History question: What happens when the base sits out?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Two situations:

1) A party goes what is perceived as "too far" and loses the middle. eg. Goldwater 1964, McGovern 1972. The party then moves toward the center.

2) A party's base, the more idealogical party core, sits out an election (in relative terms... doesn't show up as strongly as previous). The party then... ???

Any historical examples?

(This is a non-rhetorical question asked to solicit views and discussion. It seems that a party would move to appease its base but I don't know that that is or is not the case in practice. For instance, Dems did not respond to the lose of their southern base to Wallace by becoming more racist in 1972. Dems did arguably become more liberal in response to 1980. I don't have a cut-and-dried theory of the thing.)

[HillbillyBob]

I want to see a good primary challenger to Obama

I ll vote dem , no matter how furious I am at the current critters, but if there is a primary challenger to almost any incumbent. I did not make it to this years primary here I was too sick and it did not matter that much because any dem to run against Burr I ll vote for in Nov.

I can't bear to see another 94 contract on Americans.

[MineralMan]

3. Who do you recommend as that challenger, I wonder?

I can't think of anyone who could upset the 2012 primary elections for the Presidential race. I'm not sure I can think of anyone of prominence who would want to try.

So, if you can think of someone, it would be interesting to hear your thoughts.

[TheMuse]

7. This is my election season dilemma

I am almost as fed up with the Democrats as I am the Republicans. They can't seem to stick to their guns. So I think, why not vote 3rd party? If enough did it, it just might be a wake up call. But then I would be possibly handing control back to the Republicans, which is something I feel would be disasterous.

So our two party system has me perpetually locked into voting for the lesser of two evils. And it saddens me.

[MineralMan]

9. Uh-huh...

Right.

[dragonlady]

21. No "possibly" about it

The word is "certainly."

[MedicalAdmin]

22. No. The 2 party system doesn't lock you into voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

Your fear does.

[TheMuse]

28. My fear does?

So, you are saying because I "fear" giving control back to the Republicans, so they can finish the job of creating a permanent underclass of citizens, is why I vote Democrat?

Possibly true. We have been trained and brainwashed into believing that third party cannot win. That it is throwing your vote away. I don't believe this is true, but I also am a realist. I know that the Republicans will vote for whomever is up there with a (R) after their name. I know what they will do to this country if given half a chance. We have seen it coming to fruition the last 30 years.

So I say it is my realism that keeps me voting Democrat. It is that I cannot allow myself to be part of the reason they regain control.

[TheMuse]

8. And I hope you realize...

that a primary challenger to Obama would most likely be disasterous, and would give the Republicans a leg up in defeating him in November. I just want Candidate Obama to reappear. I know he is there, but he is shielded and hidden by the people in his administration. That guy could get things done.

[zipplewrath]

1. Far bigger moves

You'll see far bigger shifts when the "middle" sits out. It is usually seen in lower "down the ballot" races, but when the middle section of the electorate chooses not to vote, the swings can be huge. Some protion of the spectrum that is "near the perimeter" sit's out, and the center just slides a tad. The middle sits out, and one of the extremes decides.

[MineralMan]

2. You are absolutely correct.

The badly-named "base" is too small to make major changes if everyone votes. It is when many don't vote that the "base" comes into play.

Of course, I disagree with the fringe being called the base in the first place. It's a misnomer.

[Winterblues]

18. How exactly would you describe the most base element of the Democratic Party?

Is it someone that is quite ideologically driven or someone that sways with the breeze? To me the "base" is the Party Platform/Plank and those that defend it the most..While it may be absolutely true the Parties get the great majority of their votes from the easily swayed middle, it does not make the middle their base..

[geek tragedy]

24. The base are the people most likely to show up at the polls

in November every two years.

Part-ideological (e.g. liberal), part-demographic (e.g. people of color).

[MineralMan]

4. Along the same lines, I've heard a number of moderate Republicans

say that they were going to sit out this election. This is from precinct walking in the MN 6th Congressional District. Several people I've talked to have said that they thought Bachmann was nuts, but that they couldn't ever vote for a Democrat, so they were planning to stay home.

I'm not sure how many that will be, but it's an opportunity for Tarryl Clark, I think. We'll see what happens in November, but I think the conventional "wisdom" may not work out to be accurate this year.

[Canuckistanian]

6. Maybe the moderates will cancel each other out

And we're left with the status quo.

[MineralMan]

10. That's always a possibility. I hope not, though.

A lot will depend on how successful the GOTV campaigns go this year. I know, from personal participation, that the GOTV in Michelle Bachmann's district on the Democratic side is in high gear already. And Tarry Clark is tirelessly showing up wherever a few people are gathering for some reason. She's going non-stop, and her campaign volunteers are working their asses off. It could make the difference. I certainly hope so.

[Canuckistanian]

25. I really hope Tarryl Clark gets in

It would be a symbolic victory over conservative extremism.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. I should not have said "extreme" in the OP

I changed it.

The base isn't the fringe. I said extreme just thinking of relative placement on a spectrum, but not to denote small numbers.

Conservative Christians are extreme and the RW base but also numerous. A pro-choice pug presidential candidate would see mass hand-sitting and thus find it hard to win, for instance.

[geek tragedy]

13. Primary voting tends to ensure that the base does pick

its candidates and officeholders.

[Codeine]

11. If they sit out, then they aren't the base, now are they? nt

[MineralMan]

14. Precisely. Those who are constantly talking about

primary challenges and third parties were never the base of the Democratic Party. They still aren't. They're the fringe, and we should never count on their support. You can count on the base.

[Codeine]

19. If those here who consider themselves "the base" really were

then Kucinich would win every primary.

I do not delude myself that my party is as liberal as I.

