Discussion: 5 Signs The Left Is Ascendant In The Democratic Party Since The Election

TPM Article Topics
41

Did the left of the left stand up or did the losers of the left just get out of the way?
Because the squishy middle is descending, it doesn’t necessarily mean that all of a sudden the liberals are ascending. I say, that we libs have been on the rise for going on a decade at least.
The past election not withstanding, the trend of America is toward liberal ideas, fairness and equality. Politics and some really entrenched meanness skews that fact.
Republicans and conservatism are very unpopular but popular isn’t winning because the dregs fight harder and dirtier and reinvent their diabolical schemes as per the need. Evil genius is still genius.

My GF and her daughter claim to be Republican but don’t defend the ‘conservative’ ideas and strongly believe in numerous liberal causes. It is perplexing and a conundrum but a little skirmish of my own that I relentlessly fight back against. The 16 year old daughter is rapidly changing and bucking both of her parents and joining in with me which will help to lessen the blow to my GF’s ego once she finally admits what she already knows, conservative ideas are awful.

42

Well the one thing we SHOULDN’T do is try to appeal to voters who are just not voting for us. So no reason, for instance, for the Kentucky Democratic senate candidate to claim she might not have voted for Obama. Or to run away from Obamacare, like all those failed Southern Democrats, like Landrieu. That wins us nothing.

We’re a progressive party. Might as well admit it, start acting like it, and start from there.

3 Likes
43

Republicans don’t do any ground game in the rural areas. They don’t have to. Their base is out there, and if you have ever lived in red state small town America, if you aren’t on board with their crazy, they will see to it that you are. And putting an Obama sticker on your car is just asking to get hit in the parking lot. I think going out to the rural areas is a waste of money. If you can increase turnout in the cities by 10%, that is worth way more than increasing your turnout 10% in rural areas. And it is a lot cheaper to do. But you do still have to recruit candidates in those rural areas. If you don’t play the game you can’t win.

1 Like
44

That assumes the Union will try to stop secession by Confederate states this time…maybe it’s time to let them have it their way so we can have it ours. Why we want to remain associated with states that we’ve been trying to drag, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century is beyond me, honestly.

45

I just ignore his stories.

46

It would take a lot of luck, because there isn’t a lot of polling to be found. I looked. And I notice you place a lot of importance on evidence, yet didn’t provide any of your own.

I did find one quote that is emblematic of what I heard in 2010.

“It’s a protest toward the inefficacy of what Democrats have done with
their power,” the 28-year-old college psychology professor told ABC News.

47

Pardon my french but Sahil Kapur is pathétique

48

The trouble is, most also can’t afford to run successful campaigns without those corporate and Wall Street paymasters. Or at least that’s what the pols believe, despite a handful of exceptions. And in the primaries as well as the generals, the winnah may well be the candidate with the mostest big-money sources, pretty much ruling out the non-corp/Wall Street candidates. So any strategies for progressive Dems to win those Dem seats has to take all that into account. It would help in the long run if there were a lot more Dems and Dem campaigns in very low and mid-level elections, so taking local and state offices for testing grounds and eventual springboards to higher offices. Colleges and universities would be sensible targets too. It worked for the Reps.

49

OK, but would you please stop using “Democratic” or “Democratic Party” and “the Left” as synonyms? No doubt a few Democrats are true leftists. But just in historical terms, most of today’s Democrats are in the middle or on the middle right–and not on the left. The can only be described as “leftists” relative to today’s Republican Party, which has pushed way beyond conservatism and has become the party of raw anti-social reaction. Put another way, Democrats are conservatives. Republicans are reactionaries.

So Democrats want to use the relatively modest social gains of the mid-20th Century as a framework for further incremental reforms. Republicans want to repeal the 20th Century altogether. Their re-current attacks on everything from the EPA to Social Security are proof.

The other thing is, while Democrats bide their time, the Frankenstein monster created by the Republican Party is now using a wrecking ball on American society. How long will it take to put things right again–when and if the Democrats ever regain a majority in both houses of Congress? The national prospects for the next 20 to 25 years have the Republicans running Congress, with a Democrat in the White House. That’s a formula for gridlock, and not for progress.

Let’s hope for better, but gird for battle. We’re in for a long haul.

2 Likes
50

Why not appeal to voters who aren’t voting for us. Maybe we should be training to vote for us.

51

These people staying home are young voters without strong party ties. Just 13% of the under 30 age group voted. The 30-40 bracket is nearly as bad, only voting at 19%.

They just don’t seem to turn out unless strong progressive issues are being pushed. And what was being pushed by Democrats this time, fear? I had a stinking years worth of emails from Democrats screaming desparation and catastrophe…but the only reason I got those emails is because I already vote.

1 Like
52

That is an anecdote and not particularly useful in determining trends. You could probably find some Republican in 2010 who said the same thing about the Rs. Here is data:

Here’s what CNN found in the 2010 House exit poll, when respondents were asked for their ideology, note the number in brackets which indicates the proportion of the respondents who picked that option (link):

Liberal (20%)   
D - 90%
R - 8%
Other - 2%

Moderate (38%)
D - 55%   
R - 42%   
Other - 3%

Conservative (42%)
D - 13%
R - 84%
Other - 3%

Here’s 2006, the previous mid-term (link):
Liberal (20%)   
D - 87%
R - 11%
Other - 2%

Moderate (47%)
D - 60%   
R - 38%   
Other - 2%

Conservative (32%)
D - 20%
R - 78%
Other - 2%

So in both 2006 (Democratic wave year) and 2010 (Republican wave year), Liberals made up 20% of the electorate. And self-described liberals voted D 3% more often in 2010 than in 2006. And on top of that, the 2010 electorate was bigger than that of 2006. So the number of liberals who voted in the previous midterm election actually increased significantly.

Look at the self described moderates on the other hand. They went from making up 47% of the electorate to making up 38%. There were 9% fewer moderates in 2010. In the meantime, conservatives went from 32% to 42%. I don’t think it is likely that the moderates turned into conservatives. I think what happened was the Republicans were super excited in 2010 by the tea party, especially compared to 2006 when they knew they were going to get trounced whether or not they voted.

So stop the ever-so-cool hippie bashing that has no purpose other than trying to look reasonable. The data does not back up the myth. You have an extraordinary task, to somehow prove that the progressive wing of the party, the one more involved in politics, for some reason decided to stay home. It doesn’t even make sense to do that. And as they say: 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

For one, I think the myth came from the DLC and Clinton machine to try and weaken the liberal standpoints and justify their right-wing views for the sake of reaching ‘the middle’ which, in reality, totally abandoned them in 2010.

Secondary source where I found the house exit polls.

2 Likes
53

Amen! What I liked and miss about the Iowa caucuses was getting to chat with fellow voters. You know what, the progressives were the ones turning out to vote. Its the same for the GOP, the Conservatives get out and vote.

54

Might depend whether it translates to consistent turnout.

55

Banks have robbed us since 1981.

56

I hope you’re right and things turn out that way. I hope Republicans don’t have to foul everything up as badly as Bush did, before people get sick of it and kick them to the curb again.

57

“Balance”, apparently.