General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn My Opinion, The Only Really Useful Reaction to the SCOTUS Decision Is:
Use this decision in our GOTV and campaign efforts for the 2014 Congressional elections. Help people who think voting doesn't matter to understand how this SCOTUS decision means that their vote this year matters more than it ever has. The SCOTUS ruling was by five angry Republican appointees who want to limit the power of the voter and give that power to the rich.
We need to explain this emphatically in 2014 and in future elections and convince people to turn out in unprecedented numbers and Take Congress Back from the Republicans! Then we can, though progressive legislation, and maybe even a Constitutional Amendment, give the power back to the voter.
SCOTUS has ruled. No amount of objection to that ruling will change that ruling. Instead, we need to protest this by turning out the largest percentage of Democratic voters ever seen in November. We need to use this ruling to stimulate that turnout. Every last DUer needs to take part in this and to encourage everyone else to do the same.
GOTV 2014 and Beyond!
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,699 posts)You have nailed it, exactly.
Thank you!
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)That's always my suggestion for making change happen. I hope it works this time.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)calimary
(81,466 posts)stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)And let's hope that our Congress Critters get as upset about this as they should be. Democratic Congresscritters should be able to use this issue to very good effect. They need to be talking about it whenever they can in the media, and they need to get average Americans attention on this issue because, again, the Democrats certainly have the overwhelming support of most Americans on this issue.
It's such a no-brainer I'm sure they will do just that. I mean, why wouldn't they?!?!
polichick
(37,152 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Sorry, but you've offered nothing but bitter sarcasm, which hasn't ever won any election.
polichick
(37,152 posts)when Dems are complicit.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)You are incorrect. Doing nothing will not solve our problems, and you've offered doing nothing by offering no suggestion at all.
Cynicism and sarcasm is useless. I recommend some positive action on your part.
polichick
(37,152 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)You have no idea what I think, and that's clear from your cynical replies to my posts.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Keep working people, gotv, blah, blah, blah...
Wake up - the corporate takeover of this gov't (all three branches) is not just about one party.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)If you're not going to try, I have no time for you.
polichick
(37,152 posts)dionysus
(26,467 posts)trying to elect democrats sickens you to your core. why are you even here, to encourage people NOT to vote?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Democrats elected, not settling for any ole Democrat. Not all Democrats are created equal. I think she said that just electing Democrats isnt enough. I hope you dont disagree.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)To get progressive Democrats elected, they need to win primaries. That means they need our help to GOTV on primary day.
Which campaign are you working with?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)dionysus
(26,467 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)to ensure corporate control of this gov't.
Just getting out the vote for the D Team won't change that - voters have to expect much more in terms of policies that protect the people.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)is helpful in the slightest? There are people who want to do something more useful than whining "woe is us" and "there is no difference between the parties". The pathetic bullshit that's allowed to stand here is depressing.
polichick
(37,152 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)working to get out the vote. Why should I have any respect for that? You owe the poster of the OP an apology and if you got off your self righteous perch and thought about it, you'd know I was right.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)She said we need to make sure we get Dems who are going to make a difference elected, that merely electing any Dem is not good enough.
Now, do you think that your bitching is helpful in the slightest? Especially considering you completely missed the substance of polichick's posts?
What is so useful about your post?
Also, for some of us "not as bad" isn't good enough. Look where that's gotten us so far. A Dem Party whose leaders are almost all pro-corporate centrists. I'm not going to exert effort to get that. I'm going to exert effort to get better than that.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)who truly is trying to help by getting out the vote - and that's EXACTLY what she did - is helpful, knock yourself out. I think it's bullshit and I'll say so whenever I please.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)You know ... the ones that Democrats voted for just because they had "D"s behind their name DID bring us Kagan and Sotomayor!
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Show up on Primary day. Vote for the liberal Democrat instead of the complicit Democrat.
GOTV is not just for November.
The alternative is to wallow around in misery and ensure that nothing ever gets better.
polichick
(37,152 posts)For years too much team-think allowed the policies to move further and further to the right.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Primary turnout is abysmal. And primaries are how we can steer the party. When people don't bother to show up on primary day, the blue dog keeps winning handily.
polichick
(37,152 posts)All the Third Way ptb - and their mouthpieces here - will insist that the only "viable" candidate is the one they've chosen. Then we'll hear how our team has to stick together to beat the evil-doers on the other side. And of course that one "viable" candidate will also be a good corporate servant.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Congress is the problem.
Congress is why Gitmo is still open. Congress is why drone strikes are still happening. Congress is why we don't have up-to-date privacy laws. Congress is why the TPP isn't dead. Congress is why the economy is still shitty. Congress is why our infrastructure is crumbling but tax cuts always pass.
The media treat the president as a dictator because they're too lazy to follow 535 individuals. That doesn't make it true.
You want to turn the party left? You want better policy? You need to stop following the media narrative and fix Congress.
polichick
(37,152 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)You are demanding that 50 years of Republican hard work should have been undone in a single election.
