President Obama will draw more Democratic voters to gain back the majority in 2012

[bigtree]

We saw how our Democratic majority benefited from voters drawn to the polls to vote for Barack Obama for president. That dynamic should occur again in 2012 (albeit with potentially less turnout) when President Obama faces the republican nominee.

The importance of the presidential draw to our Democratic legislative candidates (and state elections, as well) makes the politics practiced by the President influential to our chances of regaining the House as much as they will be to his own personal prospects for success in the election.

He should be a huge draw for Democrats, especially if republicans choose one of their nuts. Conversely, he could be a big draw for republican voters if they manage to demonize him to the degree that it fires up their party faithful.

At any rate, the man in the presidency that many folks are now blaming for the House loss, in just two years, is going to be in an advantageous position to pull our legislature out of republican hands and deliver it to our Democrats. Just sayin' . . .

[speppin]

1. Pres. Obama may be in trouble in 2012 (just a gut feeling).

[bigtree]

2. depends on the republican nominee

. . . he wouldn't be 'in trouble', for instance, in a contest against Palin or any of the last pack of republican candidates.'

There's certainly not going to be any significant Democratic opposition.

[speppin]

4. I agree with both of your points.

[Andy823]

3. I doubt it!

The right has nobody to run against him except "losers"! The right is also going to be fighting each other for the next two years because those with any brains at all on the right know that Palin as the nominee means a sure thing for Obama! In order to win they have to have a "real" candidate, not some teabagger, a Mormon, or one of the other "crazy" idiots from Fox, that includes Palin!

No, republicans are going to shot themselves in the foot big time. They won't work with the president, and they "have" to cater to the rich and the corporations while trying to please the teabaggers that got elected, and that isn't go to work out well at all!

[ixion]

5. unless he does something exceptional, he's not going to draw more voters, in my opinion

the whole 'change' spiel isn't going to fly this time around.

[bigtree]

6. he'll still be contrasted against republicans

. . . and anyone who doesn't see the changes since our party gained the presidency weren't paying attention in the past and aren't paying enough attention now.

[walldude]

8. Agreed.. he's already capitulating

I was hoping this loss would fire him up but he's already talking about keeping the Bush Tax Cuts.. Yeah he's a fighter alright.

[bigtree]

9. that's the narrative folks in opposition use

His primary concern that he's expressed repeatedly is to preserve and enhance the middle class tax cuts and make them permanent. He's already expressed opposition to defending the tax cuts for wealthier Americans into perpetuity. It's still not clear what he'd accept in the way of keeping those cuts in place, but he's made it clear that any stay of the cuts would be temporary and conditional on what he's looking for in middle class tax relief.

Of course, it sounds good to claim he's 'capitulating'. I don't imagine there will be any mention from you of republicans' capitulation on what they promised voters when it's all said and done.

[Tesha]

27. He just completely lost any ability to "do something exceptional".

The Senate wasn't going to allow any action before (with
58 Dems) and you're certainly *NOT* going to see any
good bills come from a majority-Republican House and
a senate with only 53 (or fewer) nominal "Democrats".

It is all over for Obama.

Tesha

[thunder rising]

30. He could become a fighter. FDR style. "He's got the gift. What he's waiting for?" (Matrix)

[Tesha]

40. He is a powerless man. He wasn't, but he is now.

He is a mockery, a laughingstock, nothing more.

Tesha

[thunder rising]

7. Who's going to GOTV for him? The independents? ... lol

[bigtree]

10. Democrats will GOTV

. . . the dependable Democratic voting base, if they have any objection at all to the republican nominee assuming office.

[thunder rising]

13. Better than they did this time? Not likely!

[bigtree]

15. yes, likely. Midterms historically see low turnout.

There's the fact that more voters participate in the presidential elections than midterms. That alone will bring out more Democratic voters.

In these presidential elections, most Democratic voters inclined to support the President aren't going to split their vote and advance republican candidates. This election shouldn't be an exception to that.

