TYT: Cenk's Rant After 2010 Election Results

Run time: 04:39 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDS2LScjkNc   Posted on YouTube: November 03, 2010 By YouTube Member: TheYoungTurks Views on YouTube: 305   Posted on DU: November 03, 2010 By DU Member: Xicano Views on DU: 5710

 
^^ What he said.

Neither party is worth a dime with a hole in it. I vote Dem. to keep the insane rethugs out..for I know that they are the most destructive species on this earth. It baffles me why anyone would vote against themselves based on hate,ignorance,racist and biggotry. From 2000 to 2006 this country caught hell from the rethugs...so now they want to go back to it. WELL WELCOME AGAIN TO HELL PEOPLE.

Our lack of proper education is rearing its ugly head. People are simply DUMB!!! I can see why we rank so low in education now.

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

'nuff said.

But the Progressive movement is over before it even got started.

Right-on.

He's shouting so we can hear him; but I think Cenk has it right ladies and gentleman.

When the supreme court took up the mantle of 'god' and created a new life form "Corporations" our "representatives" should have shut down Congress until some form of legislation was passed to fix that situation.

Instead most of the drooled like wolve's on the hunt knowing their prey just got juicier, and indeed it has.

so that the people can vote on issues like this. We are currently a purely Fascist country. Fox "news" said yesterday that Americans want to invade Iran, the election was a referendum on that.
Americans want Peace and a real economy, not a return to to the status quo........

Look at Proposition (H)8 in California.

:kick:

Ask him today, and tomorrow and the day after and ..............

No one gets a free pass and no one who facilitated where we are is going to avoid my wrath.

yesterday part of the plan? And emanuel jumped ship just in time...

Workin' out for ya?

sorry Chulanowa, LOGIC FAIL.

Which is exactly what a huge chunk of DU's population has been doing the last two years.

where do I sign up?

A good point, however in the current, badly broken system, if you throw out a dem you get a repug! So how does that help?!? the system itself needs to be "ripped down" as you say, and some form of real democracy begun. I am for a system free of politicians,. have NO career politicos,. a system of direct democratic process (some form of internet voting, with a live change/check your vote, and moderated debates of all issues) with payed facilitators that do the will of the people (day to day implementation of the will) without need to insert their ego. Anyway, first the corpo-fascism must be dealt with,. i.e. destroyed! (suppose we need do nothing as it will just eat itself, but that will no doubt be very messy, and painfull to most that live under the 1%)

"A good point, however in the current, badly broken system, if you throw out a dem you get a repug! So how does that help?!?"

In this election, we as democrat voters showed our weakness too. I believe that many Dems stayed home and didn't vote because they are unhappy with the current situation. By backing down from the vote yesterday, we did exactly what we are accusing Obama of doing. We showed our weakness as a whole and sent a message of encouragement to the Repugs. Now they are touting their victory with their typical mantra of "the American people have spoken". The only people that spoke are the ones that voted. We accomplished nothing yesterday except for giving power back into the hands of people that will ruin us for sure. We threw the baby out with the bath water. What we needed to do was get some balls and keep the current Dems in office then work together, all of us, to either replace them with stronger Dems, or pound the message home to them that we won't tolerate their weakness. We Democrat voters are part of the chain, and as I said in another post, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

Yes, it's a conondrum we have to resolve. If we can't threaten to withhold our votes, we will be taken for granted. And what it means to be taken for granted is to be completely marginalized from the political system and have no voice, and the leadership of the nation, regardless of which side they're on, will continue to push to the right and appeal to the fascist fringe and people who aren't all that interested in politics anyway.

But we can't afford to keep living under Republican leadership. So what do we do? Well, one option is to take primaries very, very seriously, and that's the first thing we need to do. There are probably other things we can come up with if we try as well.

Great idea!

PB

Period.

I think many people should complain to news media everywhere that they should not refer to corporations or groups representing corporations as "special interests". Corporate money in elections is called corruption.

Special interest groups are handicapped, old people, gays, ethnic minorities, etc., even unions, even wealthy; but not corporations.

Corporations are not persons.

http://majority.fm/


The audio player is in the top right of the page.

The wife and I agree with this - ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. The citizens united thing has to be neutered first. Elsewise, we'll have "our guys" pummeled like Grayson was.

