received less support in 2012 from all ideology groups, though the drop-offs were not particularly sharp in any group. He received 86 percent support from liberals (89 percent in 2008), 56 percent from moderates (60 percent in 2008), and 17 percent from conservatives (20 percent in 2008).

Catch-22, winning or losing makes no difference in what direction the party moves, it's like the Invisible Gorilla, they look for reasons to move right and lo and behold they find reasons to move to the right for all that sweet, sweet corporate cash.

Lose. Because progressives.
Win. Who needs progressives.

Problem solved.

the DEM Party Plank in service to the 1%. NOTHING.

and, of course, "right wing politics is progressivism"

Remember "Triangulation"?

_____

you ignore local and state politics .

do you think Wendy Davis would win if she would try to be more like Jerry Brown ?

What would happen if we pushed unapologetically left and our policies didn't?

Will you be surprised if the country moves to the Right?

If you don't support Democrats, don't whine when they don't reflect your views. Conversely, the best way to have the Democratic Party promote progressive issues is get out & vote for Democrats.

People who say there's no difference between the two parties is fucking insane.

without Independents. Now please explain why almost all Progressive Dems held their seats in 2010 while Blue Dogs lost?? I'll explain it for you. Independents wanted real Dems not right leaning Third Wayers. Dems did go out to vote, they always do, but Indeps sent the message that the Dem Party refused to acknowledge, provide Real Dems or we Independents will stay home.

Stop preaching to those who vote no matter how hard they have to hold onto their noses. Deliver that message to the most important voting bloc at this point and then listen to what they have to say to you, Independents. If you keep attacking those who DID vote, then it will not by the voters' fault if Dems lose, it will be THIS tactic which refuses to try to attract the Independent vote while blaming it all on those who DID and DO and WILL vote.

and lose the congress we lose the SCOTUS for many years, the voter obstruction will continue and we will be lucky if any of us get to vote again. And they will dig the economy further into the whole than they already have. The safety net will be gone. And in even another 4 years they will hand what is left of the wealth in this country all into the hands of the 1%.

We would have to be insane to not vote. And God help us all if your prediction comes true.

will move further right because the monied facists will be paying them more to move that way. The entire system is alien to Democracy now and can only have Democracy regained by revolt.

But then, they call every win on their side a case where "the American People have spoken" and every win on the Dems side a case of "election fraud".

subscription site here "Building You Own Drone" they might not think the Dems were such wimps. If you don't like the idea, that's okay. Just as a ruse.

And if the Democrats hold the Senate, will I see posts saying the American people have spoken?

I suspect I will.

Boehner will stand up there talking about "The American People have spoken" but Dems in DC act like they have to apologize for winning and immediately try to win the Republicans over,...usually by assuring them that they won't do too much to upset them.

08 - ran liberal campaign and won big. 10 - ran as appeasing centrists, got killed. Duh

loses...

Look at the picture in reverse. How many Republican Senators are there in states Obama won by 15-20 points? Two, Mark Kirk and Susan Collins. Mark Kirk won by a fluke and will be in a very precarious position when he's up next cycle. Susan Collins represents a very small state. When she retires, her seat will almost certainly go Democratic.

Mark Begich, Mark Pryor, and Mary Landrieu are in precarious positions because their constituents are becoming more and more Republican. It's really that simple.

right can these politicians take us? Pathetic

I think she has generated a lot of enthusiasm in the state of Kentucky. Contrary to a couple of recent polls, she has a very good chance of winning this race. If that happens, what is the lesson we should learn? It's about speaking to the voters.

I just think it's moronic not to admit that you voted with the majority, especially when the candidate was someone in your own party. Is she that ashamed?

This is a strategic move to try and win the election and beat Mitch McConnell.

the opposite direction, of course. So you are right.

No matter the reality, the lesson they always take away is that they need to move further right. If they lost, it's because they think they were 'too far left', if they win, it's because they feel they were smart to move as far to the right as they did.

The end result is the same.

And because we couldn't grasp that even a crappy Dem is better than the best Republican solely because of the way majority leadership works in Congress. (I say this with a heavy heart. There are crappy Dems.)

They did not feel guilty and they were not inspired. They watched football instead.

The Supreme Court is doing everything they can to help the Rapeugiicans win.
Their recent voter ID rulings could well cost us the elections in the affected states
as hundreds of thousands of voters (mostly Democrats) get turned away.

Populist Campaigns like Elizabeth Warren WORK!

I'll be doing a "Hub" on what the Democrats Strategy in the Senate at least should be, as well as a view of word I could see as possible (Anonymous Infiltrators anyone?)