Man, I feel totally bitter and defeated today....

Not just the elections last night (I live in NJ where Dems won both houses). But the gubernatorial election losses, combined with the utterly negative tone of the debate last night , combined with the increasingly acrimonious and confrontational tone of this message board.

I had a fairly long, somewhat sarcastic ramble typed out and ready to post. It was nothing majorly offensive but I censored myself and didn't post it simply because I didn't feel like contending with the flames. From fellow democrats and liberals.

My overall depression is coming from the ridiculous head in the sand approach that people connected with my party and on the left in general. Whether it's the centrists refusal to throw enough red meat at the democratic base to get people motivated enough to get out to vote, or the left's refusal to admit that there is at least some rightward shift going on in this country, without blaming it on the media or the voting machines or the DLC or any number of other scapegoats.

I don't know. Again, this is just a ramble but today just feels like a very defeated day.

When I heard about MS and KY, especially MS, I just assumed it was the voting machines at work.

I have no evidence for that (yet), but....

Nevermind the fact that it shouldn't be close enough to let the machines call it. Let's just keep yelling about the machines then we won't have to worry about actual ideology or actually campaigning or putting effort into convincing people to vote for our candidate. We can just regale them with shadowy conspiracy tales.

it really was. I think that we are fed that so they have an opportunity to steal it. How come all the "close" ones always go to the Repugs. Name one supposedly close race that has gone dem.

Then look at the sunshine state. Arnold was trailing. Then there was that one stupid debate, where he looked very bad. Then in a couple of days he's leading the pack. Come on. Are you gonna tell me that Arnold actually won the governorship. I don't believe it for a minute. It is a conspiracy between the media and the voting machines, it has to be.

This country, aside from the rabid right, is not, I repeat not, conservative. I don't believe that for a minute. The real problem is information. If the masses had the "big picture" you would have a entire country pissed off. IT IS THE MEDIA!!!!!!!!!!!!

like that which took place last night in Mississippi. WTF They have to cheat. How many black people do you think have just given up on voting because of the harrassment in the South. Where is the outrage!!!!!!!!!! That shit is just wrong!!!!!

to screw the Democrats. Thousands of people are in on the fix
and they're all keeping quiet about it.


We lost the strawberry-growing counties.

...mid-term elections.

Your comments sound exactly like the typical Freeper response.

Maybe you should do a little research before you start belittling posters on DU. In fact, in your case, you may need to do a LOT of research.

for every poltical development that they don't like.

In fact if you go over there you will exactly the same
complaints about the media, the pollsters and vote fraud.
They just frame it in a different context.

I thought we were supposed to be better.

How come all the "close" ones always go to the Repugs. Name one supposedly close race that has gone dem.

You can't tell me that something is not wrong with that picture!

didn't win the election for Arnold.

for being honest!

I can't tell you how many disgruntled democrats I know who voted for Arnold or stayed home on election day.

Wake up guys and take off the tin foil. Wanna know why democrats are losing? Look inward-- and-- there's a litle bit of backlash happening as well.

we'll never make the changes that the party needs
to make to win.

Because by the time the election rolled around, the true Dem voters were on to jacking by the repugnant ones.

stupid idiot voters did

were more than just "swayed" buy a complete and total campaign for Arnold by most of the major media. All Arnold All The Time!

For all the hysteria here about voting machines nobody's ever shown
that a single vote was ever switched. From what I can see
the results in KY and MS are consistent with pre-election polls.
The ususal suspects were screaming about the machines in CA
and that race was also consistent with polls.

We have to be able to analyze elections a little better than
to whine "we got cheated" every time especially when there's
no real reason to believe that.

Arnold was trailing. Then there was this debate. Did you see it? Arnold sucked. Then a week later there is this huge turnaround and all of the sudden Arnold is leading. This is trumpeted on every television news station every five minutes. The stations were calling the race in the morning, it wasn't even lunch time.

Let's see what were the obstacles to voting. Reduced polling places, 2 hour lines, provisional ballots that were never counted, uncertified software, hanky panky. I say bullshit!

And answer my question if you can because I cannot. How many "close" races have gone dem? Do you know?

"Arnold sucked" ? Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't. But
apparently the public didn't think so. Again the pre-election
polls were quite consistent with the results so you have to
believe in some wide reaching conspiracy to explain them as
being anything other the the will of the voters.

Close elections are usually decided swing voters who decide who
to vote for within days the election and often for shallow reasons.

In 2000 the Dems had the late momentum and won close Senate elections in
MO, WA, and MI and MN. Dem Senate candidates pulled away late in NY and
NJ. Gore also made a late surge.