I think the dems, except for the blue dogs, where were only about 10-20 percent dems, are on the right side of issues most of the time. It's the need to win moderate/repub support for 60 votes in the senate that necessitated compromise. Yes, Obama could have fought harder and held his line but then we might have gotten nothing instead of half (or more) of the loaf he did get.

I'm realizing I'm probably in the minority here, but look at what happened to Grayson, Perriello, Feingold, Sestak and others and please tell me where THEY didn't fight hard enough. I happen to agree with these liberals, by the way, it's just I think that fighting harder might cost you reelection not make it more likely, even if it is the right thing to do.

Basically, it depends on your district. IF you're in the midwest or south, it's a tough row to hoe. IT's where many vote their "emotion" (which is usually to throw the bums out in tough times) and actually do against their own interests. hence why people who blame wall street, for some inexplicable reason, leaned republican this time.

"...Democrats lost because party leaders never truly fought for popular progressive reforms like the public option and breaking up the big banks, leaving voters uninspired to come to the polls and vote Democratic. What the average voter saw of Democrats was weak, watered-down change -- and weak Democratic leaders who cut deals with the very Wall Street banks and insurance companies they are supposed to be fighting..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/03/progressives-fault-econom_n_778365.html

for years. But if you come here and step out of line and try to head off the suffering ASAP, you're an Obama Hater. Well?

People tried to warn them for two years.

The real Obama haters were people like Evan Bayh who screwed the president over thirty days before his nomination with the formation of the Blue Dog Caucus in the Senate. Merry Christmas Mr. President. We are going to give cover to the most insanely oppositional, obstructionist congressional minority in American history, block the most progressive and important legislation before it even gets out of committee and in two years give our party nothing to run on.

Oh yeah and the bastard skipped out on running again the day before the cut off point for anyone to seek the party endorsement in his state. Evan Bayh couldn't have screwed us less if he had switched parties, painted elephants on his face, and took a dump on the steps of the White House before the CSPAN cameras.

And the worst part is that we still tried to play 'bipartisan' and called the progressives that wanted to hold the blue dogs little paws to the fire "retarded." So presenteth the incredible political genius of Rahm Emmanuel.

Sorry.

Like the show by the way.

There seems to be a repetitive history which if you look back over the decades follows the same results.
I think this is not solely the ignorance of the public being misinformed, I think the party's allow this so
they have a reason to give why nothing seems to get accomplished in this country; (democrat President - republican congress,
and vice-versa, so they spend all their time on legislation that will not pass in the Senate or the president ends up vetoing).
To them it's just a routine game they play with our lives, I mean, who would spend tens of millions on keeping their job when
there are starving children on the streets of this nation, especially over a hundred million of your own money ?
I don't believe in the present form of government or a two party system. As we have seen the past two years it's become an
"us against them" government (I actually believe politicians are just puppets of the corporations and wealthy who own this nation;
yes, George Carlin had it right) and the only thing it produces is harder times for the rest of us.

ie: abortion or gay marriage, we keep chasing that carrot and they make sure we never get there.

The story of the Democratic Party in California is enlightening. In the 1960s, a group of young progressives joined the grass-roots local California clubs and managed to get a voice for themselves as members of those clubs in the overall governance of the Dmocratic Party. Sorry, I don't know all the details, but I might know how to find them out.

Progressives need to take over the Party. And with Party resources, we need to educate not just working people but businesses in the U.S., especially small businesses and start-ups about the reality of the Republican agenda and what we offer as an alternative.

least half that do vote let their greed run their gullibility. I dont even really think that if we have a full out depression, the idiots will wake up.

heard all day. Too bad we don't have more like Cenk.

The part about primaries at the end is something I've posted about here recently. We need real primaries, not coronations.