Not gonna happen. It's going to take a lot of hard work by us. Which again, requires steering the party. Which again, requires GOTV on primary day.
Btw, you're doing a fantastic job reciting the "both parties are the same" bullshit used to kill turnout. You know, the thing you actually need to change where the party is going.
polichick
(37,152 posts)corporate reps pretending to represent the people.
That's the reason nothing much changed when Dems had both houses.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)You haven't been paying attention.
But it does fit nicely into the "don't bother to vote" narrative you're pushing.
Want it to change? Get people to the polls. Don't like who's on the ballot? Run. Or start getting active in the party - They're always looking for people. That way you can actually have a direct effect on who is on that primary ballot.
Complaining on a message board may be cathartic, but it isn't going to change anything.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)that both parties are the same simply doesn't pay enough attention to the reality of politics. Your opinion is worthless.
polichick
(37,152 posts)btw your reading comprehension needs work.
sheshe2
(83,898 posts)Seriously, Where have you been?
1. Appointing two Supreme Court Justices: When people consider their presidential voting decision, most dont consider that amongst the most important and enduring presidential responsibilities is the presidents ability to appoint supreme court justices. This is arguably a presidents biggest opportunity to influence his country, because Supreme Court justices sit until they retire or pass away, so the impact of his decision generally will last many decades beyond his years as president. Obama has been fortunate enough to have two Supreme Court Justices retire in his first few years in office and he has managed to secure both of his nominations through wise selection and political skill. He has added two Democrats, replacing two moderate Democrats in the process. If a Republican has won the presidency instead, we would now be looking at an unbalanced Supreme Court with six conservatives and only three liberal judges a balance that would have been in place for many many decades. In the appointment process, Obama also introduced needed diversity to the bench with two more women on the court, bringing the count to a record three women sitting, while also introducing the nations first Hispanic to the Supreme Court with his choice of Sotomayor.
2. Passing Universal Healthcare: Obama accomplished what no prior Democrat could in expanding coverage to 32 million more Americans while simultaneously reducing the deficit by an estimated $1.3 trillion over the next 20 years. It delivers on every provision of the Patient Bill of Rights that Bill Clinton unsuccessfully tried to get passed, including making it illegal to deny coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and capping out of pocket expenses when people get sick (so people dont go in to bankruptcy after getting ill). It helps shift our medical systems focus to preventative care by covering the cost of early warning tests so our doctors find diseases before they are too advanced - avoiding larger medical expenses down the road and requires the largest and richest American companies to provides insurance for all their employees. It attempts to lower health care costs by forcing all Americans to have medical insurance and pay their fair share so the system is more efficient similar to how all Americans need to have car insurance while providing tax credits to help the poor and small businesses afford this coverage. It increases competition by creating marketplace exchanges to make it easier for small businesses and those without insurance to shop and compare plans. It funds co-ops who can offer competitive insurance plans and provide further competition for insurance companies. It allows insurance companies to offer plans across state borders further increasing the supply of competitive plans. It provides funding, infrastructure, and support to automate, digitize, and unify the countrys outdated medical information system reducing system-wide costs, improving care, and increasing productivity. Perhaps most importantly, it sets up an independent commission of doctors and medical experts to identify and root out medical system waste, fraud, and abuse and includes many pieces of reform that will reduce the most wasteful medical system practices.
3. Financial industry reform: The most sweeping financial industry reform legislation since the Great Depression, this legislation tries to correct those industry issues that helped create the current recession we are still digging ourselves out of. It provides a system to allow the government to break apart large financial institutions that threaten the economy, creates a council of federal regulators to coordinate the detection of risks to the financial system, subjects a wider range of financial companies to government oversight, creates a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection to help protect citizens from unscrupulous practices, and reins in banks ability to trade in risky financial instruments such as credit derivatives.
4. Preventing a 2nd Great Depression: While preventing a depression is not sexy and certainly is reactive, history may say that this is still one of his most important accomplishment to date. The vast majority of economists and experts say that the nation had a high chance of slipping in to a Depression had this stimulus not passed along with the innovative actions of the Fed. Obama has worked with Bernanke and the Fed, put a team of some of the best economic minds around him, helped save Americas 3 major car manufacturers from going out of business, passed the largest economic Stimulus Bill in the nations history, and executed other legislative changes to keep liquidity flowing in our economy, save jobs that would have otherwise been lost, and fund areas of our economy that are strategic and important for our long term economic competitiveness including health care, education, green energy, science, and infrastructure.
Of course, critics will say that the economy today is still sputtering, holds some risk of sliding back in to a recession, and that a real recovery will take many years. These are all true statements and Obama has not moved us from a possible Depression to a fast growing economy but this is a completely unrealistic, almost childish, expectation given the severity of the financial crisis, our current debt, and other economic realities that we have to deal with. Could he have done more or done it differently? Certainly. I would have loved to see Obama do more, faster to invest in small businesses, help them get loans, and help them become more competitive with the large corporations that increasingly dominate our economy. But today we are not in a horrible depression and things are stable and this alone is a tremendous accomplishment.