In 2002 with little or no message the Dems lost the late breaking vote across the board and lost close in MN, GA, MO, NH. They won close in
SD.

Doesn't that make a lot more sense that some octapus-like conspiracy.

Vote with your essence, Mandrake.

You cannot tell me there was not a difference. How come the dems "pulled out" all of those races in 2000. Could it have been pollsters were wrong?

probably because of the Clinton peace and prosperity (despite
all his foibles) and Joe Swingvoter swung his way.

In 2002 the party simply ran a bad campaign and the late votes went
the other way. It cut across all methods of voting. Here in PA
Ed Rendell won the governors race by a lot less than was expected and
the legislature (which many thought would go Dem) stayed Republican.
And PA tends to have old fashioned mechanical machines.

We'd do a lot better for ourselves by showing Terry McAuliffe the door
than by searching for conspiratorial villains.

As another poster mentioned the governors in MS and KY were both
Dems. Did their administrations go out and buy machines that were
rigged to beat them ? That doesn't make any sense.

If there are security issues on the new machines they should be
fixed but there's no evidence of anything other than security holes.

The party needs to hone it's message and it's candidates for next year.
Chasing around after voting machines is just a distraction form the
real work that needs to be done.

about all this peace and prosperity?" And this took place in the last
few days before the election.

Lets now take a look at November 2002, what was going on? Do you remember? TERROR, TERROR, FEAR, FEAR. I wonder what would have happened had it not been for 9/11.

Fast forward to 2003. Are the people now waking up out of their shell shock. Are people now starting to question the 9/11-Iraq link. Are people starting to question the economy, the tax cuts, halliburton, job loss. Seems to me when the playing field is leveled people are supporting dems and it is showing in the elections.

and the Democrats had nothing to counter it. In '00 there
was no reason to switch for the swingvoters and they tended
Democratic. In '02 they heard terror from the Pubs and, well,
nothing from our guys. Remember, the guy who makes up his mind
in the days before the election has no ideoligcal base
and is looking only superficially at the issues.

It really doesn't surprise me that a thug like Barbour won in MS
or a Republican won in KY. Here in PA the Dems did pretty well and
they took over the legislature in NJ. I think we start next year
in about the same place we were in in 2000.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Are we going to scream "voting machine" every time a Dem loses ?

There is overwhelming evidence that the machines can be hacked, votes added or subtracted. YES! I am going to scream about it. Complacency no more.

(not can be flipped) then present it. Otherwise
if you constantly scream fraud every time a Dem loses nobody
will take you seriously when there is fraud.

The "Bird" you must be...is an ostrich...head in the sand.

It is so blatantly obvious that the wingnuts own the machines, and the whole damn electoral process at this point.

De Nile isn't just a river in Egypt.

:kick:

When the "bigger than Watergate" expose was published
a couple of months ago on the New Zealand web site they
had to put in a disclaimer saying they had no evidence
of actual vote fraud associated with the machines.

Do you have a programmer who rigged the code ?

A technician who altered vote totals ?

All I've ever seen from these people is what could happen.

And when the vote counts mirror poll results doesn't that tell
you anything ?

They won't let anybody near the machined. There is nothing to compare the computer with. What the computer says goes.

It has already been proven that it can be hacked. Do you think maybe just maybe it was designed that way on purpose.

Thats is like saying "prove there is a God"

The only point I would add to your entirely sensible discussion is that the tinfoilers need to pay at least occasional attention to who is actually running the election and is, therefore, in a position to cheat. Hint: it's not John Ashcroft or George Bush. Elections are run at the state and local level.

To limit the discussion, at least momentarily, to this year: Kentucky, Mississippi, and California were, as of Election Day, all Democratic controlled at the state level. (They are predominately Democratic controlled at the county level as well, although there are some Republicans scattered around.) I have yet to hear any of the tinfoilers explain why they think Democratic officials in these states would have rigged the election against themselves.

Nor have I heard anyone make a case for county-level tampering. That would require actual evidence and analysis, as opposed to saying: "We lost, ergo, we wuz robbed."

Just for the record, I write this as someone who thinks vote fraud is a serious problem, not limited to one Party.

What sort of Democrats? Perhaps rightwing DINOs, like the 'butterfly ballot Democrat' who'd been a Republican up til that year? Or possibly 'centrists', who demand that we all get behind 'Rockefeller Republican' DINOs? Those kinds of 'Democrats'?

centrist Democrats (unnamed, of course) want to allow Republicans to steal elections using voting machines.

It's a conspiracy, Mandrake.

... that, in each of the elections we're analyzing today, the conspirators rigged the machines to closely mirror the pre-election polling results.

