I'm starting to think that American voters are actually consistent and aware.

[metapunditedgy]

We overwhelmingly wanted the substantial HCR we were promised. We overwhelmingly didn't get it.

Throw in a similar story for DADT, Wall Street reform, criminal charges against BP and banksters.

That's the story of 2010, spin it how you like.

[emulatorloo]

1. Go look at the exit polls. Jobs

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2010/11/exit_poll_the_next_congress.html

Exit poll: priorities for the next Congress

Poll workers across the country will be counting millions more ballots throughout the night, but exit polls shed light on the new direction voters want the 112th Congress to take.

Overall, voters came down firmly against expanded government: 56 percent told exit pollsters that the government is doing too may things better left to business and individuals;38 percent say the government should do more to solve problems.

Thirty-seven percent say that spending to create jobs should be the highest priority for the Congress, which will have a GOP-controlled House and Democratic Senate. A similar number, 39 percent, say the top priority should be reducing the budget deficit. Eighteen percent cite cutting taxes as the highest priority.

On the subject of the Bush-era tax cuts, four in 10 support continuing them for all, 37 percent say they want them to continue only for families earning less than $250,000 per year, and fewer, 15 percent, say they want all Bush-era tax cuts to expire.

Forty-eight percent support canceling the changes that the Obama administration and Congress made to the health care system. Thirty-one percent say they want the new health care law expanded, and just 16 percent say they want to leave the laws as is.

[TornadoTN]

2. Lots of people stayed at home.

I'd wager a lot voted, but didn't vote the way we would have wanted them to. Not everyone is a die-hard partisan that will vote regardless.

There is a lot of truth behind what the OP is saying.

[emulatorloo]

4. If you don't vote, you vote isn't counted.

[derby378]

7. Your vote isn't counted, but YOU still are

That's why the 2003 Texas redistricting debacle was so bad. The state law says you allocate districts in Texas according to the overall population. The Republicans reinterpreted that to mean you allocate districts according to the voters, especially the voters on the winning side. Guess who lost representation in Austin?

[TornadoTN]

9. Completely agree, but I'm just pointing it out

I advocate voting, preferably for our candidates, but just the mere act of voting and getting involved in the process. Some people don't feel that way and sit out for a variety of reasons.

I think a lot of what we saw was the marketing that attracted voters to Obama in 2008. A lot of those voters voted for him because it was seen as the "cool" thing to do and knew little about policy. They didn't turn out this time. Others fell for the marketing behind "Hope" and "Change" and either expected too much or was turned off by the capitulation of the administration and Congress.

[Uzybone]

3. stop deluding yourself....

the people who showed up at the polls because of HCR came to destroy it, not to make it better and not to protest that it wasn't liberal enough.

DADT, Wall St reform, prosecutions etc don't even register on voters top 15 concerns.

Can we deal in reality here?

[metapunditedgy]

15. Which reality do you prefer? 2008, 2010, or 2012?

In 2008 we learned that voters want change, want real HCR reform, want a government that will stand up to Wall Street, etc. We voted for that so hard that I remember wondering if the final vote tallies were being held back so as not to hurt McCain's feelings.

Now we switch to 2010 reality, which is apparently your reality. People only care about jobs. Jobs jobs jobs. Jobs jobs jobs jobs. Can't even remember what we were talking about in 2008... gotta move forward. HCR?... well, nobody is even mentioning that because it's really technical and we don't want it to become an issue or anything.

Like I said, spin it how you like...

[Johonny]

42. I agree

the angry people that voted clearly have no clue what Congress did the last 2 years or why it didn't do more. I still can't believe what Rand Paul said election night. That wasn't the battle cry for a people disillusioned with moderate change when they wanted more liberal agenda.

[niceypoo]

49. More important - who DIDNT show up?

Independents didn't show up at the polls because don't like what they perceive as a weak president (watered down bills, compromised solutions.)
Liberals didn't show up because the Democrats crapped all over them.

[HughBeaumont]

5. Yes, so consistent and aware . . .

. . . that they put Wall Street's Lapdogs and the Fuck The Poor Party back in charge of the House (and let's just say for the sake of the filibuster, the Senate), despite 30 consecutive years of the husband/wife team of Corporate America and the Republicans in both "parties" giving the working/middle/poor classes the FIST.

[frazzled]

8. Yeah, but ...

the OP's statement self-confirmed his pre-conceived notions, so he (sorry if Hugh is a woman) is willing to put Wall Street's Lapdogs and the Fuck the Poor Party back in power. It makes you feel good to be right, right?

