The best way of looking at the midterm elections is to understand that the Democrats have huge disadvantages that threaten to overwhelm the fact that people dislike the Republicans intensely and narrowly prefer to have the Democrats in control of government. It’s very unlikely that more people will show up to the polls to vote for Republican candidates than for Democratic ones. But that’s not how the elections will be decided.
Even if the Democrats do an excellent job of voter turnout and erase the enthusiasm gap, they still are unlikely to have a particularly good night. Picking up seats in the Senate is out of the question, and regaining control of the House is highly unlikely.
These midterms are really about mitigating potential damage and positioning the party to win control of the presidency and both chambers of Congress (with a supermajority in the Senate, hopefully) after the 2016 elections. If the Democrats can pick up a handful of House seats and limit the damage in the Senate to the loss of just one-to-four seats, they’ll have a real shot at having enough power in 2017 to enact another wave of progressive legislation. That’s really what we all ought to be focused on.
Rubbish.
We should be focused on writing in Eugene V. Debs, over and over again.
Except where we write in Henry Wallace.
Ah! I see. It’s all about voting for Democrats in the Left pocket of the billionaires instead of Republicans in the Right pocket of billionaires.
OT: b of Moon of Alabama has an interesting “heads up” sort of analysis about the Iraq-Syria battlefield. I’m not sure that it alters what the US should be doing beyond diplomatically mending its fences with Russia and Iran to enable their aid to Syria.
The Islamic State Prepares for a Big Attack — Baghdad or Aleppo?
Sorry but if that person honestly thinks Irbil could soon fall I think we need to take them with salt.
The problem with depending on sources written before the US decision to do airstrikes and align with the Kurds.
The main point of the scenario is that the heavy weapons from Mosul move west into Syria and the big event is Aleppo. The US unwillingess to partner with Iran and Russia allows it to go unanswered, and the world looks on as unspeakable terrors take place in the genocide of the minorities of a large diverse city.
I found it a wake-up not to confine attention to the immediate US front.
It was the potential of Irbil falling that motivate US action when it did.
Based on the news reports, ISIS is not using particularly heavy weapons beyond APCs and mortars in the Kurdish areas. That means that it takes a lot of effort to find them before they are set up. Forcing that in and of itself changed the situation with regard to Irbil.
Much clarity and detail.
Thanks for this.
I guess I am an eternal optimist on this election. I am pushing to get out as many as I can to vote. I look at it this way. If blogs and other political annalists focus on the negatives. All of those negatives will become a self fulfilling prophecy.
The voting public will buy into it and not vote. Why for it is the easiest thing to do. Oh they will #itch, cry and moan about the outcome and large amount of obstructionism by the GOP. But it will not be their fault, the GOP was gonna win anyway.
Wake up ALL get off your dead A$$e$ and vote or STFU about the GOP winning for you let them win.
I find that the blogs are less of a factor than the failure of someone passionate about the election to recruit canvassers, contact folks who agree with the Democratic candidates, and make sure that their good intentions to get to the polls actually happen. We’re pretty much to the point when opinions matter less than action.
We’re pretty much to the point when opinions matter less than action.
My sense, at least here in Ohio, is that this is exactly true. Issues, by and large, are not the centerpiece of this election. Certainly, there are places where issues will motivate people. But Democrats hopes will rise and fall simply on turnout. That is totally the case here in Ohio. If Democrats show up, we win. If they carry over their 2010 mindset, we get creamed. Convincing people to show up is the major part of the State Party’s focus here.
In 2010, Republicans ran on a simple platform, “Things are going bad, throw out the incumbents.” I heard it over and over. You don’t hear it now that they are the incumbents.
This years strategy seems to be “Tie every Democrat to Obama”. Probably effective in the South.
Not having a clown at the top of the ticket sure would have helped.
for legal protection for the last 12 years. This amounts to me being a poll watcher at one precinct during early voting and on election day.
In that time I have been able to show poll workers that people should be able to take a regular ballot rather than a provisional one. I have showed poll workers that people are in fact registered.
I have also posted 10000 comments on the orange satan, and wrote on the front page of openleft for 2 years.
I have little doubt that my work on legal protection is 100 times more important than anything I blog. Blogging is fun, but it changes nothing.
Working on a campaign, however, does.
And 2020, a presidential cycle and redistricting after a new census is not that far off.
The whole statehouse/state legislature situation is a huge drag on progressive goals at every level of government.
Its nice to think that changing demographics will bring about significant in the electoral profile of some states (e.g. Georgia, Florida, Texas…) but if Republicans control the redistricting, Its just going to mean more liberal ghettos.
Time for a 6-year plan to turn that around? What are some ideas to get that rolling?
For starters, how about some labor organizing among low-wage service industry workers? That could have the dual benefit of putting a dent in nose-cutting-off by low-income whites, and recruiting more latinos into the body politic…
Might have had some labor organizing if Democrats hadn’t run away from EFCA when they had the votes. Then there might be labor unions to do the organizing. But blue dog D’s made the conscious decision to go for the bosses instead of the workers.
No one knows how to increase midterm turnout in a substantial way.
NO ONE.
Liberal Democrats lost just as badly as moderate Democrats in comparable districts in 2010. There is simply no evidence that being more “progressive” makes people go to the polls anymore than being “moderate does”.
The best article on this, and it should be required reading, is linked below. There is a graph at the top of the article. Not how far back the midterm trend is, how little it changes.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/24/voter-turnout-always-drops-off-for-midterm-elections
-but-why/
This will not stop “progressives” from saying “If only we were more populist”.
But frankly it’s nonsense. There is no empirical evidence that it works.
Is there empirical evidence that it doesn’t influence party selection of those who do go to the polls?