What Democrats Should Learn from their Loss in Florida -Charles P. Pierce

[octoberlib]

The sky, apparently, is falling eight months early because a Democratic candidate named Alex Sink lost to a Republican candidate named David Jolly in a special congressional election to replace a Republican who'd held the seat for 32 years. Paul Begala took to Twitter to warn the Democrats not to try to spin the result as anything but a loss, and Tiger Beat On The Potomac has sounded the sirens and is herding people into the shelters. To be fair, Sink had a lot of things going for her that not many Democratic congressional candidates in the South have going for them. She outspent Jolly. She was leading (narrowly) in most of the polls leading up to the vote. And Jolly was openly feuding with the national party. But neither candidate got to 50 percent, because a libertarian dude pulled over 8,000 votes.

So, it's a loss, and not a good one, for the Democrats going into the 2014 midterms, but it still doesn't look like much of a bellwether. The Republicans are crowing about how the result was a referendum on the Affordable Care Act, but Sink didn't exactly rise to its defense. In a low turnout election -- Nice job there again, Democrats. -- with Jolly explaining that the ACA will end democracy as we know it and kill us all, and Sink mumbling that she would "keep what was right and fix what was wrong," the stronger argument, no matter how shot through with nonsense it is, will generally prevail.

If you want to take any lesson from the election in Florida, take this one. Defend the law. Defend it on the basis of the fact that millions of people no longer face economic ruin because a member of their family might get sick. Defend the law on the basis of economic populism; marry your support for the law to an increase in the minimum wage, Elizabeth Warren's student-loan reform, and expanded unemployment benefits. (Tie it to this excellent idea that the president announced today.) Explain, in detail, why expanding Social Security makes sense in a stalled economy. Defend the law on the basis of the fact that the Republicans have absolutely nothing to offer on the issue; the Coburn plan is a "plan" for the sake of having a "plan." It has no chance of ever becoming law.

"Fix what's wrong," conceded too damn much. There weren't enough "independents" voting in that election to make a difference. Run as Democrats. They're going to make you do it anyway.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/florida-special-election-031214?src=spr_TWITTER&spr_id=1456_48100643

[NightWatcher]

1. No one's mentioning that Sink is such a horrible campaigner/candidate that she lost to pRick Scott

The former Bank of America executive, Sink, couldn't beat a convicted Medicare fraudster who had paid millions in fines. Why do people think she could beat anyone else?

[pscot]

2. Sink vs Jolly?

If all you know about them are their names, who ya gonna vote for?

[Loudly]

14. You've just accurately summed up ninety percent of the electorate.

So let's recruit some positively named candidates!

Can Joy Prospero be talked into running?

[Ferretherder]

96. Let's just find a candidate named...

...Screaming Multiple Orgasms.

........and I guess it would help if this particular candidate was a woman.

[Blanks]

110. How about Jeff Johnson?

[Jackpine Radical]

15. Yes, I got that same sinking feeling about her name.

Especially in the Sinkhole State.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

41. ...

[Heather MC]

92. VA has a Dem named Jim Moran, he keeps getting re-elected

[Spitfire of ATJ]

93. Inside joke around here.

[xxqqqzme]

79. I had a seasoned pol tell

me that once. You have a great last name for the ballot - Freeman.



(It helped in that I beat the Democratic registration for my district)

[IrishAyes]

82. Some guy ran a non-campaign as a write in - that's all anybody knew about him -

but he used the name Johnson. Apparently it's a pretty popular name. He got around 10% of the vote. Sorry I don't remember all the exact details, they're not important anyway. But it's a true story, take it or leave it. I couldn't prove to anyone via internet what I had for breakfast either. Smith or Jones would probably be a good last name for political purposes.

[pscot]

97. Washington State Supremes

We now have 2 Johnsons on the court. Nobody knows anything about the judicial races, and the name johnson is worth a 10 point edge around here.

[amuse bouche]

91. Anyone living in Fl

knows who they are. I don't even live in that county, yet saw hundreds of ads

Sink had some good ads. She barely lost to the snake Scott for governor

Jolly came off as smarmy, but that county has been right wing for a long time

Dems needed to do a better job getting out the vote. Still, she barley lost to the creep

[monmouth3]

22. Thank you. I live in Florida and the first responses when she was designated to run for this seat

was negative. This was from Democrats. Why do they keep running her? Also, Debbie Wasserman Schultz needs to go..

[xchrom]

3. Du rec.

[mcar]

4. Only one thing to know about this election

Turnout in D districts: 30%.