[MineralMan]

27. Nor would I. But that's one of the biggest mistakes that

some people make. They assume that if people would only listen to them, DK would get elected every time. It doesn't work that way.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

23. False

The circular logic that the base is whoever always votes for you is an undignified word game.

Are conservative christians part of the republican base?

Did they sit-out in relative terms in 2006?

Do you suggest that it was wrong to refer to them as the base in 2004 (or 2010) because they disappointed in 2006?

[geek tragedy]

12. Is there an example of (2) ever happening?

Has a party ever lost an election because it held onto the center but alienated its base?

In every ass-kicking that a party in power has taken, it's because they've lost the center/independents.

[MineralMan]

16. Very good point. All a guy has to do is look at the

Goldwater debacle to know that's true. There are other examples, as well.

[geek tragedy]

20. 1994 was about the Angry White Man vote.

Safe to say that "Angry White Men" are not the Democratic base and haven't been since the Civil Rights Act was passed.

[Historic NY]

15. You get to whine & cry more when things really go south...sitting home is for losers...

you will never win with that mentality. Why do you think the teabag wing is so loud now.

[ThomWV]

17. The Base never sits it out, its the "undecideds" and apathetic who sit it out.

[ChoppinBroccoli]

26. What Happens When People Sit Out?

Gee, I don't know. What happens when you have a football game and the other team doesn't show up? What happens when you plan a vacation but don't get on the airplane? What happens when you leave a loaded gun on the street and walk away?

You lose, you get left behind, and you end up regretting your short-sightedness for at least the forseeable future.

All you "let's sit out the election to send a message" folks remind me of kids who hold their breath until they pass out trying to hurt their parents. They end up NOT getting what they want AND hurting THEMSELVES (NOT their parents) in the bargain.

Right now, even if we paint it in the absolute WORST light we possibly can, we have a choice in this country between the "I'm going to do nothing to help you" Party and the "I'm going to do everything in my power to HARM you" Party. You might not like the two alternatives, but there clearly IS a better one.

Or you can watch the water steadily gush into your sinking boat and decide to do nothing about it. Go up to the sun deck and lay down on a deck chair while the people who want to try to plug the hole fight against the people who want to make the hole bigger. I'm sure you'll feel quite vindicated in having done nothing when you're at the bottom of the ocean.

[kickysnana]

29. Jesse Venture becomes Governor n/t

[TheKentuckian]

30. I never sit out. I spent my grocery money on a cab so I wouldn't miss the primary

I consider voting an obligation of democracy and the responsibility of a citizen.

The constant accusation of people sitting out is a constructed talking point for the purpose of setting up a presumptive defense that blames liberals for bad turn out.

Y'all are bullying the wrong end of the spectrum, when Democrats lose in the last few decades it is always because too many vote Republican, yes even in 2000.

The ones that vote Republican are conservatives not liberals. All liberals are doing is advising middle of the road Democrats, leadership, and corporate Democrats is that the free lunch is over.
Traditional Democratic principles and policy will be pursued or another vehicle for those goals will be sought even if it means building it from scratch.

That is life folks, if you don't listen to people at some point they try to find someone that will.

Zealous partisans are digging a grave, in my opinion. The refusal to honestly accept concerns, telling people they have nowhere else to go, and open disdain for the urgent need to change the dynamic is suicidal for the party and depending on fear and bullying to keep votes in line is ignorant of the make up of the people you are supposedly working on.

People don't live on sticks and Koolaid. Fuck you, get out and vote for us, kiss my ass you stupid kooks, we need your help getting out the vote, everything you believe is fucking idiotic and crazy, help us sell the agenda, and please help right now with a contribution of at least $25 is bad messaging to say the least.

Rewarding that and literally asking for seconds is insane, maybe measurable better than voting for the theocratic, racist wing of the corporate party but certainly not rational behavior.

I'm doing what is rational and asking my party to understand the needs of the American people at large and put their interests first and foremost.

If asking is falling on deaf ears and I have been persistent in making my case I must demand it change and no demand can come without the force of consequences or it becomes a suggestion and we already tried that.

What else could one's obligations to the very ideals demand? It is not the duty of the citizen to defer to institutional will when that will no longer represents their interests and values and moreover takes actions that hinder them ever coming to fruition while mocking them right along with the opposition. Same framing and talking points.

Nope, that is crazy but right now Obama isn't on the ballot and none of the leadership shows up on mine.

My rep hasn't be perfect but he's been better than average by far so I support him and he listens, I can diffuse misinformation for Conway as well as attack the madman so I can be a net help in addition to my vote for Conway even while admitting among friends that he's likely to be any better than say Bayh and because of some industry interest in the state may be worse in addressing issues of the day.

I'm trying to help them win but it has nothing to do with the leadership either way other than hopefully having enough votes to make them accountable in two years because I'm fairly settled that they wish to lose and remove the burden of trying to pretend to do anything to benefit the American people.

We should try if for no other reasons than not giving the bastards the satisfaction of lamely replaying the mid nineties script. If we can rip up that gameplan then we will have given enough rope to force the bold to step in to fill the vacuum.

The problem is we have nothing but lame scams masquerading as reform and boogiemen to sell to folks and that is what the real problem is. Even the boogieman is hard to work when we are easily busted emulating them and make no move to hold the criminals accountable.

So, while I actually desire for Democrats to win so I can hold them accountable they have done a lackluster job and promise nothing in the way of doing any different in the future that it is a mighty tough job of trying to drag the fuckers across the finish line to set up a meaningful opposition to this absurd mentality that has infected our party leadership nor sharpen outside influences to allow the spectrum to expand to fit actual solutions instead of political slight of hand.

This had to be intentional, you can't fuck up this bad on accident without being so rudderless that it makes no difference.

Are they nuts?