Baby, that's what I'm talkin' about!

one thing about the tea parties is.... they got rid of the republican candidates and got their own in there. they may have been nutzo candidates, but they did it. we need to do that too. the problem as i see it is that neither party is going to let someone in who won't tow the line. and we need to figure out how to get campaign finances under control. as long as the corporations can keep buying their way into writing bills about their industry we will lose. and both parties are part of it. i have voted dem because i figured the republicans would be worse. and now i fear what the orange man and his crew are going to do. now, bush actually did impeachable things... but how much do you want to bet this crowd is going to somehow think they can go after obama. who did nothing. but the dems will deserve what they get because when you lie with dogs.... you get fleas. and they got fleas alright.

alone the general elections in these purple and red districts. There are just not enough like-minded progressives in too many districts to make that happen. I agree with a movement Cenk talks about to get rid of corporate lobbying, etc. but it must be done in a way that can be sold to moderates or it won't materialize into reality. You have to tap into their progressive side when framing the issues. He simply doesn't understand the geographical and ideological breakdown of the nation. This is overwhelmingly a moderate nation, not one out on either the liberal or conservative wings. Last night's races were decided by moderate indies frustrated with the economy, and not due to a lack of Dem midterm turnout nor a massive new-found love of the RePUGS. So many of those races were lost by close margins. It is the economy stupid, and little else.

I was of the opinion that we could win by consistently voting Dems in but something in Cenk's tone is convincing me I am wrong.

Democrats have no idea what they're doing - it's clownish.

We have to pick our primary challengers NOW. Those of us who have the financial and emotional stability need to start working up plans to run for office NOW. We have to come up with some great progressive names and start getting their voices heard to retake those Republican seats NOW. And if we can do that, we can drag this country forward kicking and screaming, whether the president likes it or not.

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

This election brought mixed emotions. The Republican victories, and especially the Tea Party Republican victories, make me sick at the thought of what these people are going to do with my children's and grandchildren's futures. On the other hand, I think the Democrats are almost as good a financial investment for corporations as Republicans, they failed to demonstrate any "audacity" with their control of both the legislative and executive branches, they mocked the progressives that helped put them in office, and they really got what they deserved.

Maybe it's true that things have to get worse before anyone is suffering enough to demand change in ways that cannot be ignored.

as usual.

Yep.

And in drawing his hand back, the president discovered a gushing, bloody stump.

Enjoy the proctology exam you are about to bend over for and your impeachment hearings and Mr. President. Perhaps then you'll understand why paying attention to what was left behind instead of just "looking ahead" could have ended up preventing the pain you're about to experience in your ass.

You don't take a knife to a gunfight. You're from Chicago, you should have known that.

RAW

There is no real point debating Cenk/Young Turks fanboys but I let someone that actually knows what they're talking about do it

From last week:Next Tuesday’s US Elections in Black and White

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/4170/next-tuesday-s-us-elections-black-and-white



By Al Giordano




You may have heard that Democrats have a problem this November and are at risk of losing control of the US Congress in Tuesday's elections. Whose fault is that? I’m going to tell you the whole truth even though many of you won’t like hearing it: If the House goes down, it’s going to be the fault of white people.

No, I’m not talking about Republicans or Tea Party bigots. I’m talking about white Democrats and liberals who don’t turn out to vote in midterm elections. Hey liberal pundits and bloggers: We have met the enemy and it is us. Look no farther than the mirror to find a scapegoat for next Tuesday’s electoral debacle if it happens.

With Nate Silver predicting a 52 vote swing in the US House to the Republican side (39 are needed to change the party in power) and the Cook Report estimating GOP gains of 48 to 60 seats, and Jay Cost saying it could be way more than 60, and lots of chatter about an “enthusiasm gap” in which Republican voters will turn out in bigger numbers while enough Democrats stay home to throw them the US House gavel, I can’t find any data (except in California, where Democrats are going to be just fine; and that’s good for Democrats, because California has the most US House seats, 53, of any state) to demonstrate otherwise. In other words, I’m saying they’re probably right, and the Democrats have only one Hail Mary pass left and its name is Organizing for America. And if the day is saved it is OfA and its army of volunteers - that might be you - that will deserve all the credit and none of the blame if it goes the other way.

I had hoped to be able to identify the 20 or 30 key Congressional Districts in play this year and wrap them up neatly for you here. The problem is that even now, just six days out, there are as many as 100 districts in play (yes, if everything goes wrong for Democrats all at once, Tuesday could be a massacre nearing those proportions): roughly one out of every five districts and almost half of all US House Democrats are at some risk (in fact, it is about half of all Democratic seats outside of California that could be in play).