Which can only mean, of course, that all the pollsters are in on it too.

i will give attention to the theory that it's the machines if you will give attention to the theory that it isn't.

so....what if it isn't?

but we have to figure it out!! we can't just sit and hope bush loses. we have to figure this out...someway to beat him.

one thing i know is falling back on the certitude that it was the machines is either delusional, if it wasn't or defeatist if it was.

Electronic voting, voter intimidation, purging voting rolls of democratic voters, 18,181, corporate media, vote stealing.........

you are right. we have a handle on the what if it is. i even planted a little seed with the poll workers yesterday...planting the seed that machines are bad. i'm totally aware of the possibility that machines without a paper trail are an issue.

i just wish the path were so clear in the what if it isn't the machines option.

a gut level thing with me. I believe that most people deep down inside are inherently good. If you appeal to their heart. Who really wants our kids schools to go without proper funding. Who really doesn't want to feed a hungry child. Who really wants people that are sick to go without help. Who really would choose the corporation over the people. If you sat down and had heart to hearts with each and everyone of them (which is impossible) couldn't they be swayed by the arguments of the left.

I am glad I am not alone today. I am very depressed about the situation. Yes, there is a rightward shift and I do blame it on the media or voting machines. Also, the stonewalling in the administration about the CIA-Plame affair. I think I am more angry over that situation than anything. Also about the 9/11 commission. 2003 will become known as the year of stonewall. Why go through all the records (if the WH gives them) and take months when I feel sure the CIA and the WH know exactly who did it. And to top it off, CBS bowing down to conservative censoring. Hells bells, can we win anything? (It is good to ramble.)

If we keep denying that people want a leader who is strong on defense or that people don't want their taxes raised (and in fact want them lower) and that people want to trust their leader even when they don't like him personally, or that people don't have the time or energy or concern to get involved let alone to care about the vague possibility of a conspiracy regarding voting machines, we will keep waking up bitter post election day.

I'm not saying I agree with any of this stuff but to deny that a good chunk of people in this country, particularly in the middle feel this way is willful ignorance that is going to cost us.

I've heard it called the 'Apathy Party'. And a number of around 50% of the population is attributed to that party. I prefer the term sheeple, but some of you may wish to adopt 'Apathy'. But until we all realize that what we are up against is a class of people willing to be slaves to a set of elite rulers, then we are but pissing in the wind.

To not be willing to call a spade, a spade, is willful ignorance, eh?

And until they are grabbed it will continue to be like it is now.

But don't let it get to you. Instead take positive action and make an attempt to educate and inform. Make sure they know the facts and the truths. Peace.

it's no big deal that they remained red for the governors. We need to focus our energies on states where there is a reasonable probability of success in 2004. Those are the left coast, Northeast, Great Lakes, and Florida. There were lots of Dem victories in those places yesterday.

Not as quickly as we would like, but it does. The Democrats have enjoyed nearly a century of superiority, and now things are going the other way -- but that can change tomorrow. I actually think we've seen a high-watermark for the Republicans, assuming things go right in the next elections, but either way, things will get better eventually.

I need more of Sammy Davis Jr. though. Got any?

I think the US population has become more liberal but with a long way to go. The power structure's techniques for demonizing populism have improved significantly with media control.

There's still a huge well of dissatisfaction with 'consumer democracy' and 'market-driven free speech' as it's being lived.

I just think things go up and down and I am willing to bet the GOP felt this way when they were out of power for so many years.Face it their are people in this country that think power is great and to push other countries around is the way to go. That all people should pull them selfs up by their boot straps and do it all by them selfs(like George) no taxes and all with assallt guns, and businesses are always right. I am a liberal and think they are wrong. I also feel that there are really more like me than them but they do not vote. I hope your passion will help people to get out and vote as my understated ways will not.

Let the Repubs deal with it...

The only comfort I have in that is my right wing friends complain about the same bitter defeats.

Democracy is about participating. As activists, we rarely get what we want, but the public at large gets better than it deserves and a system that is not nearly as bad as any other.

sharply to the right. There are many reasons, I believe. One that no one mentions is the popular culture. George Gerbner has studied TV viewing more than anyone, and among other things found that heavy TV viewers tend to become politically more conservative without even knowing it. Almost all TV shows, movies, video games, and magazines in the pop culture have an overtly conservative moral message including pro-war, revenge, simple black-white issues, and good vs. bad. TV news is part of this. We don't grow up in a vaccuum. People absorb their values from their surroundings. There's too much to discuss in a thread, but I do think this is one of our problems. Being liberal means being able to think about things in a more complicated way. Yes, people want lower taxes. 99% of the time the candidate whom the voters think will cut taxes will win. Being a celebrity, tall, tough, or professional helps too. Most voters respond to things they are unaware of. Liberals tend to respond to complex issues.

more conservative without even knowing it"

I agree with you, also agree about the
video games. Young people are becoming
more right wing politically because they
believe that being the strong bully is
the answer to everything.