[scheming daemons]

6. Exit polls tell a completely different story than your spin

Democrats overwhelmingly voted for Democrats.

Republicans overwhelmingly voted for Republicans.


Independents leaned Republican..... and in exit polls, they listed JOBS as the #1 reason.... and it was much higher than the second-biggest reason.


DADT wasn't even in the top 10.



You can try to spin reality into what YOU felt about the election.... but the electorate didn't agree with you.

[TornadoTN]

10. 29 million registered Democrats stayed at home

Some of those just might have been a little pissed off about the way things have gone. Others might have voted third party or wrote someone in.

I'm not arguing the wisdom of doing so, I'm just saying that 29 million voters could have made a hell of a difference in some places if only a portion of them turned out.

[scheming daemons]

11. Dems ALWAYS see a decrease in turnout in midterms vs presidential elections

In fact, this year's drop off was less than normal for us.


The difference is that the Republicans didn't have any drop off at all.



But our drop off was consistent, and slightly better, than our normal drop off.

[emulatorloo]

12. Or they may have been hung-over, or had to work double shifts. Or they don't vote in midterms

only in Presidential elections. Or they didn't take it seriously.

We will never know whether they were pissed off or what - THEY DIDN:T VOTE.

[TornadoTN]

13. Part of solving this equation is finding out why

You are probably right and I am probably right on this one, I think we can both agree on that.

[emulatorloo]

16. Sure - especially if we both keep scheming daemons' post 11 in mind

:patriot:

Just to throw something out there -- There was a ballot initiative in my town to keep bars at 21-only. (They had been able to allow 19 year olds in before). There was tons of outrage about it from the College Students. And lots of organization. Yet young voters did not turn out to defeat it. It seems like when push came to shove, they couldn't manage voting. So it is really hard to know what motivates non voters.

[metapunditedgy]

19. LOL... "We will never know" why Democrats didn't vote. Hmm, what brought voters out in 2008?

What brought out the Republican voters in 2010?

If only there was *someone* in the party who can remember what it was that voters were interested in back in 2008....

[emulatorloo]

21. Believe I said "We will never know whether [non-voters] were pissed off or what"

Voters got polled in the exit polls as to their priorities,

Non-Voters weren't there to get polled.


What brought voters out in 2008 and Repubs in 2010 is a great topic though.

[Uzybone]

27. OBAMA

thats your answer.

When he is up for reelection many of these voters will come out again.

[metapunditedgy]

29. Sorry, I don't buy the "Messianic Obama" line. We voted for him because he promised

to work for us. And if you think Obama can sway elections, then tell me... why didn't he sway the midterms?

[Uzybone]

32. Messianic Obama...WTH are you talking about?

coming back to earth, many young voters and minorities were energized to come out due to the historic nature of his candidacy. He was not on the ballot this time. People don't usually come out to vote in mid terms. Why you thought this would be different I'm not sure.

[metapunditedgy]

36. Where was Obama exactly? Hiding on Jupiter? Where were the issues he ran on?

Oh, you're saying that voters weren't interested in the issues, just Obama. And that somehow the personality of Obama was not effective in 2010. But this personality-of-Obama should not be confused with the right-wing talking point "Obama messiah", two totally different things. And some other stuff.

I think your alternate reality is inconsistent, but maybe it looks fine from over there.

[spin]

35. Had the Democrats we elected, listened to the people who voted for them ...

maybe the voters would have turned out.

Obama basically said, "Vote for me and I'll accomplish A, B and C." Two years later X, Y and Z have been accomplished and all three look like they were designed to please the big corporations.

I don't blame Obama, he's still learning how to be a President. The on the job training for the job is daunting for all Presidents. I blame Pelosi. She was good at ramming through legislation which pandered to the big corporations and deaf to the wishes of the people who voted Democrats into power.

[PassingFair]

46. Thats not what I saw of the results in MICHIGAN.

In my district, I knew we were
cooked when I saw that democrats
were voting the mixed ticket.

Voting straight democratic, but
going almost 2 to 1 for the Governors race.

Our state house reps were slaughtered, too.

[JoseGaspar]

14. All people are "consistent and aware".

Understanding that should be the minimum requirement for entering politics.

Missing that and thinking people are stupid should be the minimum requirement for entering middle management at WalMart.

[metapunditedgy]

17. When party officials suggest that voters are being stupid, it's time to rethink strategy.

Just sayin'.