Turnout in R districts: 50%.

When dems don't vote, dems don't win. It's not rocket science.

[lostincalifornia]

47. and who is to blame for that? The people who didn't vote

[Fumesucker]

60. Vote for the "not quite as bad as the Republicans" it's important!!

[Maedhros]

75. It is the responsibility of the candidate to motivate voters to go to the polls

and vote for them. That's what a campaign is for.

[lostincalifornia]

76. It is the responsibility of the voter to go to the polls. That is my view

[Maedhros]

78. I agree it is the citizen's responsibility to vote.

But the credit for winning/blame for losing belongs with the candidate.

[mcar]

89. Agreed

No reason for Dems in St. Pete to stay home. Shame on them.

[merrily]

111. People don't need reasons to stay home. They need reasons to roust

themselves to vote.

Inertia is default behavior.

Sure, we can insist it's the fault of the voter--and it is. But being right gets being right. The reality is, a lot of voters stay home and fewer all over votes almost always hurt the Democratic candidate. That's why Republicans have spent so much on legal and illegal vote caging and creating barriers to voting.

[bvar22]

118. When the troops are not motivated,

it is ALWAYS a FAILURE of Leadership.

Blaming the Troops for not being motivated solves nothing.
However, Failures of Leadership CAN be corrected.


You may rant and blame the stupid voters until the heavens fall,
and you won't accomplish anything.
That is wasted time.
We will always have stupid voters.

However, if Leadership has to courage to face their failures,
and the courage to FIX their problem,
THEN the real problem can be fixed.


Repeat:
It is NEVER the voter's fault.
It is ALWAYS a failure of leadership

[tofuandbeer]

105. It's messed up...

...that most of those 'R' votes are middle-class (if that exists anymore) and upper middle-class folks who believe the GOP will help them.
GOP = the 1%—and that's all.

If you vote otherwise, you're voting against yourself.

[Scuba]

5. "Tiger Beat On The Potomac" Bwahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

66. That was my favorite line...

Along with the advice that Democrats should run as Democrats, since the Republicans are going to make them anyway.

[Fawke Em]

121. Is that Politico?

I LOLed at that name, too.

[Scuba]

122. I think it's pretty much of "The Beltway Media".

[MO_Moderate]

6. This election loss means nothing for us

I wouldn't worry about trying to defend the ACA either, it is here to stay. The huge majority of Americans never had a big problem with our previous health care system and they won't have a problem with this one, so no point in dwelling on it.
Concentrate on jobs and bettering the average persons daily life now and we can finish taking the House in 2016.

[KoKo]

17. I think his point was that Dem Candidates need to go with a more

Populist campaign and point out who will benefit from ACA rather than just say "we will fix what's broken" which is a downer/negative making it seem as though the ACA is flawed and putting it right in the RW's pocket that there's something wrong with ACA to begin with.

This is a problem with FRAMING issues that's been pointed out over and over to our Party Campaign Ops...yet they don't listen. They tend to think that if they give the Repugs some points ...(like that there were glitches in ACA rollout) that this will gain them swing voters. It doesn't work.

Maybe she was a flawed candidate but we've seen too many Repugs elected who were practically criminals but they have a message that appeals to their voters and gets them out...even if they lie to do it they SOUND strong and principled (ha!) But, too many of our Democratic Candidates running in strong Repug Districts come off sounding weak when they should be trying to convince voters that they can be depended upon to be different from the Repugs on basic bread and butter issues they care about and will fight for those issues rather than pandering to Repugs.

[MO_Moderate]

30. That will only work

in the few areas where people will actually benefit from the ACA, not in most areas where people see no difference. Target ACA talking points where they are needed, but stick with jobs and the economy everywhere else.

The Republicans have NOTHING to do with how Democrats run. Urban, suburban and rural folk have different "bread and butter issues," and it is up to Democrats to be the Democrat their voters demand.

[HERVEPA]

52. 'in the few areas where people will actually benefit from the ACA" ???

Hope your back isn't hurting from carrying all that water.

[MO_Moderate]

65. Other than a slightly higher increase than normal

my coverage has not changed in any noticeable way, just as President Obama claimed would be the case for most Americans.
Some say worse, some say better, most say no difference.

