|
FAUXTON posted:Well put. Considering we're in D&D, this is the last response I thought I'd ever see. Thank you 
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 08:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 10:22 |
|
|
It sounds like flying in a plane is a "look at me doing my job" ad, the same way white politicians in Illinois always have a shot with them taking to old black ladies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
So the GOP is going to win this election by running on a policy idea (repealing of the ACA) that is never going to happen and instead of proactively running on issues that would get the democratic base excited like free college for all, single payer or expanding social security, with the exception of people like Jeff Merkley who has a safe seat, the Democrats are going to fight the election defensively on the GOP's terms and lose more house seats + the senate. Because, democrats.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:instead of proactively running on issues that would get the democratic base excited like free college for all, single payer or expanding social security, with the exception of people like Jeff Merkley who has a safe seat, the Democrats are going to fight the election defensively on the GOP's terms and lose What, did the Dems just scuttle the whole plan to run on the issue of economic inequality?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:What, did the Dems just scuttle the whole plan to run on the issue of economic inequality? Well, see, mcmagic would rather that they ran on issues just as pie-in-the-sky as the Republicans'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:What, did the Dems just scuttle the whole plan to run on the issue of economic inequality? That isn't running on an issue. That's talking about a problem while not having any concrete proactive policy prescriptions to solve it. Winter Stormer posted:Well, see, mcmagic would rather that they ran on issues just as pie-in-the-sky as the Republicans'. Are you kidding? Who cares if they are "pie in the sky?" Mid terms are a turnout game and those issues poll at over 90% among democratic voters (NTM over 50% with the general public) and are actual policies that will reduce income inequality and help the middle class. They tried running an election defending the ACA in 2010. How did that turn out? mcmagic fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Mar 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:That isn't running on an issue. That's talking about a problem while not having any concrete proactive policy prescriptions to solve it. My mistake, I thought a bunch of Dems were making noise about raising the minimum wage 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:My mistake, I thought a bunch of Dems were making noise about raising the minimum wage It's a start but it's also a small bore issue that doesn't effect the vast majority of voter's lives and has virtually no impact on elderly voters. In short it's not nearly enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Don't forget that even though Latinos came out strong in 2012 as opposed to 2010, the democrats caved on immigration incredibly quickly. If i hadn't read about it here, i wouldn't know they even put a proposal forward.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:Don't forget that even though Latinos came out strong in 2012 as opposed to 2010, the democrats caved on immigration incredibly quickly. If i hadn't read about it here, i wouldn't know they even put a proposal forward. I don't think we're following the same nation's politics. Hell last month Obama even went out and met with people camped out in front of the WH over immigration.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:I don't think we're following the same nation's politics. Hell last month Obama even went out and met with people camped out in front of the WH over immigration.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Nate Silver has a forecast up for the Senate:quote:When FiveThirtyEight last issued a U.S. Senate forecast — way back in July — we concluded the race for Senate control was a toss-up. That was a little ahead of the conventional wisdom at the time, which characterized the Democrats as vulnerable but more likely than not to retain the chamber. Includes a short rundown of every seat, and probabilities here:  Surprised Georgia is above Kentucky. Also what are you doing Udall come on man get this poo poo locked down
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
The Landstander posted:Surprised Georgia is above Kentucky. Also what are you doing Udall come on man get this poo poo locked down The win percentages aren't something you should pay too much attention to, because small leads result in huge win probabilities.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:Don't forget that even though Latinos came out strong in 2012 as opposed to 2010, the democrats caved on immigration incredibly quickly. If i hadn't read about it here, i wouldn't know they even put a proposal forward. Also don't forget that one of the reasons Latinos came out strong in 2012 is that the Obama campaign didn't assume immigration was the beginning and end of Latino outreach. More Latinos went to the polls over PPACA than comprehensive immigration reform, I would bet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Also don't forget that one of the reasons Latinos came out strong in 2012 is that the Obama campaign didn't assume immigration was the beginning and end of Latino outreach. More Latinos went to the polls over PPACA than comprehensive immigration reform, I would bet. http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnstanton/some-republicans-see-racism-as-a-factor-in-immigration-stale “I hate to say this, because these are my people — but I hate to say it, but it’s racial,” says a Republican congressman. This quote should be in every democratic ad in every race in every southwest state this year. (It won't be)
