Wingnut fantasies about their "mandate". Why do our Dem leaders & media buy into them?!1

[UTUSN]

There are 201.5 million ELIGIBLE voters. Many or even most of the constituents of the Democratic coalition tend not to vote, not with consistent frequency, not with intensity. The wingnuts are way less numerous but with consistent frequency and intensity. If every eligible voter actually did, there wouldn’t be a Rethug in office anywhere. Many Dem non-voters TEND to be more preoccupied with surviving, focused on their immediate daily cares, not focused on abstract ideological points, yes probably less motivated, more emotional and needing to be “inspired”, and not driven to vote until they reach a point of desperation.

“Ballot Access News” Edited by Richard Winger (can’t copy the link):
“Curtis Gans, long-time student of U.S. voter turnout, has estimated that 2010 general election turnout is 42% of the number of persons who could potentially have registered to vote and then voted. While this is very bad relative to other nations, it is higher than any midterm year since 1982. The 2006 figure was 40.8%, and the 2002 figure was 39.7%. Gas estiates that 90,000,000 persons cast a ballot in 2010.”

“Red” states vs “blue” – This is a totally stupid non-concept: LIMBOsevic and other wingnuts are constantly flashing graphics of the U.S. totally “red” except for tiny pockets of “blue.” Uh, those would be red, geographic miles of EMPTY space compared to the blue spots crammed with POPULATION. Can they quit it now?!1

By the bye, the Blue states pay for a far higher amount of the benefits that Red states take full advantage of. Wingnuts tend not to see agricultural and business subsidies as government “welfare.”

[budkin]

1. Because the media is run by corporations who use them for their propaganda

[FiveGoodMen]

2. ...and many of the "Dems" really have no political convictions, whatsoever.

Sad to say, but denying it won't make it go away.

"Vote for us, we're not them" is the best they could come up with.