Also, there will be the dynamic of Democratic voters looking to reverse the catastrophe of republicans gaining our House. Their activity up until the election will be a poster for their defeat.

[thunder rising]

19. But we win when we have somebody leading. 2006? Howard Dean? Remember

[bigtree]

24. much of the increase in the last presidential election came from minority voters

. . . and youth voters energized by Mr. Obama.

2006 was about the country's antipathy to Bush. Btw, Dean's approach supported many moderate Democrats successfully into office to make up our majority. I don't imagine that's something you're pining to repeat, but bipartisanship (toward voters) and taking regional considerations into account is the way we win national elections.

[thunder rising]

28. "taking regional considerations into account" is exactly the DLC way to lose!!!

[bigtree]

33. Dean's 50-state strategy intended to make Democrats competitive in red states and regions

. . . not ignoring traditionally conservative states. If you bother to look, moderate or conservative Democrats were supported by the national party in those elections (causing some controversy among progressives) to make up our Democratic majority. Progressive candidates weren't numerous, popular, or successful enough to carry our party to the majority on their own. They still aren't.

[thunder rising]

37. Tautology. Kudos on the deflection.

[bigtree]

38. Inanity. (Kudos on the projection)

[thunder rising]

39. and we're done

[JTFrog]

11. K&R!

[Scurrilous]

12. K & R

:thumbsup:

[thunder rising]

14. I'm not in the mood for a cheerleader. The "clap louder" theme is pretty much dead.

[bigtree]

16. I'm not in the mood for despair

. . . and hand-wringing. I believe in our party and I'm not going to be dissuaded from that by finger-pointing and misplaced recriminations.

You'd be making a big mistake believing that political progress stops and optimism fades just because republicans have gained control of the loquacious-but-politically neutered House.

[thunder rising]

18. I put in 8 hard years to watch Obama and Kaine give it away in 2.

[bigtree]

20. Democratic voters who refused to turn out gave it away

. . . for whatever their reasons. It's as much their majority as it is the President's.

[thunder rising]

21. There's an old Pogo cartoon ... "It's the voters fault!" Sometimes the arguments are sooo bad

[bigtree]

25. again

It's the voter's majority. They'll either will defend it or suffer through the republicans.

[thunder rising]

36. When you have nothing to lose (unemployed, foreclosed, uninsured) it's good to have company.

[bvar22]

17. Unless he continues slip sliding to the Right...

...appeasing the abusers, compromising from The Middle, "seeking bi-partisan consensus" where none is possible, insulting the Democratic Wing of the Party....
If that happens, the vacuum on The Left will grow. Someone will step into that vacuum and pick up the votes that the Centrist Party leadership think are not important.

It will be a Perfect Storm replay of 2000, but worse since the vacuum is stronger and more dramatic.

Its Physics.
Vacuums are filled.


"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[bigtree]

22. not only did we win in 2000

. . . we also won almost 2 million more votes in the popular election.

All of that with Naderites doing their best to ensure we lose.

I would think back to 2004 where the right was energized to the degree that they produced a record number of republican voters to match our own record number of Democratic voters. It's not as if there aren't political consequences to unbridled partisanship.

[thunder rising]

23. The difference is losing in a fight and losing by cowering. Want to puch somebody in the nose, aim

for the back of the head.

The Democratic wing of the Democratic Party can understand a hard fought lose, but it's getting hard to abide a coward that will not fight.

[bvar22]

31. So you believe if the Party Leadership just keeps doing what it is doing,

everything will come out peachy in 2012? :shrug:

[thunder rising]

34. CLAP LOUDER...and the fairy comes back to life.

[thunder rising]

26. Now it's beginning to look like a response generator (Eliza). Same crap over and over

[bigtree]

29. mirror.

[thunder rising]

32. A mirror with context. Like what topics to jump to when cornered.

[Ter]

35. Zero chance of that happening

The next time the House changes hands, it will be the midterms for a Republican president.