Oh and much more here: http://3chicspolitico.com/president-obamas-accomplishments/
Oh another update...
President Obama Signs DADT Repeal Act of 2010
Obama said:
It is time to recognize that sacrifice, valor and integrity are no more defined by sexual orientation than they are by race or gender, religion or creed. It is time to allow gay and lesbian Americans to serve their country openly.
http://3chicspolitico.com/2010/12/22/president-obama-signs-dadt-repeal-act-of-2010/#comments
So sorry he has not done enough for you. Yet this is not about one persons needs, it is about all our needs a nation! We are The United States of America.
polichick
(37,152 posts)(Of course Bush wouldn't sign anything very helpful).
With Dems in control of both houses and the WH, they could've enacted major climate change legislation (carbon tax?) or game-changing campaign finance reform - if not for the corporate tools among them. Hell, even now, Landrieu and others refuse to take part in climate change talks.
Getting out the vote is important but Dems have to pay a lot more attention to what kind of candidates they're pushing. There's a credibility problem out there - and rightly so.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)and getting money out of politics. The all important mushy middle just won't respond to anything but republican framing of issues. Strong on terror, free markets, jobs jobs jobs, and union hate, term limits, fiscal responsibility, homes don't deficit spend why should governments is what our dogs in blue tell us the mushy middle wants.
I say fuck that. Give voters a choice. Know the republican lies and attacks are coming and defend a liberal agenda by showing exactly how a centrist/conservative agenda has failed us. Offer real hope vs repuke faux fear. Give people a meaningful choice. And refuse to let pukes set the agenda and warp reality. Do that and watch the voters come out. We saw it when President Obama was running like a liberal. Damn did that GOTV.
pandr32
(11,612 posts)I've heard rhetoric like yours before. Truth: "...to the extent there was a filibuster proof majority in the Senate it lasted during two brief periods which lasted for a total of just over five months when counted altogether (and Congress was in its traditional summer recess for most of the July-August 2009 time frame)." Read it for yourself: http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/did-the-democrats-ever-really-have-60-votes-in-the-senate-and-for-how-long/
polichick
(37,152 posts)It goes like this: Don't blame Dems for not fighting for Dem policies.
btw, a lot can get done in five months - unless corporate tools stand in the way.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)That's kinda the point. Watching only the Presidency does not fix Congress.
JI7
(89,264 posts)and Hillary opposed both.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)that doesn't have a non-complicit Democrat? Or one that barely or RARELY has a Democrat running at the county level?? And, from the news I'm picking up, Kochy Bros. are getting way down to the teenie tiny elections!
It's so depressing getting up some days. BELIEVE ME, I try so very hard to do the things that need to get done, but if you're a couple of fish in an ocean it's hard to find a way to keep from getting eaten up by swarming sharks.
Even our local Democratic Party here is more DLC or Democrat Lite and I'm generally the odd man out. Sure I can do the grunt work, door to door, phone banking, standing on corners and handing out literature. Attending meetings and making suggestions is quite different. Even trying to "middle of the road it" my views seem "leftist" to most of them.
So, I spit against the wind and wonder why I try. I'm no newbie to politics, been involved for many, many years... I'm a Boomer and yes, more liberal. But, even when I bend toward the middle I still feel like I'm being left out in the cold. At my age, I try so hard to get the younger generation involved, my kids & grand kids just don't see the importance. I have been able to get them out to vote. The hundreds of people I connect with generally tell me I'm too involved and I stay stressed out. Not good for my health, take a break... we can't change it anyway. Too much money.
Oh, just a few comments I get ALL THE TIME! And, there are those who actually tune me out and flat out say THEY don't want to talk about it.
So, there are days like today when it hits home even more and it's my computer and me. Unfortunately there are days that I say out loud that I'm glad I have one foot on the way out and may not be here to see when it REALLY gets bad. The House voted that THIS country should do NOTHING more regarding climate change! It's SICK!
And, I have thoughts about what I think should happen to people like Roberts, Scalia et al!! Not nice ones.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)I live in North Carolina.
Due to redistricting and Democratic cowardice, I don't have a lot of candidates to work with. Doing what I can to help keep the Senate, but that's about my only option when you're talking about candidates that will actually be on my ballot.
So I also try to do things for candidates in other areas. You don't have to live in the district to phone bank, for example.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)(personal) on top of EVERYTHING else that is making my head spin. I live extremely close to the Bill Young District, in fact DID used to live there before my husband's job took him further south. Even though I think he probably voted in lock step with the Repukes of late, there was a time that he was quite helpful.
I called upon him once when my father had a stroke and we were having a problem with Bay Front VA Hospital. He was quite open to our family. NOW, they have this Tea Party guy who just took over. Still he has to run again in November. Not sure how that's going to go, but my sister still lives there and she's a Democrat.