Pundits are wondering aloud why it is that the Democrats can be in such danger of losing the House, but appear to be on the verge of maintaining a Senate majority. They tend to settle on, “well, Senate races are more personality driven,” and to a limited extent that is true. But here is the real reason why Democratic Senators are safer next Tuesday than so many Democratic US House members: Congressional districting.

Every ten years state legislatures are given the new census numbers and told how many US House seats their state will have, and are then charged with drawing a new map to reflect population shifts so that all Congressional Districts have roughly the same size of population. And in general, district lines are drawn to create black districts, white districts and, increasingly, Hispanic districts. And African American leaders and organizations are all for this because they get more Congressional representation by members of their demographic group. And white leaders and organizations are all for this because they get to have districts where their politicians don’t even have to shake many black people’s hands, much less attend to the needs and demands of that (more organized) sector of the American citizenry. And everybody in power is happy with this deal – courts have even backed it up – until, perhaps, now, when it is going to have a real impact.

But back to the Senate contests: Why are enough Democratic US Senate seats likely to remain Democratic while in those very same states US House seats are going to the GOP? It’s because they can’t redistrict state lines to separate the whites and the blacks. And those who blab on about an “enthusiasm gap” between Democrats and Republicans obviously talk only to white folks, because among African-Americans there is no lack enthusiasm or voter participation. If anything, they’re more enthusiastic to turn out and vote this year than Republicans and tea baggers. And since African-Americans are the reliable core of the Democratic “base vote,” white liberal pundits and bloggers who whine that “Obama hasn’t fired up the base” obviously have the same problem a lot of white politicians have in that they don’t have much exposure to black folks in daily life. They certainly don’t have a clue as to who makes up “the Democratic base.” The biggest demographic sector of “the base” is already fired up and ready to vote. So who is not as likely to vote? Young white people, mostly; those cell phone voters we identified last week in California who are likely turning out there because Proposition 19 to legalize and tax marijuana is on the ballot, but who don’t exactly identify with the political culture of Washington of which Democratic politicians, like Republicans, too often resemble wind-up Ken and Barbie dolls with strings pulled by lobbyists and special interests. They look the same, they sound the same, and they say the same empty phrases over and over again whenever their strings are pulled.

These folks turned out in record numbers in 2008 because presidential candidate Barack Obama didn’t look or sound the same. And he’s still different, and still popular (more popular than Reagan or Clinton were at this point in their first terms) and no matter how it goes down on Tuesday he’ll likely still be reelected in 2012, because then everybody will turn out to vote.

With only one exception I can think of, virtually all the Democratic House members going down on Tuesday represent predominantly white districts outside of California. Congressional redistricting has literally zoned them out of representation of African-American voters. Thus, there is no cavalry coming to rescue them if you can't or won't do it.

But if Democrat Joe Sestak suddenly pulls off a surprise victory in Pennsylvania on Tuesday, it will be because the 9.6 percent of that state’s population that is African-American rescued him. And if Alex Giannoulias pulls out a come-from-behind victory to become the junior Senator from Illinois, that will be because the 14.6 percent of that state’s population that is African-American put him over the top. If Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid survives, guess who will have saved his ass? The 6.4 percent of Nevadans who are African-American, voting in bigger numbers than their actual per capita of the population. Senator Russ Feingold: the 5.4 percent of the people you represent in Wisconsin may be your last hope, too. They're turning out to vote. It's the rest of the citizenry that poses a problem.

Democratic Senators Patty Murray in Washington state, Joe Manchin in West Virginia, Michael Bennett in Colorado, and US Senate candidate Paul Hodes in New Hampshire – all in states where African-Americans make up less than five percent of the vote – will only win if young white and Hispanic voters get their butts to the polls on Tuesday. (And, frankly, Sestak, Giannoulias, Reid and Feingold need plenty of that kind of help too.) Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer in California is likely going to get reelected because the marijuana referendum will pull enough young voters to the polls (and also because the 6.1 percent of her state’s population that is African-American will turn out in big numbers).

For the Democratic Senate and House candidates in overwhelmingly white states and districts, the last and only hope is the ground war: that their field organizations and that of Organizing for America can drag enough first time voters from 2008 and other young and Hispanic folks who don’t usually vote in midterm elections and get them to the ballot box (or bring the mail-in ballot to them). Organizing for America is targeting these potential voters and also you. They want you to help make seven million phone calls this week, something, they remind, that you can do from home or work and they’ll set you up with the list, the script or even invite you to a phone bank location in your area where you can do it together with other interesting people like you who aren’t just sitting around complaining and worrying.

There is no doubt that Democrats will suffer losses next Tuesday. Almost always, the party in the White House loses some Congressional seats during the midterms. That’s the contrary nature of so much of the American electorate: If I can’t find my socks this morning, it’s the fault of the party in power. But whether Tuesday is the electoral blow-out that so many in the media are predicting, or closer to a normal midterm result, is not up to Obama, and will not be because of “what Obama did or didn’t do,” and anybody who comes around next Wednesday or beyond trying to sell that used car will get interrogated from this corner: How many phone calls did you personally make? How many voters did you personally turn out? Hit the phones, or pound sand. Armchair presidents need not apply. Between now and Tuesday, we’re all Mr. and Mrs. President. That’s how democracy was designed to work. The only missed opportunity this week will be your own.

Cenk gets it.

President Barack Obama responded to Tuesday’s mid-term election losses by promising to bend time and space, invent a cold fusion reactor and walk on water at least twice a week in an effort to appease his base—but also indicated he would keep the American people in the dark about what he’s accomplished.

“My administration steered through Congress the largest legislative agenda since FDR and The New Deal, but polls indicate most Americans don’t even know about it. For example, the stimulus bill included a tax cut for 95 percent of American families, one-third of it was tax cuts, yet most Americans don’t realize their taxes were reduced,” Obama said. “This lack of communication has been a hallmark of my first two years and I intend to keep that going.”

Obama noted the administration also passed financial reform, health care reform, expanded kids’ health insurance, passed the fair pay act, signed a nuclear reduction treaty with Russia and enacted the largest investment in infrastructure since the Eisenhower administration. Most Americans are completely unaware of this, which Obama called “a perfect score” in his lack of communication.

(continued….)

http://www.thechicagodope.com/2010/11/03/obama-vows-to-keep-accomplishments-to-himself/

"...While Progressives kick the shit out of the Democrats from behind and undermine any voter support for even the most progressive candidates!"

Cenk has it 100% correct.

- The only difference between us is that I believe that it's too late to fix it. It'll have to be replaced.

When the problem is systemic, change the system.

There is no use dancing and debating on a dead corpse.

Anarchy is coming...

The corporations and their stooges; the pugs are playing war; "0" and Reid and the "centrist" Dems are playing old maid and need to be replaced with someone with a backbone.

No more Mr. Nice guy. I want to see you work these reactionary, misinformed, bigots!

Or never gonna happen?

Right on Cenk. Perhaps we'll wake up in time.

LOL dems dont know what they're doing? Dems know EXACTLY what they're doing and it's CRIMINAL! As Cenk states, they play the role of the patsy as the GOP agenda goes through unmitigated. Look at Obama pushing the illegal, undeclared wars of occupation, patriot act, bailouts for banks, big pharma and health ins, etc. Now he declares he's compromising over the tax cuts and not even a day since the elections at that! It's all an act and we've been had!

Cenk usually says what most of us are thinking... :thumbsup:

The corporate machine poured money into defeating him, targeting him in particular. Maybe if he had not been so alone, their aim could have been diverted. But they had plenty of anonymous money to defeat many, many other Democrats.

There's some truth to what Cenk said, but it's not the only reason for this failure. He rails against the false dichotomy, that if you dislike Democrats you must like Republicans. Yet, he kind of sets up another, that you either agree that this one thing is the cause of the Democrats' losses, or you disagree. There were several reasons for it. I think the principal one was that Obama was too reasonable, too patient, too generous. He needed to act faster, show some fire, some anger. He allowed himself to look weak, and maybe he was. The Republicans pounced on that, making him look ineffective. And maybe he was.

Unfortunately, anyone can now see why he needed to act faster. A President doesn't have 8 years or even 4 years to make his mark. Obama didn't even have 2 full years. Now he finds himself on defense. It will be nearly impossible to implement any new initiatives. It will be hard just to maintain what he did manage to put in place.