[HERVEPA]

88. Way to ignore those who will be able to have insurance

when they could afford none before.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

29. Sort of amazing that some people are so upset about ACA

but don't seem to realize how much better things are NOW compared to what they used to be- or they think that things are going to drastically change for the worst for large swaths of people when it actually won't. Of course, if you have never been denied insurance for a pre-existing condition or have fallen through the cracks of not being able to afford health insurance but not qualifying for Medicaid either, you might never notice the problems in the old system. Of course, ACA has been so thoroughly demonized by Republicans and the right-wing that most people seem willing to believe almost any negative thing that the Republicans have to say about it and/or blame any problems they're having with their insurance on the ACA despite the fact that nothing would have been different before the ACA, which is actually one of the law's unique problems: Because it did NOT change things in regards to health insurance provision (but Republicans have accused it of being a "government takeover" of healthcare" nonetheless), the Republicans and pundits are able to basically blame any negative actions by the insurance companies (i.e. plan changes, premium increases, doctor changes) on the ACA. In response, we have to explain to people how the law is NOT to blame, which a lot of people either don't hear or they don't get and, in the end, just leaves things muddy.

[MO_Moderate]

33. What people fail to realize

is that things aren't really any better or any worse then they used to be. While partisans on both sides are shouting doom or greatness, most people aren't noticing either. The President said most people wouldn't see a difference and he was right.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

35. I think that they're overall better

but, like I said, the difference is more palpable for those people whom were disadvantaged by the previous system. Democrats should maybe remind people though that ACA's protections will help them if they wind up in a difficult situation, which could be anybody at any time. People should be comforted by the fact that they won't be dropped by their insurance company if they go to the doctor and are told they have cancer or some other kind of medical condition. I don't benefit from the law myself much right now but we do get my wife's birth control covered 100%, which saves us some money.

[MO_Moderate]

38. Most were not disadvantaged by the previous system

and stories about how good/bad things were, or how good/bad they will be, are not going to influence their vote when they see no difference between the two systems.

I'm not saying I think we should ignore it, just that it is not worth being our primary focus.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

42. People are pretty entrenched in their opinions

some people love it and other people- either due to their principles- or because of the lies that have been told, hate it. Focusing on other things would be more productive IMHO. I'm sure that some people have to be getting sick of hearing about Obamcare all of the time. I know I am!

[MO_Moderate]

44. Amen to that

The ACA isn't going away no matter who wins, it is here until the next phase. I wish the Republicans would just let it be.

[xxqqqzme]

81. Ever have your

insurance disappear because of a pre-existing condition? Have to drop your child because of age? Pay a premium that increases by 15% every year? You notice how good/bad things are/were..

[MO_Moderate]

112. Well, actually

other than some information headaches, I have never had a problem with my insurance paying out when it was supposed to. Also, I had four major surgeries in 2011 and 12, kept my insurance ,and even changed it late last year.
This years increase is the highest I've had, only slightly though.

I'm not saying nobody is going to benefit, but that most people are not going to notice anything. All the praises and doom are unwarranted.

[IrishAyes]

83. Most were not disadvantaged by the previous system? Huge numbers were. In some southern states,

they couldn't get Medicaid if they earned less than enough to keep a church mouse alive. The Medicaid rules vary wildly from state to state, and that needs to change. Maybe the exact overall percentage of disadvantaged didn't top 51% nationwide, but believe me the total number would be staggering. Besides the fact that even comfortable middle class people could be wiped out by one severe illness.

Talk about something else if you will; I understand your reasoning. But the ACA most definitely is a BFD to millions.

[MO_Moderate]

114. No, most were not disadvantaged at all

Could be is not the same as a guarantee, sorry. The vast majority of people used their insurance when needed and had no problems, myself included. If the numbers of those who had been disadvantaged by the previous system were "staggering," the people would have voted to change it a long time ago.

[IrishAyes]

119. In your dreams, pal.

[MO_Moderate]

120. LOL

Facts can be discouraging, can't they.

[IrishAyes]

123. How would you know, since you seem to avoid reality like the plague?

[Doctor_J]

85. You are overestimating its effect

how much better things are NOW compared to what they used to be

They're not. For a relatively small segment of the population things are better, as you point out. For another small segment things are worse (my deductibles went from $500/year to $8300/yr). For most the effect was minimal. And then there is the fact that the president's campaign promise to include a public option ("to keep the profiteers honest&quot turned out to be a lie ("they deserve to make a profit&quot .

Pierce is absolutely right. Talk only about those who can finally get coverage. Run as Dems (whatever that means now). And next time nominate a presidential candidate who will follow through on his/her promises.

[kitt6]

7. Florida huh?

The state that exonerated GZ? No surprise here.