I'm surrounded by Repukes, but you are correct a person "could" help in other districts. Alan Grayson is across the state from me, but I'm on his support list. My main focus right now is to PINK SLIP Rick Scott, the corrupt Governor here who really should be in prison. But this is "Jebby's" state and who knows. I DID vote for Crist when he ran as an Independent for Senator, and will try very hard to oust Scott. That's a given, but we need to keep the Senate and the House is just too scary to think about.
Another one of my sister's lives in Franklin, NC, but I don't know who her Representative is. She's not very political, but I think her guy is a Repuke too. I'm really so bummed out right now, and filled with fear. I've been political for a very long time, seen some tough times before, but not sure I've seen the likes of what's going on right now. Not in my lifetime anyway.
I'm sure Vern Buchanan will get re-elected, and he's also a crook too. A bona-fide car salesman who got elected even when he had many lawsuits against him. It's crazy!
ballyhoo
(2,060 posts)which is not done anymore. We will continue to move in a random walk to a Stasi-like government. Garish signs and emails to bought-and-paid-for congresspeople will doing approximately nothing. I take some relief from abject enervation that others know the situation. However, when they hit Social Security, there WILL be a response. And the respondents will be ready with far more than words written on the wind.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)is the large number of people who believe that complaining on a message board is a substitute for being actually involved in the party.
So which campaign are you working with? Any?
ballyhoo
(2,060 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,029 posts)and further assume that not one of us does anything else but complain, we'd still not have numbers to support that assertion.
What a lame and silly copout to explain our obstacles and challenges.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)So raw numbers are not required.
Get liberals to the polls on primary day. Now the liberal candidate wins. The GOTV effort was run by fewer people than voted for that candidate.
Phone bank. Again, does not require outnumbering conservative voters.
Get involved in the party's various committees. Now you can influence the party's official positions and candidates. Does not require outnumbering conservative voters.
And so on.
Complaining on a message board? Does nothing to help your candidates win. Helps them lose by convincing people that the situation is hopeless, so those GOTV, phone banking and other efforts are not done.
polichick
(37,152 posts)What that will look like we don't know yet - but I agree with you, there WILL be a response eventually.
ballyhoo
(2,060 posts)Last edited Wed Apr 2, 2014, 05:10 PM - Edit history (1)
yes, I agree with that. But no social revolutions disguised as political. Those have done more harm than good. I'll not elaborate on that. When the real thing arrives, polichick, I'll be there with you. But GOTV? No. A device of yesteryear when people that looked and sounded somewhat like you came to the door and you listened to them with mainly one ear. Now, it's: How did these people get my address? And how in the heck does one make their hair blue? I don't even talk to the Jehovah Witnesses anymore. I give them a quarter and make Spock's P&P sign and bid them adios. Well, nice talking to you. I've enjoyed your posts. You remind me of that Russian tennis player that posts here. Nadia Brasinski...something like that.
fasttense
(17,301 posts)They are NOT empowered by the Constitution to make laws from the bench. They should be totally ignored.
They do NOT have the power to distribute money. They do not have the power to execute laws. They DO NOT have the power to make laws and have over stepped their jurisdiction. Therefore, except with this one uber rich fool in the case that they ruled upon, all laws involving limits on contributions should STILL BE ENFORCED.
President Lincoln ignored them in the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision and they should be ignored here as well.
They have consistently proven they don't know their limits and have usurped congressional power, they must be ignored by President Obama and congress.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)They're pleased as punch to let a relative few rich guys call the shots as long as they're assured jobs at the end and Addellsonish donations that keep them in office. The party of rich guys bought and paid for this precise verdict from bringing the case to adjudicating it, and ultimately until single member districts are opened to actual competition so we can churn some seats in the house, the obstructionists in the congress call the shots.
I was sickened today watching Rinse Penis gloating over his "real first amendment victory."
LeftishBrit
(41,210 posts)I suppose Byron White was a conservative Democrat, but even he wasn't Scalia, and he was a longish time ago. The recent Dem appointees - by Clinton and Obama - have all been relatively liberal. (There were even liberal Republicans on the Supreme Court not so long ago, notably Stevens, but that would be most unlikely to happen in the future.)
Do you really think any likely Dem president would appoint a Scalia?
polichick
(37,152 posts)referring to the 98-0 Scalia confirmation vote.
It's a problem when we work hard to elect Dems and then they ok guys like Scalia, or they appoint RepubliCons to key cabinet posts, etc.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)swilton
(5,069 posts)Isn't really the space here to elaborate but thanks for your voice!
Response to MineralMan (Original post)
VanillaRhapsody This message was self-deleted by its author.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)was getting at the myth about how both parties are the same and how pointless it is to vote, despite the contrast between the justices that were appointed under Democrats versus Republicans.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)If you cannot see the difference now...at this moment in history...you are not seeing the forest for the trees...
justhanginon
(3,290 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)without the dreaded Blue dogs (that Democrats elected just because they had "D"s after their name) the vote likely would have been 7-2, as we would be seeing a Justice Kagan or a Justice Sotomayor.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)amazing isn't it?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)is caused by Congress.
