Days of Change

The Failure of the Four Year Strategy | November 6, 2014

One of the worst parts of partisanship is when one side uses their preconceptions to define a result. In this election, many Democrats, progressives and liberals have chosen to look at the bad results for Democrats across the board as a condemnation of the voters not turning out. At most, Obama failed at pushing himself on more candidates or those candidates running from his agenda.

The most common excuse is that Republicans, aided by more money (even though Obama always had more campaign money and they didn’t bitch then) and a bunch of old White racists, won because turnout among the creative (lazy) class was extremely low. In other words, this election can’t be legitimate because fewer people voted than in a presidential election year.

My response is “What about 2006?” In the Senate elections of 2004, the turnout was over 84 million and the Republicans turned over 4 seats. It was a good year for Republicans. 2006 was not. However, in that year’s Senate elections, less than 58 million people voted and Democrats turned over six seats (if you count the election of Angus King, an Independent who is essentially a Democrat). The Democrats won big with a paltry number of midterm voters.

Now, let’s look at 2008. The turnout for the Senate elections was about 62 million. The turnout for the presidential election was over 129 million. This also puts the lie to Obama having massive coattails as nearly half the voters in 2008 skipped voting down ticket at all and just checked Obama. Even so, the Democrats gained a staggering 8 seats.

The first election where Whitey supposedly out-represented America was in 2010. The turnout for Senate elections was 61.8 million. In fact, using Wikipedia‘s numbers, only 1.15% fewer people voted for Senators in 2010 than in 2008. In fact, Democratic Senators got 247,000 more votes in 2010 than in 2008. The truth is that Obama never had coattails.

The real problem, then, is in a four year strategy. The Democrats have one difference over Republicans. Any city with a high population density, besides being crime-ridden, gun-infested and full of crushing poverty, also has a large percentage of Democrats. This fact makes little difference in a Congressional election since it is about 470 different races. In the presidential election, however, any swing state has an urban center where Democrats can walk a city block and knock on 100 doors in an hour. Plus, armed with voting data and a bus route, Democrats can pull people out of their homes to vote for weeks in places with early voting.

The good news is that putting Republicans in control of Congress is a relatively easy goal to achieve. Democrats haven’t actually figured out a secret, they merely leveraged some advantages. Republicans are now matching Democrats in early voting totals and voter ID laws may have stopped a last-minute or suspicious Wendy Davis victory in Texas. In other words, Democrats are dumb and it caught up with them.

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized

2 Comments

  1. In other words, Democrats are dumb and it caught up with them.

    You said a mouthful, brother 15.
    ———————————————–
    1. This Rpub tsunami courtesy of b. hussein obama. Period.
    2. If they don’t vote, they don’t care about the outcome.Therefore, victory belongs to those who do care, i.e., those who do vote.

    Comment by Mary — November 7, 2014 @ 12:06 am

  2. So many Dem strategists seem enthralled with the immature, childish “gimme, gimme, now, now” mode of politicking rather than long range, strategic planning for social betterment. The lack of accountability bothers me. I know, I know, the first rule of politics is “Get Elected”. Yep, that works really swell, eh?

    Comment by 49erDweet — November 8, 2014 @ 6:31 pm


    2016 Polls

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 16 other followers

%d bloggers like this: