GOTV! But why?

[Savannahmann]

In 1994, Republicans revolutionized the GOTV effort with their Contract with America. Newt for all his failings had read the polls, and realized that the way to win the House and possibly the Senate was to make the local elections national. Democrats snorted knowing that elections of House and Senate Candidates are in fact, local. Imagine the Democratic Party surprise when Newt became Speaker after his ideas not only worked, but worked fabulously. The local elections, nationalized.

Democrats failed to learn this lesson until 2006, when the Democratic Party led by Nancy Pelosi nationalized the 2006 congressional elections. By promising to end the culture of corruption and bring honest governance back to Washington, coupled with disgust about the Katrina debacle, Democrats managed to retake the House and the Senate. Again, it was local elections nationalized.

Now, we look at the Nationalized Elections of 2010. Again the Rethugs managed to nationalize the election. By using Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party scandals including "Deem and Pass" to get the ACA through, and several asinine comments about the process, the Rethugs were able to claim that Democrats had broken their promise, and that they were more corrupt than the Rethugs were. They nationalized the local elections again.

All elections are local is the biggest fallacy in the world. Look at John Kerry, and how he managed to look completely out of place in an effort to look like a "regular guy" that understood the local people. The Hunting License thing. And let's not forget the Cheese Steak photo op.

Let's contrast that with Bill Clinton, who ran a fabulous campaign focusing on national issues. He did not pretend to be a guy familiar with the nuances of local life in every city he went to. Instead he focused on his strengths, his history, and his experience. He focused on the issues, and the economic situation that was the reality for all of us. President Obama's successful campaign talked about how national issues could and would affect local life. He didn't pretend to be anything, he was presenting himself as someone ready to lead on the issues of this nation.

In 2012, we were fortunate. The Racists who wouldn't vote for a Black Man were also bigots who wouldn't vote for a Mormon. I don't know if that would have put Romney over the bar, it's impossible to say it would, or wouldn't. But we saw that the election was national again.

In 2002, Republicans made the mid term election about the national question of invading Iraq. Democrats suffered in the election.

So the fallacy of all elections being local is obvious to anyone who has watched any of the elections since Bill Clinton was President. Yet, here we are again, a mid term election. What is our National Strategy? GOTV! OK, what do we want to do to GOTV? We have to GOTV to keep the Republicans from winning? What is our issue? What is the national issue that our local politicians are going to use? Why, the Republicans are bad, and we want to GOTV to prevent them from winning.

We suffered terribly in 2010 when every Republican Candidate ran advertisements showing Speaker Pelosi saying we had to pass the ACA to find out what was in it.

Every Republican pointed to the Democrats and said that they had broken their promise from 2006. Every one of them nationalized the election as a referendum on Nancy Pelosi, and the Democratic Party and how they passed the ACA.

So Nationalized Mid-terms are in fact, very useful in GOTV efforts. Voters respond to the National appeal. Merely promising to represent the district's local issues doesn't work for the simple reason that with the Internet, people understand that local issues do not live in a vacuum outside of national issues.

As an example. Georgia wants to deepen the Savannah River to make it more accessible to larger ships that are bringing cargo to the Georgia Port. These larger ships are a fact, they are bigger, and they will probably get even bigger still. Georgia is making this a regional issue showing how cargo from the port goes to Tennessee, the Carolina's, Florida, and even Alabama by rail. This isn't just an issue with local significance. Georgia alone does not stand to gain from this effort. Importers and Exporters all across the region stand to cut costs by letting the shipping companies bring even larger ships into the area. President Obama has offered his support for the effort. But the next budget doesn't include any money which is upsetting people in the region.

So national issues as applied to local elections is again, a winner. But for some reason we continue to hear that these truths, demonstrable, and historically proven, don't exist.

Just GOTV damn it is what we hear. On what national issue? Oh politics are local and don't worry about the national.

Republicans have a national agenda. It's wrapped up in their opposition to job killing Democratic party plans. Everything is job killing to the Rethugs. We don't respond, the Rethugs win the point in the mind of the voters. We point to irrelevancies. We decry the Koch brothers without telling anyone what we stand for. Obviously we stand against the Rethugs, but we stand for very little as far as I can tell.

Usually, when I post something like this, someone inevitably accuses me of trying to suppress Democratic Turn out. It would be difficult to imagine a more stupid response than that. People on the board are going to vote Democrat. Get over it. If I was a Rethug or RW plant wouldn't I want Democrats to make the mistake they have been, and apparently are determined to make. Does anyone think that shouting GOTV is going to win the House back? If we want to win the House, we have to nationalize the election. We have to cover the local issues in the larger National Blanket.