The only way to fix those problems is to fix Congress. By GOTV.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Why we do not work toward that goal I also do not understand. And we do not. We focus on the Presidency, as if it were the only important elective office. If we do not change that, we will never get what we're looking for.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The media frames the Presidency as a dictator. They treat it as if the President has the power to do anything.
So tax cuts for the rich in 2001? Those are W's....despite the fact that he couldn't actually cut taxes. Congress can.
The Affordable Care Act? That's Obama's....despite the fact that he can't actually reform health insurance. Congress can.
Why does the media do that? First, some of them really like dictators. But the larger reason is being lazy. It's a lot easier to attach it to the President than trying to figure out why 535 people voted a particular way.
Which then feeds nicely into the "Congress" problem. People don't hear how their representatives voted, except in attack ads. So they keep voting for the same blue dog in a neon-blue district, and we don't fix Congress.
polichick
(37,152 posts)That's why it's not enough to vote for anyone with a D behind his/her name - the policies and principles they support matter.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Bush from getting to pick the nominees.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)In November, it's too late to steer the party properly.
Vote against the D in November so the R wins? Just teaches the party that the voters are to the right - the Republican won, after all.
If you want to turn the party left, you need turnout on primary day to be above 20%.
polichick
(37,152 posts)but we still move further and further to the right.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)You aren't the only voter. So the important metric is turnout of everyone. Not just you. Turnout in the last primary I voted in was 18%.
We need to get more people to the polls every election if we want to push the party left.
polichick
(37,152 posts)but getting out the vote involves understanding why people don't bother.
Perhaps Dems should do some listening.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)is that the parties are identical. So they don't show up on primary day, and the blue dog wins.
If you want different Democrats, you need to get people to show up on primary day - you are claiming that a more liberal would win, after all.
It's how the insane right dragged the Republican party to it's current insane right position - primary victories against "moderates".
polichick
(37,152 posts)neither party works for the people.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)And once again, to fix that you need people to show up on primary day and vote.
So which campaign are you working with?
polichick
(37,152 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)And that problem makes the two parties create the same results.
According to the narrative you're pushing, the only difference is the names of the parties.
polichick
(37,152 posts)but that doesn't make the parties "identical."
imo running around trying to gotv is silly without thinking about why people aren't voting.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Look, if you're going to claim there's no reason to vote for a corporate Democrat over a Republican, you are saying they get the identical results.
It's utterly false, but it's the narrative you are pushing. Why? I haven't a clue. It looks a lot like you're following the "after society completely collapses, politics will turn my way". Work to get more liberal Democrats elected, and we don't have to suffer through society's collapse.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Never said that - please read more carefully.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)And btw to all the naysayers, Democratic voters did not put Scalia on the court. A lot of elected Senators did, but their constituents had no say in the matter, except indirectly. We need to reach out to those people. A lot of them are hurting. They WILL listen to our message if we put it out there.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)president than anything. He can take it. I would bet everyone here defends the president while confronting republicans. The president isn't nearly so insecure as you seem to be for him.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)RandoLoodie
(133 posts)of the stragglers who can bother to anything as individuals to GOTV will have very little effect compared to carpet bombing media buys.
TONS of cash talk much louder than individual voter screams.
But, hope springs eternal, I guess.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)campaigns double the turnout in a district, and have been part of those campaigns. You are simply incorrect.
Thanks for trying, though. I'm not about to let you derail my efforts.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)along with other social media groups. In addition to its effectiveness it's free.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)more than Jerry Brown, who calmly and casually defeated her without even spending all his cash on hand.
This concept you have that lots of spending = electoral success is silly. It does not bear out in politics anymore than it bears out in other forms of marketing. The makers of films for example, would be thrilled if all it took to have a hit was lots of ads and marketing but that is simply not the case. It just isn't. If it was that easy, Will Smith could buy a hit for his son don't you think?
RandoLoodie
(133 posts)this current bribery scheme means only those deemed worthwhile by the oligarchs will be deemed worthy of participating in politics from the "get-go."
You won't see a "citizens" candidate or a "man/woman of the people" in your lifetime.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Betty McCollum. If you met her, you'd understand that you're incorrect. How did she win office? People supported her and got out the vote. That can happen almost anywhere. But, it won't happen if you've resigned yourself to believe a lie. Every Congressional race is a local election, and every one of them is won in a local election.
If you do nothing, you'll get nothing. Think about it.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Which in itself shows that I have the stronger point. This decision is a bad one, but it is neither the introduction of money to our politics nor the end of the world.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)we're all using social media these days. We can use that, as well. There are many ways to increase the number of Democratic voters who go to the polls, and we should use them all.
To start, though, I suggest that we all contact our local Democratic organization, which will offer resources, training, and more for those who want to work at the precinct level. I've been doing that for decades, and it works.
riqster
(13,986 posts)GOTFV!
Gothmog
(145,554 posts)The next couple of election cycles are very important and we need to get the vote out
Zorra
(27,670 posts)We can always bore the low information, sporadic voters and non-voters to death with jargon later, after we give them this really exciting and important cause to rally around.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Everyone is. It will not, however, convince the SCOTUS to change their votes. Electing Democrats to have control of Congress is the only way we can deal with this. We have no influence over the Supreme Court, as we have seen again and again. We do have control of our individual votes, though, and the freedom to convince others.