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnstanton/some-republicans-see-racism-as-a-factor-in-immigration-stale I mean, it's not like we're stupid, we don't really need the smoking gun. The biggest drive of the Latino vote from leans-Democratic to overwhelmingly Democratic has not been the GOP's substantive proposals, but the way they talk about the issue and the people it affects.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Also don't forget that one of the reasons Latinos came out strong in 2012 is that the Obama campaign didn't assume immigration was the beginning and end of Latino outreach. More Latinos went to the polls over PPACA than comprehensive immigration reform, I would bet. How does that theory reconcile with Latinos' underenrolling in the exchanges/Medicaid to date? As I recall from reading stories over the last month, Latinos have shied away from enrollment for various reasons ranging from fears for undocumented family members' being reported to feeling more comfortable with person-to-person enrollment that online enrollment. In any case, the enrollment numbers for Latinos in most states (and especially in California, where they represent about 11 percent of exchange enrollees in spite of comprising 35-to-40 percent of the states' citizens) has been concerning enough to HHS that they've rolled out various initiatives targeted exclusively to them over the past month, which leads me to guess that the ACA will not be a determining factor when it comes to midterm voting for Latinos.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:Don't forget that even though Latinos came out strong in 2012 as opposed to 2010, the democrats caved on immigration incredibly quickly. If i hadn't read about it here, i wouldn't know they even put a proposal forward. How did the Democrats cave? They passed an immigration bill in the Senate and then the Republicans in the house refused to bring it to the floor. Obama's been fairly vocal about it. Every time immigration is brought up, it's the Republicans saying not now, because we can't trust that guy in the White House. Seeing as the bill was DOA in the House, Democrats don't even have to worry about any idiocy in their passed bill because nobody is taking anything away from the situation other than Republicans don't care about brown people. Which, to be fair, is the takeaway from a lot of situations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
Immigration reform isn't the path to holding the Senate in 2014 for the Democrats anyway. To do that they need to win elections in Montana, Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, and/or North Carolina. The social issues championed by the party aren't going to win those races, but they might be able to win on economic populism, which is why the big issue right now is a minimum wage hike.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:How does that theory reconcile with Latinos' underenrolling in the exchanges/Medicaid to date? As I recall from reading stories over the last month, Latinos have shied away from enrollment for various reasons ranging from fears for undocumented family members' being reported to feeling more comfortable with person-to-person enrollment that online enrollment. I don't think they have to be reconciled, considering I was talking about 2012 and the Hispanic-targeted media in 2012 (including Spanish-language ads), which all predate the enrollment clusterfuck. Where this becomes pertinent to the midterms is that the idea that as-goes-the-fate-of-comprehensive-immigration-reform,-so-goes-the-Latino-vote doesn't hold up anymore (if it ever did). Sorry if that was unclear.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Gyges posted:How did the Democrats cave? They passed an immigration bill in the Senate and then the Republicans in the house refused to bring it to the floor. Obama's been fairly vocal about it. Every time immigration is brought up, it's the Republicans saying not now, because we can't trust that guy in the White House. Seeing as the bill was DOA in the House, Democrats don't even have to worry about any idiocy in their passed bill because nobody is taking anything away from the situation other than Republicans don't care about brown people. Which, to be fair, is the takeaway from a lot of situations. They passed the bill, and then stopped talking about it completely once Boehner said he wouldn't bring it to the floor. That's not fighting for it, that's caving. They should have been railing against the "obstructionism" of the House and making it a serious issue. Fighting over a bill could draw more immigrants (Asians as well) to vote than a passed law.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:I mean, it's not like we're stupid, we don't really need the smoking gun. The biggest drive of the Latino vote from leans-Democratic to overwhelmingly Democratic has not been the GOP's substantive proposals, but the way they talk about the issue and the people it affects. And those voters usually don't turn out in mid terms....