So sad isn't it?

I understand your frustration and bitterness. My city re-elected our very liberal mayor, Rocky Anderson, which is fantastic news, but what is scary is that 85% of Mormons and 91% of Republicans voted against him. Democrats are in trouble because a certain religious fanaticism and neo-conservatism appears to have a grip on our country. Ignorance is once again considered 'good', and intelligence/logic, 'bad'. What can we do about it? What can you do about a large part of the population defying logic and going by 'feelings'? 'Bush is a man of God?'--yet NOTHING he has done even resembles the life of Christ. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact. How do you make the blind see?

'Liberal' has become such a dirty word, almost like 'Jew' was in 1930's Germany. I wish our 'liberal' reps in D.C. would understand that playing to the right is not going to make a damn bit of difference. We need a contrast to the 'Family Values' hypocritical bullsh*t.

I know too many liberals who vote Republican, because of their religion, and because they have been convinced that liberal = communist sympathizer or anti-American, or in a word, 'bad'. Or perhaps it's just that they want to feel a part of what appears to be the prevailing crowd--you would think this nation was completely Republican if you watched enough news. We need to make 'liberal' a good word again (Kennedy's quote on liberalism comes to mind). How? I don't know, but we could start by demanding our reps start following the party platform instead of pandering to Bush policy.

So you my friend are on the way to solving it....


The point about New Jersey is instructive..... The Democrats are consolidating their power in the areas where they are popular and the R's are consolidating their power where they are popular...Unfortunately the Republicans are popular in more places...

We need a bag of bullshit to sell in places like the south and a bag of other bullshit to sell in liberal areas. Now you say that is impossible?? welllll..bullshit. I see it every day with the repukes. Remember our lovely "compassionate conservative" goon in the big white house?? He told you he loved you baby, took the oath of office and turned around and ripped your lungs out. That's what we need--a damn good liar and con man and we need a lot of them.

I have long believed that the so-called "pro-life" movement is one of the biggest victories Satan has ever pulled off. Those who vote for candidates solely on the basis of their stance on choice/no choice, they have tacitly approved all the rampant evils perpetrated by the right wing extremists. Those who call themselves "pro-life" are simply self-righteous.

looks like it may be in check at least from this election locally.

To be honest, PA has had conservative republican and democratic governors for the past 12 years and while Rendell is not a leftist, he is a lot different than either Casey or Ridge.

To be honest its conservatism that has hurt our state. That tight-fisted, supply side jesus approach has just strangled local governments, school districts and public works projects. Personally the victory in Allegheny County last night seems to be a sign that republican rhetoric may be wearing thin finally.

Rendell (Gov.) last year, Street (Phil. mayor) and Onorato (Allegheny County exec.) this year.

Pennsylvania. I don't have a clue.

(West. PA)

maybe we are on to something.

nothing i enjoy more than filling in those little ovals with a soft lead pencil!!!!!

around these parts.

The R's Are Consolidating Their Power Where They Are Strong.....

Sadly the R's are stronger in more areas....

If the "centrist" electorate wants a stronger defense and lower taxes, should we advocate for those things?! Why wouldn't we just vote for Bush? Just what the hell are you advocating? If the average Joe thinks we should "nuke Iraq 'til it's a sheet of glass", should we incorporate that into our message?
Just why do you think 60% of America doesn't vote? Is it because they think politicians have no integrity? At least partially?
But you seem to think we should pretend to be as dumb as many in the electorate are.
Stick to an honest, just message and, eventually, the public will see the error of their ways and elect sane leaders. And, if not, at least we have our integrity. And the wonderful people of our country will get the government they deserve.
I'm sick of the DNC trying to appeal to the NASCAR vote. Fuck 'em!
Every time we engage in a vain attempt to lure the Billy Bobs into the party we alienate younger, idealistic voters of all races. The Dixiecrats were never true Dems. As I said before, FUCK 'EM! Good riddance. If we need to appeal to brain-dead racists to get elected, then I'm proud to be in the minority.

In greater numbers than their older counterparts?

They haven't seen as much, they don't know as much, they grew up on TV and movies that glorify toughness, pro-war, and stereotyping, they are politically naive and can't tell when they're being suckered, they are rebelling against their liberal parents in order to establish their own identities, they are materialistic, they can't see the value of taxation. The thing that is most correlated with liberal thinking is higher education. The better job we can do of educating people, the more liberal they become. Look at countries around the world. There's a near perfect correlation between amount of education and liberalism. Right now, Americans want lower taxes. I believe that's because no one has shown them the advantages of tax and spend.

what the atvantages of tax and spend are? (and I'm not putting you on I'm just kind of new at this).

pay them all... police, firefighters, nurses, road construction, teachers, military, etc. Taxes are the income for the society. Some borrowing (debt) is okay, but if too large, there are problems (interest, plus, who wants to loan money to someone who might not pay it back?). Spending by the government accomplishes much that spending by individuals won't. Big projects: pollution control, public health, public schools, public institutions, security, roads, public buildings, nursing homes, libraries, parks, etc. Also, government spending gives money to people (just like a tax rebate, except the society gets something in return)! That is income for them that can be taxed and spent again. Who gets the money? Police, teachers, construction workers, government employees who provide services, researchers, health inspectors, etc. They are all citizens whose incomes will go up (they can spend the money to help the economy) and the money goes round and round. Individuals with lots of money won't buy the things that society needs: restaurant inspectors, pollution control, highway repair, etc. Reducing taxes does help stimulate the economy a little, but there are more effective ways. Tax relief can be targeted to certain groups who are more likely to spend than are the rich (they have enough money to buy anything they want - giving them more money does not increase spending or investing very much). Also, government spending can be targeted to help people who need help.

So I'm not sure which of these young voters you are talking about?

days before election.

I think it's because more young people have college educations these days.

CNN claimed more were in the thrall of Arnold's stardom. It turned out not to be true.

about true conservatives voting for Arnold over Mc Clintock. Ultra conservative Orange County went to Arnold?

18-29 year old folks are more likely to be Bush supporters than their older counterparts....

An often overlooked fact is that Nixon did better among this group than McGovern...


I think a "little draft" could change this dynamic fast....

but the situation seems to darken around us all the time. The optimist in me says, you know, all that stuff about being darkest before the dawn. The pessimist in me says the darkness could be from the political asteroid about to slam into our world next November that's blocking out the light.

bush

he's still president and he's still screwing up.

maybe we don't have to win this.

maybe bushco will lose allllll by itself

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=652540

Plus you have the seeds of cheer in your own post: "I live in NJ where Dems won both houses"

Yesterday got me to thinking in a broad terms about the whole political situation in the United States and, at least for a while, as me re-thinking my adamant refusal to accept Norquist's assertion that the United States is entering the dawn of a decades-long conservative reign. The main reason I've never really given that scree any credit is because Norquist has said this before in the 70's, 80's, and 90's...and he's been wrong each time.

My thoughts this morning are still grounded in the hope that Norquist will be wrong again, but wrong or right, the Democratic Party and liberals in general need to sort some things out if we are going to stand toe-to-toe with or hopefully head and shoulders above our Republican conservative adversaries. I think the three main things are party cleavage, organization, and national party leadership.

First thing on the list: We need a Green Party. People who are very liberal need to quit being unhappy with the centrist dominated Democratic Party and form a viable third party, one that is truly liberal instead of constantly fighting with the many centrists in the Democratic Party. This Green Party could very well be more viable than the Democratic Party in a decade's time if it is organized properly from the beginning: From the grassroots up. Forget wasting money on running Presidential campaigns and Senatorial campaigns. Run for House seats, state seats, and local seats. Start in "safe" Green areas, build a record of accomplishment, and grow. I think this type of party with this type of message could very well be the antidote to so much of the institutional malaise the Democratic Party exhibits these days. The lack of consent at critical times within our party makes it almost trivial for our Republican conservative opponents to step right over us and keep on plundering. I simply don't see another way around this besides cleaving the contemporary party into two more ideologically compatible institutions.

Second thing on the list: Organization. Just like my proposal for a grassroots Green Party building from the grassroots, the Democratic Party needs a good dose of the grassroots revolution. When I hear people talk about "the Dean revolution" or "the Clark revolution" it gives me a good gut laugh. Revolution? You're joking, right? The only revolution at work in these two campaigns has to do with the use of MeetUp and online donations. You can quit talking about it beyond those things. Is that necessarily bad? No. I just don't believe that you can call a couple of structural innovations a "revolution" and not get laughed at for thinking it's true.

The revolution we do need as the Democratic Party isn't going to come from a candidate or his or her campaign. It's got to either come from the grassroots or it's got to come from a very rare top-down change. We need to build up the same type of intermeshing network that has contributed so heavily to Republican success over the last two decades. No, it's not as if they've swept the entire House, Senate, and the Presidency in every election, but they have made very solid, very incremental gains that are going to be very tough to roll back. Witness the gubenatorial wins in from yesterday.