If you thing people are bored, go talk to some people away from DU. Tell them why they should not be bored. That works. Defeatism doesn't.
FUCK DEFEATISM!
Zorra
(27,670 posts)The reason for protest is to raise awareness so that enough people get aware of and pissed off about this fascist SCOTUS that they will actively do something to neutralize them, namely, vote for Democrats so that these fascist laws can be overturned, and have a SCOTUS that presides in the interests of justice, equality, and democracy.
Low information voters and young people don't turn out to vote unless they have something to be excited about.
This has nothing to do with defeatism, coach, unless you are talking about your apparent intention of discouraging protest on this issue. Most people are smart enough to protest and then later get out the vote, ya know?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024769909
meanit
(455 posts)There is a lot of apathy around and the practically treasonous decisions of this Supreme Court should not be immune to a backlash. I mean just look at all the ways that the GOP has meddled with voting and elections all over the country.
GOTV is certainly necessary, but some additional motivation would be helpful, instead of just taking belly punch after belly punch from the right wing and sucking it up.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Thanks MineralMan! I have seen a few pushbacks and I would assume because they don't want Dems to vote. One of the most important choices we have as Americans is the right to vote. The GOP party want to take that away and are chipping at it daily with the help of judges and justices that were installed during the Presidency of GOPs. That's why GOP congress is dead set on not voting on as many judges as possible for Pres O.
For the sake of our democracy we must take back the house and keep the senate. Keep another Democratic president into office for 2016 and 2018.
Now I see why it is was so important to keep control of the house (Dems). Forty years, but look what was done, they helped everyday people. These assholes in the gop run house don't give a fuck but only for their 1-2%ers overlords.
Look at the Supreme Court, the five justices are truly fucked-up. Democracy is slipping.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)AAO
(3,300 posts)I purposely won't use the word "persons" because it has been corrupted and disfigured to become meaningless. But by law "non-humans" cannot vote, and if they ever change that, we are truly fucked.
lastlib
(23,286 posts)If we don't do it fast, the Billionaire Boys who will now own the government will use their power to bar the rest of us (the "riff-raff" from ever voting again. Then they will have a total lock on power, and we can kiss our asses goodbye.
[font size=10]VOTE, People!![/font size]
NOW--while you still can!!
blue14u
(575 posts)VOTEVOTEVOTEVOTEVOTEVOTE PEOPLE..... GO VOTEVOTEVOTE
GO VOTE!!!!!!!!
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Let's put our money / time where our mouths are.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Time is, indeed, money.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)wandy
(3,539 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)That should be our call in 2014 and in every election year.
wandy
(3,539 posts)Teapublicans are, well, Teapublicans. They will vote for whoever Fox News or Rush Limbaugh tells them to.
No talking to 'em. Lost cause.
We here at DU are for the most part already engaged. Sure we may bicker from to time to time on finer points but in general, let's just say that no one here would give a vote to Jeb Bush by not voting.
Sending three 'dolla to the DNC, the same DNC that has said nothing of Net Neutrality of late appears little more than a token gesture.
I wonder if WE, collectively could come up with a way to reach out to others not so as interested in politics as we are.
A way without nasty GOP like E-Mails to show those less involved the cost of Fredumb in living under GOP control.
We could never match the funding provided to "Astroturf movements", there is no question about that.
Can we find another means?
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)It's called talking and communicating with people. It can be door-to-door canvassing, which is what I do in my own precinct. It can be social media posts spreading the word. It can be Twitter, Facebook, and email campaigns to everyone's email lists.
It can be all positive and no negative. In fact, that works much better in social media and direct contact than negative campaigning.
It all takes work and getting over our fear of saying what we think to others. That can be an issue, since anything you do is going to get negative feedback sometimes, and you just have to learn to ignore that.
It doesn't need funding, really. It just needs time spent convincing people that going to the polls and voting is the solution. That can be surprisingly difficult, but it's how it works. If everyone just gets ten people to go to the polls and vote, and convinces one other person to get ten people, the multiplication works beautifully.
It's an old strategy, but one that works extremely well. It's the essence of grassroots activism and it's actually very easy to do.
ewagner
(18,964 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)If we all work hard on this, we will win.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)I know for certain that you'll be out there bringing the voters to the polls!
handmade34
(22,757 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Excellent person to quote, too.
handmade34
(22,757 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Thanks for the picture and the quotes.
johnp3907
(3,732 posts)Isn't the Emma Goldman quote above the opposite of what you say in this OP?