[emulatorloo]

22. Get me the exact quote

Because nobody said that.

[metapunditedgy]

26. Try googling "Democrats voters uninformed." Not so hard.

“We have an electorate that doesn’t always pay that much attention to what’s going on so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what’s happening.” John Kerry.

Or you could just scroll down a few posts to see the talking points that have been going around criticizing voters for not knowing what's good for them.

[emulatorloo]

31. Oh brother - so Kerry's criticism of Limbaugh, Beck, misleading people into thinking Obama caused

the economies problems is telling Democratic Voters they are stupid?

NOWHERE DID HE SAY VOTER ARE STUPID or DEMOCRATIC VOTERS ARE STUPID.

It is a critique of the Right Wing Noise Machine's promotion of no-nothingness and anti fact and anti science.

We complain about the damage the Right Wing Noise Machine does all the time.

Link to full article for those that want to bother:

Kerry voices frustration with US political scene
By Glen Johnson
AP Political Writer / October 28, 2010

BOSTON—Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry unleashed a broadside Thursday against Republican "obstructionism," saying the GOP and its talk-show allies have created a "period of know-nothingism" in the country.

With his party braced for defeats in the midterm elections, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee told the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce that a Republican machine -- fueled by talk show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck -- has undermined progress and misled the public into believing Democrats created the country's current economic problems.

Kerry singled out attacks on an energy deal he was negotiating with Republicans, which fell apart amid criticism of an emissions-trading program. Some 20 Senate candidates are now opposing the proposed deal in their campaigns.

"It's absurd. We've lost our minds," said a clearly exasperated Kerry. "We're in a period of know-nothingism in the country, where truth and science and facts don't weigh in. It's all short-order, lowest common denominator, cheap-seat politics."

To underscore his claim, he said statistics show Republicans had blocked Senate business with filibuster tactics more during the past 18 months than the period between the end of World War I and the Apollo moon landing in 1969.

"The obstructionism is stunning," Kerry said, noting the country still lacks an assistant treasury secretary. "I think America really needs to know more of this kind of tactic and how it's shortchanging us."

[metapunditedgy]

37. So you agree voters are misled "know-nothings" who have lost their minds. But that's not bad

or anything. Not a criticism.

To each his/her own. If you want to continue with more of the same, I guess we'll just have to pretend we're happy with the results so far.

Me, I think lots of voters were actually paying attention.

[emulatorloo]

44. If I want word-twisting and intellectual dishonesty, I'll visit other site beside DU

Have a great night!

[metapunditedgy]

45. Sorry you didn't like Kerry's statement! Have a good night yourself. n/t

[Stevenmarc]

18. More like consistently bamboozled

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. It was a monumental defeat for "pragmatic" moderates.

Who are still trying to tell us that moving to the center is the answer.

[emulatorloo]

23. "obama needs to move to the center" is the media theme. Evan Bayh NYT etc. DU'ers arent saying

that, as far as I can tell. There may be strategic differences about how to move forward.

Or maybe I have missed all those Obama must move center threads

[eissa]

24. If by "consistent and aware" you actually mean

"stupid and moronic" then I'm right there with you, because there just is no other rational explanation. Yeah, times are tough, we know, everyone is feeling it. But to expect things to turnaround in less than two years is ridiculous. It took 8 years of bad decision making to get us here, it's going to take a while to get back on course. To vote back in the same people who are responsible for this mess is nothing short of idiotic.

Absolutely NOTHING has been presented by the opposition to make any logical person think they have the answers to anything. All we've heard is "cut spending" but none have been able to offer specifics (other than getting rid of the Department of Education and the EPA, both of which are more symbolic than money saving.) Our society has the patience and attention-span of fruitflies; we deserve everything that is about to come our way.

[metapunditedgy]

25. Pretty much everything you wrote was proven "impractical" by the election.

You may want to re-think those talking points.

[newspeak]

50. actually, how informed is a voter who

votes against their own interest. I mean if they were informed, then they knew that Little boot's had one of the worst job creation records for eight fekkin years. And being so informed, they knew that * increased the deficit by 89%, while shoveling our money to his corporate greedhead friends, ya know that privatization of the war, military, prisons. They would have also known that * was no friend to labor, especially after he attempted to break the dockworkers union. Being informed, I'm sure they knew that deregulation hurts us, we the people, how's those bankers and wall street doing after fekking us!!!!