I will be the first to admit that these wins should not be surprising when you look at the national voting trends in these two states. I mean for Christ's sakes, these are the home states of Mitch McConnell and Trent Lott! In cold, hard, rational terms there should not be a bit of surprise that these states' Governor's races went Republican. What is surprising is that these races went strongly Republican after all of the criminality, cronyism, and screw-ups that have been the Bush administration. Even with a biased voting base to begin with, I think the cautionary message we need to take away from these races is that it's not going to be good enough to just show up, be angry, be a veteran, be progressive, or just be an alternative: We need to go to battle as a party and we need to change as a party, because the alternative is more incremental Republican gains; they will literally nickel and dime us into irrelevancy.

Third and final point: We need a Democratic National Committee that is going to get behind gubernatorial, House, and Senate races, not just the Presidential races. Granted the Republicans have an incumbent and more money right now, which means they aren't distracted with primaries and multiple candidates nor are they strapped for cash, but since the DNC is not officially backing anyone at this point, there is no reason that McAuliffe et. al. cannot get their asses out of their chairs and put their insitutional shoulders behind incumbent Democratic gubernatorial candidates. I heard plenty (even here in Texas) of support from the RNC for their guys and I read plenty about their commitment to those candidates and races.

I read NOTHING AT ALL about similar commitment from the DNC for their incumbents.

My original session timed out on me but it posted anyway. Can you delete this for me?

Thanks!

Yesterday got me to thinking in a broad terms about the whole political situation in the United States and, at least for a while, as me re-thinking my adamant refusal to accept Norquist's assertion that the United States is entering the dawn of a decades-long conservative reign. The main reason I've never really given that scree any credit is because Norquist has said this before in the 70's, 80's, and 90's...and he's been wrong each time.

My thoughts this morning are still grounded in the hope that Norquist will be wrong again, but wrong or right, the Democratic Party and liberals in general need to sort some things out if we are going to stand toe-to-toe with or hopefully head and shoulders above our Republican conservative adversaries. I think the three main things are party cleavage, organization, and national party leadership.

First thing on the list: We need a Green Party. People who are very liberal need to quit being unhappy with the centrist dominated Democratic Party and form a viable third party, one that is truly liberal instead of constantly fighting with the many centrists in the Democratic Party. This Green Party could very well be more viable than the Democratic Party in a decade's time if it is organized properly from the beginning: From the grassroots up. Forget wasting money on running Presidential campaigns and Senatorial campaigns. Run for House seats, state seats, and local seats. Start in "safe" Green areas, build a record of accomplishment, and grow. I think this type of party with this type of message could very well be the antidote to so much of the institutional malaise the Democratic Party exhibits these days. The lack of consent at critical times within our party makes it almost trivial for our Republican conservative opponents to step right over us and keep on plundering. I simply don't see another way around this besides cleaving the contemporary party into two more ideologically compatible institutions.

Second thing on the list: Organization. Just like my proposal for a grassroots Green Party building from the grassroots, the Democratic Party needs a good dose of the grassroots revolution. When I hear people talk about "the Dean revolution" or "the Clark revolution" it gives me a good gut laugh. Revolution? You're joking, right? The only revolution at work in these two campaigns has to do with the use of MeetUp and online donations. You can quit talking about it beyond those things. Is that necessarily bad? No. I just don't believe that you can call a couple of structural innovations a "revolution" and not get laughed at for thinking it's true.

The revolution we do need as the Democratic Party isn't going to come from a candidate or his or her campaign. It's got to either come from the grassroots or it's got to come from a very rare top-down change. We need to build up the same type of intermeshing network that has contributed so heavily to Republican success over the last two decades. No, it's not as if they've swept the entire House, Senate, and the Presidency in every election, but they have made very solid, very incremental gains that are going to be very tough to roll back. Witness the gubenatorial wins in from yesterday.

I will be the first to admit that these wins should not be surprising when you look at the national voting trends in these two states. I mean for Christ's sakes, these are the home states of Mitch McConnell and Trent Lott! In cold, hard, rational terms there should not be a bit of surprise that these states' Governor's races went Republican. What is surprising is that these races went strongly Republican after all of the criminality, cronyism, and screw-ups that have been the Bush administration. Even with a biased voting base to begin with, I think the cautionary message we need to take away from these races is that it's not going to be good enough to just show up, be angry, be a veteran, be progressive, or just be an alternative: We need to go to battle as a party and we need to change as a party, because the alternative is more incremental Republican gains; they will literally nickel and dime us into irrelevancy.

Third and final point: We need a Democratic National Committee that is going to get behind gubernatorial, House, and Senate races, not just the Presidential races. Granted the Republicans have an incumbent and more money right now, which means they aren't distracted with primaries and multiple candidates nor are they strapped for cash, but since the DNC is not officially backing anyone at this point, there is no reason that McAuliffe et. al. cannot get their asses out of their chairs and put their insitutional shoulders behind incumbent Democratic gubernatorial candidates. I heard plenty (even here in Texas) of support from the RNC for their guys and I read plenty about their commitment to those candidates and races.

I read NOTHING AT ALL about similar commitments from the DNC for their incumbents.

McAuliffe should go, and we need more attractive candidates, and, somehow, a coherent message, instead of a hodgepodge of special-interest issues (although all of these are important) -- but, things beyond our control that are defeating us, again and again, are:

1. Many Americans from Generations X and Y are not well, or broadly, educated -- they were not taught history, or "civics." They have not been given a worldview, or a sense of what we should be as a country.

2. They are susceptible to a corporate-controlled media, driven by money and inside-the-beltway social climbing -- as are all Americans who rely on news sources that no longer provide them with what they need to be the informed citizens essential to democracy.

3. The zealotry of the right, the unlimited funds at its disposal, its willingness to do anything, including using extra-democratic tactics (with impunity), and its single-minded unity, overpower our efforts and resources.

4. The "religious right" votes, in very large numbers.

Battling any one of these things is a battle against huge odds. But try is all we can do -- let our voice be heard; use any resources, financial or otherwise, we as individuals might have; work hard for a candidate, with some thought given to that candidate's "electability," as we are a country in crisis, and already virtually a one-party state.

Things have been worse than they are at this moment. We see W's polls much higher than they should be, but lower than they were. We see some critical coverage from the print press, and some damning magazine covers. What can we do but seize the moment, such as it is, and try and keep on truckin'? Our country's at stake, and also, now, the lives of our kids in the hellhole of Iraq.

Mostly because of our municipal elections. Here in my town in "liberal" Massachusetts, we had a vote to pass an override to raise property taxes more than the allowed 2 1/2 percent. The override would have meant an increase in property taxes of about $100 per year on your typical home, which is worth around $300,000. (This typical home, BTW, has almost doubled in value over the past 5 years.)

The override is necessary because Romney has cut aid to towns and school districts due to our huge deficit.

Needless to say, the override failed. As a result, our elementary schools will each have to lay off 2 teachers. Our high school will lose 9 teachers. Students will have to continue paying to take the bus or for full-day kindergarten. Funds for libraries, the senior center, and public works will be slashed.

I am thoroughly disgusted with the anti-government, anti-tax rhetoric the right gets everyone to believe. Norquist has won -- the government is getting so small he could drown it in the bathtub.

Combine this with the Reagan movie debacle, and the negative crap about the Dem candidiates, and seeing how * gets away with all his lies...I just feel so disempowered.

Thank God DU is here.

Over here, average home is worth maybe $90,000. Oregon has one of the highest, if not the highest unemployment rate. And yet our little county voted to raise property taxes, extra funds going directly to the schools. How much did that cost us? Approximately $115 as an average per home.

I think the Dems need to really stress how education is being eroded in America because of Repub policies. A college education is getting more and more out of reach for the children of the "average Joe" and "average Jane." It is absolutely alarming. Without a good education, people cannot think for themselves in a complex world. All the guns and military hardware in the world can't compensate for that.

I posted this observation on another thread, but since there's a lively discussion here, please forgive the repetition.

Elections are not administered by the federal government. They are administered by state and local authorities. In most places, the counties make the logistical decisions for the very good reason that arrangements that seem necessary in Megalopolis County, pop. 1.5 million, don't necessarily fit out in Wilderness County, pop. 4,000.

Anyhow, Mississippi and Kentucky have been Democratic controlled for decades. In California, until Arnold came along this year, Pete Wilson was the last Republican to win a major statewide race (governor, U.S. Senate, or president), and the Democrats dominate the legislature.

Anyone who wants to indulge in voting machine conspiracy theories regarding this year's races needs to explain why Democratic authorities in Mississippi, Kentucky, and California rigged the elections against themselves.

Obviously, the conspiracy runs VERY deep ....

This was meant as a reply to TolstoyAndy's comment at #1, which started a voting machine subthread. Sorry for the misplacement.

and we did okay.