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)johnp3907
(3,732 posts)You're saying get out the vote.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)But, that's OK. Reading comprehension is a learned skill. Keep working on that.
johnp3907
(3,732 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)still very legal. Maybe that's changing evidenced by voter restriction laws by republicans of late.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)some would just rather curse the darkness.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)You don't even have to rise from your chair to do that.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)despite having been complicit in what follows.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)between elections, I've noticed.
tiredtoo
(2,949 posts)I agree totally with MineralMan. but i do see some good points made by polichcik. Personally i have been working both within and outside of the local party to GOTV. I also prefer progressive Democrats to blue dogs. A progressive candidate just filed for a state rep position thanks in part to my urging. The candidate committee had other possible choices. Not seeking praise here, just sharing the thought that we can make a difference if we get off our computers and get involved.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)I know Betty McCollum. I've worked to get her elected ever since I moved to Minnesota. She knows me. I just had a conversation with her at our DFL district convention in March. She wins her elections because her district turns out and votes, with one of the highest turnout percentage in Minnesota. We actively support her, and she wins.
We are the candidate selection committee here, starting with the precinct level caucuses. We dumped a state Senator in 2012. We refused to endorse him in the district convention. He withdrew his candidacy, and someone else got elected. We have the power to choose our candidates. So do voters in every state. It requires participation, though, however your state's candidate selection process works. If you're a part of the group who makes the selection, you have a voice. If you're not, you have no voice at all in that process.
JayhawkSD
(3,163 posts)That our elections can be bought is more a condemnation of the electorate than it is the courts or the people buying the elections. Where it is written that we have to vote for whoever buys the most advertising? I hear the argument that people are busy working and raising families, and therefor don't have time to study who to vote for, and it that is so, then we do not deserve to keep our democracy. Anyone who votes without knowing who he/she is voting for and specifically what that candidate stands for is subverting democracy.
And voting the party is not much better. Anyone can put a "D" or an "R" after their name and run on a single issue which will secure the support of that party and/or the financial groups which run the party while being in a different realm althgether on other issues which matter greatly. Dianne Feinstein might be a case in point.
A nonvoter is less subversive to democracy than is a voter who votes for reasons that subvert democracy.
We "took Congress back from the Republicans" in 2006, both houses, and what did it get us. Instead of ending the war in Iraq as promised, we got "the surge." We got the renewal of the Patriot Act. We got the Military Commissions Act. We Got TARP. We got immunization of the telecom industry. Every bill that George W. Bush wanted passed, he got passed, with the eceeption of the privitazation of Socila Security, which was killed as much by Republicans as it was by Democrats.
Why? Because we elected rightward-leaning Democrats. They had the "D" after their name, but they were not the liberals we thought we were electing because all we looked at was the "D" after their names.
asjr
(10,479 posts)know if anything can be done about it. Clarence Thomas' should be removed from the SCOTUS because his wife has been for years going around making money for the Republican party. She has called him many degrading names. His vote should be removed. SCOTUS is trying to take over government, including the President. If the Democrats in Washington and bigger cities do not step forward and point their fingers in the faces of Republicans and say NO, you will never rule us and mean it. We may be doomed. I believe many Republicans in the boonies and minority towns have never known just exactly what the Republicans are telling them. It will take something specific to get rid of the mess at SCOTUS such as millions camping out at the front door of the Supreme Court no matter how long it takes. And barricading the back door would be a good idea also. Keep them in the building and starve them.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)There are events all over the country TODAY! Find one and participate.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024769909
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,437 posts)They may be able to pour loads of money into campaign coffers but that still doesn't buy people's votes. As long as we GOTV, they can't win no matter how much money they get/give. In fact, we should probably encourage the Kochs, the Adelsons, et. al to put so much money into the political process that they go lose lots and lots of money and/or go bankrupt. Let's let them spend so much money that it makes them sick of it. After all, being the *shrewd* businesspersons they are, they'll eventually realize losing bets when they see them......eventually.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)That's my plan.
ecstatic
(32,731 posts)You can't help but wonder what their true agenda is. By now, you'd think people would understand cause and effect, but apparently not...
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)Unambiguously.
In the manner of Franklin ( "I *welcome* their hatred." Roosevelt. and Harry ( "gluttons of greed and privilege" Truman.
Call it class warfare, call it something else; if Obama is not unambiguously and enthusiastically on board with this message ... and thus far he's never BEEN on board with it... it is not going anywhere.
Not Biden, Not Reid. Not Bernie Sanders.
Obama.
The POTUS.
A defining moment for him, one might say.
mountain grammy
(26,648 posts)One person with a million dollars is still one vote. Only people voting in mass numbers can stop this.
Meantime, as a non believer, I have no problem wishing for one or more of the corrupt 5 to drop dead, since they have no problem destroying my country.
totodeinhere
(13,059 posts)presidents will have an opportunity to shape the court. You said that "No amount of objection to that ruling will change that ruling" but a future court with a robust liberal majority could reverse that ruling. And of course we need to keep enough votes in the Senate to assure the confirmation of future liberal appointees.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)automatically elect a Democratic President as well. If we get a strong majority in Congress, the Presidential election will go to the Democrat as well. In fact Congressional GOTV is the very best way to elect a Democratic President.
One follows the other. Get Democrats to the polls in record numbers, and there will be a landslide.