[Eleanors38]

21. The state which voted for Obama. Twice. nt

[freshwest]

8. Excellent, thanks Mr. Pierce:

GOTV likely falls on deaf ears at DU. More were interested in beating up on the FL Democratic Party because they didn't have a media star running than GOTV.

...In a low turnout election - Nice job there again, Democrats...

Note the "Independents."

...But neither candidate got to 50 percent, because a libertarian dude pulled over 8,000 votes...

On defending the ACA as a Democratic initiative, not cutting it down, missing the social justice of Obamacare, which Pierce does not do:

...Defend the law. Defend it on the basis of the fact that millions of people no longer face economic ruin because a member of their family might get sick. Defend the law on the basis of economic populism; marry your support for the law to an increase in the minimum wage, Elizabeth Warren's student-loan reform, and expanded unemployment benefits. (Tie it to this excellent idea that the president announced today.)

Explain, in detail, why expanding Social Security makes sense in a stalled economy. Defend the law on the basis of the fact that the Republicans have absolutely nothing to offer on the issue; the Coburn plan is a "plan" for the sake of having a "plan." It has no chance of ever becoming law.

"Fix what's wrong," conceded too damn much. There weren't enough "independents" voting in that election to make a difference. Run as Democrats. They're going to make you do it anyway...

[IrishAyes]

86. As you might guess, I'm not a natural part of Esquire's target demographic. However,

on my news feed I got a referral to Pierce's story about SP at the CPAC. I've bookmarked it so let me know if you need a link. I just figured most people on DU had heard it from somewhere before I got to it. Anyway, I'm now a huge Charles Pierce fan. No, make that HUGE. He did the best chop job on her that I could hope for. Most beautiful piece of surgery I've ever seen. So now I have someone else to keep up with. Well, them's the breaks, huh? But I will practically kiss the feet of anybody who can slaughter my sworn enemy like that. I think I'm in love!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

9. They have a criminal as governor - what did you expect?????

Florida is a state of right wingers. Being right wingers, they don't particularly like females, and they sure as hell don't like Democrats. Florida elected a (Republican, of course) Medicare swindler as governor, and there he sits. Why Democrats think that there's some hope in Florida, I don't know. Unless Democrats mobilize and get even more votes out of Florida, I don't see much hope there.

[Eleanors38]

26. Write off Florida, write off the whole damned Party.

The state went for Obama twice, and is changing quickly to a profile Democrats should be pleased with. Please quit finding fault and moral outrage: That is what potential Democratic voters see and get quite enough of already.

[IrishAyes]

87. I believe you're right. Why wave a white flag even before an election? That's what looks wimpy

and puts off potential Dem voters. We're not going to get the wingnut vote anyhow; why not march in as united, proud Dems?

[zipplewrath]

10. Here's the lesson

In much of Florida, they'll elect a trained monkey flinging poo if it has an R after its name.

[SunSeeker]

28. Yes. In this case, they did just that. nt

[Catherina]

11. Wise words. Deaf ears. Rec'd n/t

[Paladin]

12. "Run as Democrats." What a concept. Thanks again, Charlie. (nt)

[brush]

13. It was a red district held for 20 year by a republican

IMO, the loss was no unexpected. In fact, I'm surprised it was so close.

The Republican was running in a repug district.

It certainly was no referendum on the ACA.

[former9thward]

45. Sink outspent Jolly and she was ahead in all the polls.

So yes, it was unexpected. The ACA was the main issue the Rs raised in the election.

http://www3.blogs.rollcall.com/rothenblog/the-race-democrats-cant-afford-to-lose/

[brush]

72. Polls can be skewed to read either way

Last edited Wed Mar 12, 2014, 07:23 PM - Edit history (1)

It was a red district for 20 years and apparently still is. Not a big surprise that the repug won repug voters opposed to the ACA.

[SunSeeker]

74. Not true. The GOP spent 35% more. And it was a red district.

Reality check: 48.4 percent of the vote in your favor in an extremely low-turnout election is not a referendum. It's a one-off in which the party with the bigger base is likely to prevail, which is what happened with this seat. Because Republicans didn't win this seat, they held it, barely. A 48.4 margin is a full 15 points less than the late Bill Young held this seat by in 2010, and almost 10 points less than he held it by in 2012. Still, Republicans turned out, Democrats didn't.

That slim 48.4 hold was gained by spending a boatload: $2.2 million from the National Republican Congressional Committee; $1.2 million from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; $470,000 from the American Action Network; $470,000 from Karl Rove's American Crossroads. That's along with the uninspiring $1.3 million Republican David Jolly was able to raise himself. All in all, Republican groups sunk about $5 million into this race, Democratic groups $3.7 million.