And being so knowledgeable, I'm sure they wondered after * cut USDA, FDA, EPA, that all of those recalls that killed and sickened people and pets could be directly related to those cuts.

So, they were so informed, they wanted the same shite they had for eight nightmarish years. Yeah, that's the ticket. Oh, and I'm sure all of those well informed voters are wealthy and care nothing about the huge disparity gap we have--so long middle class.

[dionysus]

28. ROFL... i smell fail....

[metapunditedgy]

30. You can probably wash it off with some soap... n/t

[treestar]

33. They didn't want HCR at all

They want to continue DADT. Why else vote for Republicans?

[metapunditedgy]

34. As you know, voters wanted substantial HCR back in '08, and weren't happy with

what we got. I think they really were paying attention.

[treestar]

38. Well now they've changed their minds and don't want it at all

they want it repealed, right?

Nothing at all. Just like Republicans want.

[metapunditedgy]

39. They don't want crap. Tell me, why can't we campaign on HCR? Who is carrying the torch,

getting out the message about how great the new reforms are? How well would you say that message is getting carried out there?

Most I've heard lately is that the government lost a stare-down with McDonalds.

[spin]

41. In '08 we had the most expensive healthcare system in the world ...

In 2011 we can expect the premiums to increase by 9%.

Rate of Increase Rises Significantly as Companies Struggle to Keep up with the Rapidly Evolving Health Care Landscape
September 27, 2010

LINCOLNSHIRE, Ill. – Due to recent higher medical claim costs, an aging population and changes brought about by health care reform, employers can expect 2011 health care cost increases to be at their highest levels in five years, according to an analysis by Hewitt Associates, a global human resources consulting and outsourcing company. Next year, Hewitt projects an 8.8 percent average premium increase for employers, compared to 6.9 percent in 2010 and 6.0 percent in 2009.

According to Hewitt's analysis, the average total health care premium per employee for large companies will be $9,821 in 2011, up from $9,028 in 2010. The amount employees will be asked to contribute toward this cost is $2,209, or 22.5 percent of the total health care premium. This is up 12.4 percent from 2010, when employees contributed $1,966, or 21.8 percent of the total health care premium. Average employee out-of-pocket costs, such as copayments, coinsurance and deductibles, are expected to be $2,177 in 2011—a 12.5 percent increase from 2010 ($1,934). These projections mean that in a decade, total health care premiums will have more than doubled, from $4,083 in 2001 to $9,821 in 2011. Employees' share of medical costs—including employee contributions and out-of-pocket costs—will have more than tripled, from $1,229 in 2001 to $4,386 in 2011.
http://www.hewittassociates.com/Intl/NA/en-US/AboutHewitt/Newsroom/PressReleaseDetail.aspx?cid=9106

Let's look back at 2008.



I voted for Obama because I have wanted a better healthcare system in our nation since Bill Clinton's first term.

It will be 2014 before the heathcare system kicks in and if the cost continues to grow at the same rate until then, we might find the savings of the new system will just cover the increase in cost from the time it passed. We will still have the most expensive healthcare in the world.

And what were we promised?

Will Obama's healthcare plan reduce costs?
By Mark Trumbull, / Staff Writer / March 4, 2010


On Wednesday. President Barack Obama delivered a speech urging Congress to pass his healthcare plan. The president said the proposed reform would reduce costs for millions of Americans.

As President Obama tries this week to put his healthcare plan on a fast track toward passage, he's still struggling to persuade Americans that the plan will reduce costs.

"My proposal would bring down the cost of healthcare for millions – families, businesses, and the federal government," Mr. Obama said Wednesday in making his pitch. "Let's get it done."
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0304/Will-Obama-s-healthcare-plan-reduce-costs

[fadedrose]

40. They gave up hope . . . no sense voting when hope is gone

I voted, but didn't have that "feel good" feeling; it was more of a duty. Young people haven't developed that patriotic optimism that we old ones "used to have."

[AnArmyVeteran]

43. Why do people unrec this??? What are people afraid of?

[metapunditedgy]

48. That... is a good question. Me, I would think the path to future success involves understanding

the present. There seems to be a conflicting view....

[bvar22]

47. Shhhh!

You are going to ruin the Blame the Voters parade.

It is NOT that difficult:
The primary job of Leadership is to motivate the troops (voters).
If the troops are NOT motivated,
it IS a FAILURE of Leadership. Period.

Blaming the Voters is the coward's way of avoiding responsibility.