With the executive and legislative branches in Democratic hands, we can actually get things done that move the nation forward in progressive ways. Nothing else is going to work. It's that simple.
For example, the percentage of victory in my Congressional district was identical for our Democratic Congressperson and the President Identical. We can do that all across the country, if we have the will to do so.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)Wolf Pac http://www.wolf-pac.com/ and Rootstrikers http://www.rootstrikers.org/#!/
Citizens United and McCutcheon will eventually be overturned when we get the SC back but we can start pressuring our representatives
for public financing of campaigns right now. And , yes the more Dems we can elect the better chance we have of getting some reform implemented.
http://vimeo.com/76349568
Progressive dog
(6,918 posts)five Supremes appointed by Republicans said yes. The yeses won. Democrats are not the same-not even close-as Republicans.
We need to support Democrats.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)makes it abundantly clear that the two parties are not the same. Abundantly clear.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Many thanks for contributing something actually useful rather than the "woe is us" drama queen crap that has littered this site. If this decision has shown us anything it's that those who say there is no or little difference between the parties are nothing but morons. Everything needs to get out and vote and bring 10 voters with them. Thank you for this call to action.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Go vote and bring 10 Democrats to the polls with you. We cannot lose if everyone does that.
lastlib
(23,286 posts)...from President down to town dog-catcher on record with their answer to this question: "Do you support a Federal constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United and MacCutcheon decisions on campaign contributions?"
[font size=8]And VOTE accordingly![/font size]
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)It heartens me to see that.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)lovemydog
(11,833 posts)never give up!
BumRushDaShow
(129,449 posts)to take control of the gavel.
Here's a list to target for candidate to run and GOTV. At least one member, off the top of my head after looking at the list, announced just the past week, that he was not running again (Mike Rogers).
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/24/house-republicans-2014-elections_n_4152818.html
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)by campaign contributions. No one gets to cast more than one ballot on Election Day, no matter how rich they are, or how much they've contributed to campaigns. Money gives the power to try to persuade voters, but not to cast votes.
Dustlawyer
(10,497 posts)Then we can tell the Koch brothers and SCOTUS to kiss our ASSES!!!
Exposethefrauds
(531 posts)Over the last few election cycles liberal and progressives have been winning while the other type of dems lose except when the corporate interests know their bought and paid for candidate will lose then corporate leadership rallies around their own which causes the defeat of the liberal progressive candidate and all hope of any real liberal and progressive legislation from being implemented. Too many examples to list beside they are well known and pointless to rehash.
Starting this election cycle we are going to see liberals and progressives lose at the expensive of corporate backed dems. People need to wrap their head around what is going to be the new political reality in the new and improved Fascist United States of America.
Sure vote please do be dont be surprised your choices are corporate candidate R or corporate candidate D.
The best we can do to fight back is shine a light on every candidate confront them on who is backing them and paying the pills for them.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)people on DU with 5 posts right now.
4bucksagallon
(975 posts)the Supreme Court was the prize, which was why the Presidency was so important to them. Now that it seems they will not get back into that office anytime soon you don't hear that any more. They are trying a workaround but they still know that if we get a progressive SC their charade will end. Don't lose focus it still is the SC that is on their agenda, makes putting Democrats in the White House all that much more important in the years ahead. I personally would like to go for limits on SC justices serving 6 years should be ample.
Cha
(297,655 posts)Mahalo MineralMan
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)I don't answer those.
nikto
(3,284 posts)In the context of the very real GOP vote-suppression efforts over many states,
I found it to be a rather funny line.
IMO, you gotta' laugh about this stuff sometimes.
It precludes crying.
madinmaryland
(64,933 posts)A complete takeover over this country by an alliance of oligarchs who control all arms of the government. No dissent will be allowed.
I don't see any end of the tyranny of the SCOTUS-FIVE in the next two years. What scares me even more is it could become the SCOTUS-SIX if a republican is elected POTUS in 2016.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)What is it you think I'm calling for, giving up? Read what I wrote.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)jonjensen
(168 posts)Thanks to supreme court ruling in bush v gore that there is no right to vote in constitution EXCEPT for women and minorities amendments and voting rights act. White men have abused their voting "PRIVILEGE" and we should rescind it before they do more harm!
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)I'm not sure how that relates to the topic of this post, though. But, hey...
BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)Hope certainly springs eternal...
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)Hopelessness fails. I don't do hopelessness. I find it useless.
Overseas
(12,121 posts)MineralMan
(146,329 posts)I'm hopeful.
Overseas
(12,121 posts)They vote against all of our interests -- Healthcare, Jobs Bills, Environmental Action to control climate change and of course, campaign finance reform.
I hope we can help people see that denying Republicans voted against so many of our interests over and over again, only interested in defeating Democrats, not helping the country.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)With that step completed, we can work to elect progressive Democrats to build a progressive caucus that will drive the changes we need in our country. Until we can at least regain strong majorities in both houses, though, we won't get there. That's why it's up to us to elect those strong majorities of Democrats.