That is an easy one. Yes this country is becoming Very Right Leaning I admit it and am very unhappy about it. Just because half the lemmings are going off the cliff doesn't mean I have to follow or vote for someone who does. If we lose we lose. It is apparent that will be the case no matter who the Democrats put up as a candidate. I am resolved to that being the case. I will not give up on my beliefs and I will not vote Republican just because the great majority of Americans do. You may want to vote right-wing but I don't and I will go down with the ship. I value Democratic ideals and I don't feel they need to be compromised. I just wish we had a spokesperson able to espouse those ideals where people could make a legitimate choice. The media doesn't seem too interested in helping our cause but that doesn't mean I will give up. If moderates want to live by our ideals I say all the better but that doesn't seem to be the case. They want to follow the Republicans just because Polls tell them that most Americans do. I have always been one who dances to the tune of a different drummer.

pounded into the heart and souls and brains of America. The pitting of Dem and Rep against each other. Classic example:

My brother-in-law from Seattle visits us here in California, not the brightest guy in the world, but a nice guy.

The subject comes around to Iraq. I make the statement that the casualties are being hid from the public. He starts on a rant about how the "liberals" are destroying our country with the frivolous lawsuits. Where did he hear that from?

My own parents have made comments right off of Fox news talking points. "Dean is too liberal to win." Well where did they hear that. People form their opinions from soundbytes from the television. They can't expound upon that statement when questioned. "Oh really, tell me his positions that are so liberal that you don't agree with." Silence. "Well I'm not sure." Really, "what information are you basing your opinion on?" They respond "well that's what I heard." And to qualify this, my parents are in the upper 10% income bracket. But truly, liberal at heart. I have had many conversations with them, given them books, emailed them articles. These Bush voters are deciding which Dem candidate to support now.

It comes down to information, period. And the American people suffer from a lack of it.

On edit I am a uncommited voter with respect to a presidential candidate at this point. My reference to Dean is just an example of discussions I have had with them, that have given them pause to investigate.

These "I'm depressed" posts are depressing. And play into the opposition's hands.

I live in a country where I am in a political minority...always will be, likely. We muddle forward.

The Dems have got to stop this acrimonious in fighting and stop it as soon as possible. In fighting is a big turn off for potential voters, and if these attacks on candidates continues well it is four more years of Bush. From last night's debates I lost all respect for Kerry, Sharpton, Gep (already lost it for him) and Edwards. They really need to pull their collective heads out of the sand and understand that eating your own is a turn off to voters. IMHO and from what I have seen from focus group.

I like CMB, but Dean and Clark are my top choices.

move over and we'll eat worms
in the garden together. So much
failure from the democratic
party cannot go unnoticed
forever without going insane!

conservative. Four years ago Ronnie Musgrove running for Governor lost DeSoto County, a very Republican leaning county, by 156 or so votes. This year he lost DeSoto County by 10,000 votes. And in Mississippi it has become socially unacceptable to be a Democrat. IMHO, it is all about race. One of the big "issues" this time was the state flag "issue". The state flag issue had already been put on the ballot by Governor Musgrove and decided by the voters (we decided to keep the current flag). But the fact that Musgrove "supported" the changing of the flag simply by his act of letting us vote on it was made an issue. This is a very important issue, right. Give me a break. Also, at my precinct me voted using a paper ballot and filling in the oval with a ball point pen. How modern - this is supposed to be an improvement over the stylus and punch card (no hanging chads, dontchano). I'm very depressed. The two candidates for governor spent 20 million dollars between them to land the $120,000 a year job. Oh by the way, George W. Bush came to the state the Saturday before the election in support of the Republican candidate, Haley Barbour, and it is said that the Republicans got so stirred up at the pep rally that on election day they were really voting for Bush.

conservative?

If Al Gore can actually get a mainstream news cable network off the ground - and a Wesley Clark type candidate can profit from some fair, even sympathetic treatment there, while DU type news items re: the BFEE/PNAC Mob can be exposed - AND Rush Holt's bill can be passed - we may well route Chimpy in one of the biggest landslides in history! If these things do not come together - we are all royally screwed, quaranteed more wars for empire, and quite possibly heading towards WWIII! But do not quit, comrade! You have every right to be discouraged, but we can and we must win this thing!

I think the thing to do besides to just try to make a more centrist appeal - is to TEACH the public that liberalism is NOT a bad word just because notorious druggy Slush LimpBalls says it is - that it is in fact is a far more fair and favorable governing philosophy for the vast majority of Americans!! We need to sell Liberalism to the American public - not hide it the closet every election. For example, Liberalism could = universal health care!

Defeated, don't get your hopes down

Look at why you feel defeated? Grow from those feelings.

Defeated because your lost in your own party? Is it the correct party for you? Or, depressed because you lost. Look at how you can better run next time.

T.B.
http://conservativeissues.com
Balancing out Politics