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:And those voters usually don't turn out in mid terms.... Yeah, but I don't think that's for lack of awareness that the GOP has a racial issue.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:They passed the bill, and then stopped talking about it completely once Boehner said he wouldn't bring it to the floor. That's not fighting for it, that's caving. Considering Boehner almost didn't let a bill get to the floor that would've literally destroyed the world financial systems had it not passed I don't think there was a lot the Democrats could do about that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Yeah, but I don't think that's for lack of awareness that the GOP has a racial issue. I agree, as I mentioned in my other posts, the democrats need to have a proactive agenda that will turn out base voters but they also need to hammer home the point of who you're letting take control of the senate and gain seats in the house if you stay home.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Considering Boehner almost didn't let a bill get to the floor that would've literally destroyed the world financial systems had it not passed I don't think there was a lot the Democrats could do about that. This. They'd have needed some significant number of Republicans to even do the discharge petition, and a lot of the ones inclined to sign on probably balked due to possible committee ranking reprisals. It was, as it would have always been in a GOP House, dead on arrival. As for Dems not running on anything useful: I'm wondering what real policy prescriptions they could run on that are somehow more potent than the minimum wage hike. It's easy to explain and already popular.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:As for Dems not running on anything useful: I'm wondering what real policy prescriptions they could run on that are somehow more potent than the minimum wage hike. It's easy to explain and already popular. I said one a few posts before. Increasing Social Security benefits. Jeff Merkley just signed on to a plan to raise the COLA for Social Security that Warren, Brown, Sanders and Begich have already signed on to. The minimum wage IS popular but it doesn't effect the lives of the vast majority of voters and even less, the lives of elderly voters who are the majority of MidTerm voters ntm by definition not having an impact on the middle class. It's not a huge turnout driving issue. That isn't true for Social Security.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
They could try running on the NSA/privacy thing so people don't get drawn off by Rand loving Paul =/.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
Sancho posted:They could try running on the NSA/privacy thing so people don't get drawn off by Rand loving Paul =/. Kinda hard to do that when your most senior member on the oversight committee is all in favor of what's going on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 15:46
|
|
|
Sancho posted:They could try running on the NSA/privacy thing so people don't get drawn off by Rand loving Paul =/. Waiting on a presidential candidate to pick that up. Someone has to. As for SS expansion: look, I hear you on that, but it takes too much explaining in too short a period of time to get that across while also correcting the popular perception on SS to turn that into a turnout issue beyond progressive circles. I'm not sure how much elderly voters who will be showing up anyway can be bought away from being mostly just anti-Obama. It will take a lot to fix the media and popular perception of SS too. Polls showed young people thinking SS was going bankrupt long before Simpson-Bowles. This is an issue for a more drawn-out campaign with much more speechifying and debating in the national eye, like in 2016. Minimum wage goes right to the voting blocs that don't show up in midterms, and getting them to show up rather than trying to change the minds of voters likely to oppose the president and an increasingly "nationalized" Democratic Party is a better investment, IMO.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
We want to raise your social security benefits and Republicans want to cut them. That isn't hard to explain.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:We want to raise your social security benefits and Democrats want to cut them. And this is exactly what the Republicans are saying. Why would saying the opposite convince anyone of anything?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:And this is exactly what the Republicans are saying. Why would saying the opposite convince anyone of anything? Republicans are saying they want to raise Social Security benefits? Really?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:We want to raise your social security benefits and Republicans want to cut them. If Benghazi hasn't shown you that Democrats lie about everything, I don't know what to tell you. Only conservatives can tell you the truth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Republicans are saying they want to raise Social Security benefits? Really? They're certainly going to say that Democrats support cutting them (and be somewhat correct). http://crooksandliars.com/2014/02/absurdity-alert-nrcc-attacks-democrats
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
Radish posted:They're certainly going to say that Democrats support cutting them. Well they are going to keep at it with the ACA is a cut to medicare stuff that helped them in 2010 but that doesn't mean democrats need to cede that ground. And BTW that statement was correct about Alex Sink who in addition to being an incompetent politician, also supported chained CPI and raising the retirement age because thats what democrats should be running on against republicans in 2014, right? What could go wrong?! mcmagic fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Mar 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:We want to raise your social security benefits and Republicans want to cut them. "We can't afford to raise Social Security!" "With the unfunded mandate of Obamacare staring us down to the tune of $x billion over the next y years, where will we find the money to afford hikes in Social Security?" "Increasing Social Security payouts is not only expensive, it's also fiscally irresponsible." "Those people who are telling you that we should raise Social Security payments are not being serious about the economic issues that America faces today."
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:"We can't afford to raise Social Security!" Those arguments do nothing to blunt democratic base turnout. This isn't a presidential election where you need to appeal to "moderates" or "independents". mcmagic fucked around with this message at 16:34 on Mar 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Those arguments do nothing to blunt democratic base turnout. This isn't a presidential election. Agreed, but they will energize the Republican base and potentially convince those moderates who are voting in the midterms. Sure, Democrats will bring more Democrats to the polls with their rhetoric, but those arguments may help to keep the gap in the Republican's favor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 10:22 |
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Agreed, but they will energize the Republican base and potentially convince those moderates who are voting in the midterms. Sure, Democrats will bring more Democrats to the polls with their rhetoric, but those arguments may help to keep the gap in the Republican's favor. You know the majority of republican voters support expanding social security benefits in polling, right? The idea that they are going to turn people out to fight expending Social Security is silly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2014 16:38
|
|