Instead, all we have is a shout. GOTV! I imagine it will work about as well as ABB. Anybody But Bush.

[lostincalifornia]

1. It is really quite simple, if Democrats get out and vote WE WIN. Everything else is BS, and 2012

demonstrated that

[liberal N proud]

2. It is much simpler than that - Get everyone out to vote and Dem's win

There is a reason the republicans are always passing laws to block one group of voters or another. They know that if everyone voted, it would be very difficult for them. They would not win many elections.

Just get people to the polls, that is all we have to do!

[Savannahmann]

7. Indeed?

I don't suppose a little fact would upset you would it?

In 2006 when we took control of the House, 85.7 million people voted.

In 2010, when we lost control of the House, 90.7 Million voted.

So more people turned out, and yet we lost. It isn't just getting the bodies into the booth, it's the way in which they vote.

In 2006, we gave them something to vote for. We gave them honest government after the scandals and debacles of the Rethugs. In 2002 it was voting for war in Iraq by voting Rethug.

It's not just bodies in the booths. Because even when you look at "generic ballot" polling, Democrats don't break 50%. So a goodly portion of the public votes for people, and issues. The twenty percent or so that vote for issues that matter to them, and the candidate that will take the lead on those issues.

So if you want those voters, the ones who push you over the top and into victory, you have to give them something to vote for. Those are the ones who vote for Obama, and then vote for the Rethug in the House and Senate. They vote for people, and issues, not party.

Bodies in the booths isn't going to do it. You have to give them an issue to vote for, some reason other than Rethugs suck to vote for you.

[lostincalifornia]

8. 2012 Democrats came out and we won

[Savannahmann]

9. OK, granted

President Obama won re-election.

So why didn't Democrats win the House? Remember those voters I mentioned, the ones who vote one way on the Presidential, and another on the congressional? So why didn't Democrats win the House of Representatives?

They turned out and voted. What national campaign did local Democratic candidates embrace?

[lostincalifornia]

10. Because they gerrymandered most of the house, however, even with that we had a net gain in the house

[Savannahmann]

12. Pfui

Nonsense and all that. Democrats vote Democrat. Republicans vote Republican. Moderates, the people in the middle, the people who elected Reagan, the people who Voted Democratic in 2006, and in 2008, but did not vote Democratic in 2010 vote for agendas.

We are looking at losing the Senate. That means that a majority of Senators would be Republican. You can't blame that on Gerrymandered districts. We won the Senate, which would be impossible if Gerrymandered districts was the deciding factor. I'm sure you think this stuff, but it is denied by facts.

We need a national strategy. We need a national plan. We need a national agenda. Shouting GOTV isn't any of those. It's a tool that makes those more successful, but it isn't a plan unto itself.

We are so much like the Underpants Gnomes from South Park. We're missing a huge part of the plan, and we're going forward like it doesn't matter.

In our case, phase one is blank. Phase two is GOTV with an exclamation point. It must have an exclamation point. Then phase three is electoral victory.

Gerrymandering means we can't win all districts. But as we showed in 2006, and 2008, we can win a majority. But then we had a national strategy. Now, it's just GOTV and Rethugs suck. We're missing that part of the plan.

[polichick]

3. Maybe it's useful if Dems don't win too much...

Those pesky House liberals aren't cool with things like the TPP.

[el_bryanto]

4. I don't see GOTV and nationalizing elections as conflicting

You can do both. The truth of the matter is that GOTV is a retail approach in which you talk to your neighbors and friends about the issues that concern them. Sometimes those will be local, sometimes state, and sometimes national. But whatever gets them to the polls and voting Democratic is probably good, right?

Bryant

[Savannahmann]

5. Nor do I

However, if your national plan is nothing but GOTV, then you're doomed.

[MineralMan]

6. Why? Because Congressional elections are still

decided by how people vote in their district. The more Democrats we can get to the polls, the more Democrats who get elected.

Making those elections of national interest? Sure. But GOTV is still a crucial aspect of getting individual candidates elected.

GOTV 2014 and Beyond!

[alarimer]

11. The 50 state strategy worked pretty well, but the Democrats seemed to have abandoned it.

They've all but given up on the Senate race in Texas. Why else would that Bircher even get into a runoff?

I think they've given up on Kay Hagan too, here in NC. At least I haven't seen any ads yet.