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/1284092

[former9thward]

80. Since you are into reality checks:

A Libertarian got about 5% of the vote. If he hadn't been on the ballot those votes would be R. To compare a first timer with a long time incumbent is not reality. No one expects to do as well as well as an incumbent in vote margin. The DNC expected to pick up the seat.

As far as money goes here is an article which says $13 million was spent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/03/11/the-one-number-from-the-florida-special-election-that-will-blow-your-mind/

[SunSeeker]

84. Jolly was the natural successor to the very popular Bill Young, Jolly's former boss

Last edited Wed Mar 12, 2014, 11:00 PM - Edit history (1)

Jolly was chief counsel and adviser to Young. No big surprise that people who voted overwhelmingly for Young would also vote for his protege.

And how much of that $13 million was spent by Jolly or supporters of Jolly?

[former9thward]

90. I have no idea.

The article does not do a breakdown and I did not find out anything else on google.

[razorman]

16. Hope is not lost. But, we can't write this off as a fluke.

Get out the vote in November!

[Enthusiast]

18. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch.....nt

[The Wizard]

19. Democrats who stand for Democratic principles

have more success than those trying to be Rethug with a grain of decency.
“Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time”
(Harry Truman)

[tableturner]

20. Many problems with Alex Sink's candidacy.....

To begin with, Sink was not a strong candidate. Like noted above, she could not beat a guy in the governor's race who ran a company that was guilty of Medicare fraud of the highest degree.

Just like when she ran for governor, she ran a race that is so typical of many failed Democratic candidates in that she was always trying to run a safe race, one in which a candidate is afraid of just stating his or her opinion, leading to what clearly looks like an overly calculated strategy designed not to offend. Why couldn't she just let the fur fly and tell the people what she actually believed, and thus not appear to be apologetic in a passive way about the programs and positions she supported? Because of that, she looked a bit phony in her approach to the voters. Her position on the ACA is a prime example.

She is a terrible debater. She is not quick on her feet, and again, she looks overly calculating and phony when debating.

Plus, when a candidate suddenly moves into a district in which that candidate has never lived, and does so to win an open seat, it is only natural that there will be some resentment in the minds of the residents of that district. The resentment will exist regardless of the party of the candidate. Yes, that type of candidate can win, but that circumstance is a negative that must be overcome in a race that was already slated to be a difficult, close race. The inevitable "carpetbagger" label was one that probably cost her a few thousand votes that could have been the difference in spite of her weak candidacy.

[Android3.14]

23. Unless the Dem leadership comes out strong in support of 4th Amendment protections,

Unless the Dem leadership comes out strong in support of 4th Amendment protections, low voter turnout is going to be even worse come November.
The NSA intrusions and a stance to protect personal information from corporate snooping is the strongest way to get the vote out. A strong statement that a citizen's personal information is absolutely protected under the Fourth Amendment and a party condemnation of NSA surveillance would reassure a great many of us who vote.
The pandering of folks like Feinstein and Obama regarding the NSA violations on personal privacy will make it easy to portray the Dems as the flipside of the McCarthy and a threat to those people who value their rights, such as the right to vote.
If I knew that a Democratic candidate was going to protect me, my family and my neighbors from government and corporate snooping, I'd truck people to the polls all day long. With the current slew of lukewarm defenders of the 4th Amendment or downright Big Brother lovers, I could care less. I'll write in a name if I must.
This one issue, I believe, is the Democrat's Achilles' Heel, and they ignore it at the risk of our republic.

[leftyohiolib]

31. and unless they go vote for dems how is this going to change. this is exactly what the republicans

aRE counting on. they are counting on the whiney-ass part of our party to fold our arms stomp our little feet and stay home. then in 2016 i'll be saying we got our asses handed to us b/c dems stayed home and everyone will be pipng in to say that isnt true. it's 2010 all over again. some people never learn

[Android3.14]

94. The solution is obvious

"in 2016 i'll be saying we got our asses handed to us b/c dems stayed home"
That's the truth for the loser in any election, and as useful as whining. It's like saying you missed your date because no one filled the gas tank.
We need to fill the tank now, before the November date.
It doesn't matter that you are disgusted with the ennui of the members of the party. What matters is whether the leaders of the party do anything about it.
Who wants to vote for for Big Brother? Mistreating our Fourth Amendment Rights only increases the problem, and the Democrats are running out of time.

[leftyohiolib]

24. fucking democrats get off your asses and vote

" In a low turnout election -- Nice job there again, Democrats. "

[B Calm]

43. BINGO!

[leftyohiolib]

62. i dont get the attitude here and elsewhere that the dem pols have to "MOTIVATE" the base to vote

just go vote. if dems just voted we wouldnt be here

[BlueJac]

25. What do you expect......

first Florida votes in a criminal to be governor, then a lobbyist to be a Rep. Nothing new in this fine state of confusion. Just stand your ground and you can shoot anyone! People vote Republican out of protest to any Democrat. Liberal is a dirty word down here and there hasn't been a liberal run for office since I've been here! Just another Sunshine State day.

[leftyohiolib]

32. save the excuses there is no excuse for dems not voting

[BlueJac]

64. that was not an excuse, just a fact........

not in my district

[SunSeeker]

27. Couldn't agree more! nt

[HoosierCowboy]

34. Until the Democratic Party...

...quits being a giant neighbor hood garage sale where everyone can sell whatever they're bringing, this will happen. Most Democrats don't want it to be any other way.
...and so do I.
better to loose an election than your ability to promote your own thoughts versus the party line.
We have poor candidates that's for sure, but at least we have them.

[Autumn]

36. I think running on cutting Social security may have helped her lose

at least that's what an article from Kos is saying.

"But given our anemic base turnout, Democratic candidates need to do a better job motivating them to vote. And in this case, I don't blame our base voters. When Democrats like Alex Sink run on austerity, cutting Social Security and bringing back the Simpson-Bowles Catfood Commission, well, no one is inspired. That has to be part of any effective base-mobilization strategy. Maybe promising to be a dick wins over some independent support (Sink did win the early vote despite the outsized GOP numbers), but that's as relevant as Mitt Romney winning independents by double digits in 2012. Democrats win by getting Democrats to the polls. There are more of us than there are of them. Period."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/12/1284086/-Florida-special-election-We-didn-t-turn-out-we-didn-t-win

That would keep me at home if that's true

[octoberlib]

49. She ran on cutting Social Security? In Florida?

That's the most tone deaf thing I've ever seen.

[leftyohiolib]

68. this makes me want to quit the democratic party

"But given our anemic base turnout, Democratic candidates need to do a better job motivating them to vote. And in this case, I don't blame our base voters. When Democrats like Alex Sink run on austerity, cutting Social Security and bringing back the Simpson-Bowles Catfood Commission, well, no one is inspired.

wtf people do you think the republicans will be nicer to you. jeez bob i dont want austerity so i'll just sit this out and let the republicans have it. like they're gonna be fucking nioce to you.
stupid blind attitude and we wonder why we cant beat republicans. WE'RE TOO BUSY SURRENDERING TO THEM.

[Kermitt Gribble]

116. If both candidates are proposing austerity

what reason does a voter have for going to the polls? Just to get a "win" for their team?

The Party has surrendered to the repubs (by adopting repub policy), not the voters.

[leftyohiolib]

117. it's to keep out republicans if for no other reason. and yes just getting a "win" is worth it

it can come with non-tanglible things that are beneficial, fires up the base demoralizes the other side etc. so you cant just brush-off a win. plus once you get her into office you can work on changing her stances. republicans are not going to repond to you at all, they are a closed door.
there are other issues here as well like the aca

with Jolly explaining that the ACA will end democracy as we know it and kill us all, and Sink mumbling that she would "keep what was right and fix what was wrong," the stronger argument, no matter how shot through with nonsense it is, will generally prevail.

one is going to see that you get no affordable health care the is more promising. this SHOULD matter to people and i shouldnt have to explain it. i agree dealing with the landrieus and the liebermans is frustrating at times but theyre still better than republicans

[YOHABLO]

99. Retirees don't want their Social Security cut .. no way Jose'!

[dicksmc3]

37. Missed oppportunity

Well, you can thank all the Dems that didn't go and vote for this defeat!! When in the hell are Dems going to get some BALLS and show up and voice their opinions with their votes?? NEVER in mid-term elections!! We need to get it together folks or we are going to crash and burn in November!! I'm sick and tired of the Dems not calling out the Repugs on any lies they spew and then not backing OBAMACARE... Gutless wonders some of these Dems. Forget about me donating to lost causes again...

[tularetom]

39. The reason Sink and other Democrats don't sound enthusiastic about the ACA

is that there really isn't a great deal there to be enthusiastic about.

The goal was to get everybody insured. Well, BFD. That's a faulty premise, the goal should have been to get everybody access to health care.

The president is smart enough to know that but what else can he say. He set the bar pretty low when he failed to even push for a public option, let alone single payer. Which is where this whole thing is going to end up when the insurance companies realize their profits are going down the crapper if they have to cover everybody.

The test of Obamacare's success will not be measured by how many people sign up for it. It will ultimately be judged by statistics on life expectancy, death rates for heart disease, cancer, diabetes and other treatable conditions.

[JoePhilly]

54. So people voted for a Republican because Obama didn't push for Medicare for all?

The voters in Florida must be pretty dumb if they would vote for a Republican who would push to end Medicare for everyone because the President didn't push for Medicare for all.

Or, with everyone running around complaining about how evil Obamacare is (including the disgruntled left), they simply assume that's true ... the ACA must be evil.

So they better vote Republican to get rid of it completely.

I think we know how that will effect those statistics ... because we used to have exactly that situation. And it wasn't going well.

[tularetom]

61. I have no fucking idea why people voted for a republican

All I said was Sink did a crappy job of defending Obamacare because there isn't very much to defend. And I never said Obamacare was "evil". It's a health insurance program, not a health care program. All it can do is ensure that everybody has health insurance, not that they will receive adequate health care.

As far as the voters in Florida are concerned, I assume a lot of them are dumb because of the electoral choices they seem to make. As shitty as the ACA is, it's an improvement over no insurance.

[totodeinhere]

40. Here's' the way it works. Prior to the election there were predictions at DU that Sink would win.

But of course that didn't happen so now the new talking point is that it wasn't any big deal.

Just watch. There will be widespread predictions next that the Democrats will do well in November 2014. But then if that doesn't happen again we will hear excuses.

Take off your rose colored glasses people. The Republicans are in this to win and they will try every trick in the book to beat us. We have got to do a better job of getting our base out to vote in midterm elections. Look at all of the damage that our loss in 2010 has caused. And if we lose this November it will only get worse.

[Hubert Flottz]

53. I agree.

Democrats need to send the GOP a real message in the next election. This GOP War on the Poor, has got to stop.

[Kablooie]

46. He's got a point.

The Republican message: If you vote Democratic the world will end!

The Democratic message: If you vote Democratic we'll try to fix some of the problems.


The Republicans always focus on attacks based on pure emotion.
They don't need to defend themselves because they control the conversation.

The Dems defend themselves with facts but with caveats.

If you are an informed, thinking person you will see what's going on.
If you are an uninformed, impressionable person the Republican message is so scary that you don't want to take a chance that it might not be true.

I wish the Democratic message could contain some emotional content.
Heck, when you see what Republican governance produces it should be easy to create a scary scenario that is based on reality.

[octoberlib]

57. Good post! nt

[ancianita]

48. If voters can get off their asses and register, they can get off their asses and vote. EVERY TIME.

[JackHughes]

50. Timid Democrats lose.

Democrats lose because each of their candidates is -- in effect -- a "party of one." Instead of running with unified and coordinated rhetoric that amplifies their message, Democrats refute and weaken their own propaganda with their current "every man for himself" non-strategy.

Was Sink aggressive enough to charge the Republicans with lying about everything regarding Obamacare?

Timid Democrats lose.

[octoberlib]

55. +1

[ancianita]

56. Absolutely. Embolden Democratic voters by outraging Republican candidates. Attack their lies.

[pragmatic_dem]

102. But when rehtoric is about spying, drones, more offshoring trade agreements

keystone, Monsanto protections, privatization, etc etc etc that's part of the problem. If Democrats want to embrace conservative economic values, they should run as Republicans instead of diluting traditional Democratic values.

I don't mind marching, but I won't goosestep down Wall Street.

[myrna minx]

113. In addition, Dems usually choose to inhabit the false choice framing constructe by the republicans.

When the Dems frame the debate on their own terms, we win and win big. When we shadow box around republican framed issues we lose and lose big. I boggles the mind what we're still dallying around talking deficits and austerity when health care, wages and infrastructure for jobs are huge winners. Ugh. It drives me up the wall that the Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory time and time again.

[Hubert Flottz]

51. Because the republican leaders in and from Florida...

have a political setup in that state, that will stop at nothing to beg, borrow or steal, a "Win." The Repub Cheat machine, runs even smoother today than the did in 2000. I wish Jimmy Carter would call the UN in to oversee the elections in Florida, Ohio and Texas.

[questionseverything]

59. i wish citizens would count and report their own votes

instead we have a foreign company telling us the "winners" and "losers"

http://enr.votepinellas.com/FL/Pinellas/50891/125083/en/summary.html

same soe reporting software as is used all over the country so we really have no clue who the winner was but the indie getting 5% of vote reminds me of how we lost il cd 13 only in il cd 13 it was a progressive candidate receiving 7% that threw the election to a tea bagger

[Vinnie From Indy]

58. Amen!

Dems need to start throwing punches instead of catching them.

[bvar22]

63. Run as Old Time Pro-Working Class DEMOCRATS!!!!!

[font size=3]
"I've seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the Fair Deal, and says he really doesn't believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign."
---President Harry Truman

QED:2010[/font]


[font size=3] NO Excuses![/font]

[mdbl]

107. Agreed! If Democrats would have

derailed the repugs ambitions starting with the Raygun and Mush Lumpball and continuing through today, we wouldn't be sitting on the margins. Instead, they allowed a couple of big pigs embarrass them for the values that made the party great. The country has swirled down the toilet for 99 percent of us ever since and many are still listening to and electing repuglican BS. We only have ourselves to blame.

[struggle4progress]

67. 40% turnout? Learn how to vote!

[octoberlib]

69. +1

[TheKentuckian]

106. Lucky to get that running on austerity. That 40% had to be almost all brand and habit voting.

Why take even 10 minutes out of a busy day to cut your own throat when you can still get the service without investment of any effort.

One may as well run on a "the Holocaust wasn't that bad and the slaves loved slavery" platform, stick a fork in your own ass, and stitch a white flag to your fucking forehead.

Seems she was kept in shouting distance by the crappiness of the opponent and the slime all over their party.

[DeSwiss]

70. K&R

"Every nation gets the government it deserves." ~Joseph de Maistre

[marble falls]

71. May they should learn how to hold their water and not panic? This wasn't any sort of a ...

horse race.

[certainot]

73. most of the analysis is bullshit- democrats got beaten again by their ignorance of

RW talk radio.

sink lost by2%. how much did rw radio ignorance cost?

all the other factors are normal for both parties- print, tv, internet, money, get out the vote, tactics, etc. we can analyze the results for weeks as to relative wins and fails and comparisons but it's all bullshit because the left cedes the rw radio advantage.

what did it cost dems to continue to ignore rw radio? how many pts was that worth? 10% 20% 30%?

all the other analysis is bullshit if dems and progressives continue to ignore the right's best weapon.

[Cha]

77. Thank you, Charlie Pierce!

"Paul Begala took to Twitter to warn the Democrats not to try to spin the result as anything but a loss, and Tiger Beat On The Potomac has sounded the sirens and is herding people into the shelters."

thanks octoberlib!

[blkmusclmachine]

95. How many times does Sink have to LOSE before we give her the boot???

[DallasNE]

98. They Need To Beef Up Early Voting And GOTV Efforts

And not be so concerned with market saturation of 20 second ads. When I heard that early voting favored the Republican I thought to myself "that's it" and that is how it turned out.

[Pryderi]

100. We're going to lose the Senate in 2014. n/t

[pragmatic_dem]

101. The author is spewing right wing talking points. It's clearly Nader's fault.

Sigh...

[MFM008]

103. have we so soon forgot about Virginia?

there is still plenty of time for the gop to do what they do best....screw up in a major way.

Lets not throw the babies out with the bathwater.......yet.

[Phlem]

104. I'm starting to think our Democrats have been bought to shut up.

Explains why the Republicans have a foot firmly up our ass all the time.

They're allowed to speak for theater but nothing else.



-p

[bkanderson76]

108. ...."A Low Turnout Election".....Democracy....The American Privilege.....Vote

Don't necessarily agree with the "Nice job there again, Democrats".

For those of you who just had to drive on to get their BigMac with not a minute to spare to stop and exercise your right to vote....

Let me step up to call the kettle black as it is....Fuck You In Florida

[merrily]

109. IMO, Democrats should not "defend" the ACA, they should sell it proudly.

People with pre-existing conditions covered at no extra cost.

Kids able to remain on their parents' policies until age 26, etc.

Am I thrilled with the ACA? No. But that is a different issue from what campaign strategy should be. A lot of the Democrats who will be running this fall voted for the ACA. They can't be defensive about it or ashamed of it. Brag on it.

And, if they are going to attack anything, attack people so heartless they'd repeal the ACA, namely, Republicans.

[mountain grammy]

115. K&R always for Charlie Pierce.