# Will Democrats ever figure out why they lost? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 6, 2014, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925 "2014-11-06T21:14:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/81 "2014-11-08T01:46:56Z")
> [@JKellyMap](#): > > Agreed. Plus, many of his not-extremely-popular initiatives and policies are, nevertheless, objectively\* working\*. So, in defending them, some candidates could have done at least a little voter education – at the very least, by showing that it’s okay to dislike Obama personally (for whatever reason, including the lapses in management you mentioned), but he did do some good things (and hopes to do others), and here’s why. Yes, which even if it doesn’t work in 2014, it sets things up a little better for 2016, because the argument has already been made. Instead, if the Democrats decide to defend OBama’s legacy in 2016 it will seem like a novel argument. But I think the Democrats will stick to their message in 2016: Obama’s not going to be President anymore, we need to look ahead, not back, etc. It’s the path of least resistance to just go along with public perception than to change it. As you know, I really, really, don’t like Obama, but when some of his accomplishments are brought up I find I don’t really have a way to refute some of them. So they are obviously real even to me, whereas when I try to think of Bush’s accomplishments I generally draw a blank. But voters are only really focused on what he’s done wrong. If you can get through to ME that Obama’s done some good things, you can get through to the average voter. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/82 "2014-11-08T02:39:35Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > :rolleyes: Which is what they’ve been doing for decades, and helps convince people to not vote for them since “there’s no difference between the parties”. Why vote for a fake Republican when you can vote for a real one? Why bother to vote if neither party represents you? When I say be more like effective Republicans, I don’t mean adopt Republican policies. I mean they need to learn to play (and expect) hardball politics, and in some cases be content with real incremental gains rather than grand sweeping schemes expecting the public to go wild over it. Classic example: Healthcare reform. I am all for it. However, with a starkly divided government (and electorate), a biting recession, 2 wars, and a lopsided judiciary packed with Bush appointees, was this really the best time to rush through a gigantic law that few understand much except that it has a whiff of socialism about it? It now looks like there is a very real chance that [ACA is facing an existential risk of being gutted.](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/07/supreme-court-obamacare-subsidies_n_6122370.html) Meanwhile Obama may as well kiss goodbye his chances of appointing progressive-minded individuals to cricial vacant positions (including the judiciary). Although Republicans did a shameful amount of obstruction, I think it’s undeniable that Obama skipped over some important basic liberal governance opportunities in his reach for a signature achievement. And now we might end up with neither of them. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/83 "2014-11-08T04:10:00Z")
So in your opinion, do you think Clinton had the smarter approach with his incrementalism? It does seem like his Presidency involved hitting a lot of singles, whereas Obama seems to have hit one big home run and whiffed on everything else. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/84 "2014-11-08T05:02:18Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > So in your opinion, do you think Clinton had the smarter approach with his incrementalism? It does seem like his Presidency involved hitting a lot of singles, whereas Obama seems to have hit one big home run and whiffed on everything else. I don’t think Obama whiffed on everything else… he’s accomplished quite a bit, but that gets overshadowed by Obamacare and the debt drama. This is one problem we have in America is the fetishization of the President as a god/superhero/Santa Claus who can make grand things happen. That’s never what the position was supposed to be about. Clinton understood this and made an effort to manage expectations. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 7:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/85 "2014-11-08T07:50:02Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > So it sounds as though Democrats are already having an honest conversation about why they lost. Your OP is answered! 😉 I think the question was whether it would be figured out, not addressed. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/86 "2014-11-08T21:07:55Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Yet mailing people ballots seems to have resulted in lower turnout than standing in line. Really? > [@](#): > > Oregon had one of the highest turnouts at 69.5 percent. Oregon used a mail-in ballot. [The article](http://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/2014/11/06/oregon-get-bluer-nation-got-redder/18625195/) cites a 2007 study indicating mail-in voting would not increase turnout. So maybe this was just an anecdote… ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/87 "2014-11-08T21:58:51Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Yes, which even if it doesn’t work in 2014, it sets things up a little better for 2016, because the argument has already been made. Instead, if the Democrats decide to defend OBama’s legacy in 2016 it will seem like a novel argument. > > But I think the Democrats will stick to their message in 2016: Obama’s not going to be President anymore, we need to look ahead, not back, etc. It’s the path of least resistance to just go along with public perception than to change it. > > As you know, I really, really, don’t like Obama, but when some of his accomplishments are brought up I find I don’t really have a way to refute some of them. So they are obviously real even to me, whereas when I try to think of Bush’s accomplishments I generally draw a blank. But voters are only really focused on what he’s done wrong. If you can get through to ME that Obama’s done some good things, you can get through to the average voter. Adaher, that sounds really reasonable to me. Are we both mellowing with age? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![LC\_Strawhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@LC\_Strawhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LC_Strawhouse)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/88 "2014-11-08T22:25:37Z")
As a committed centrist, I’ll give the Republicans credit for not handing the car keys to the crazies this time around. If this marks the end of the Sarah Palin / Joe the Plumber clones, we’re all better off. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/89 "2014-11-08T22:50:02Z")
I’d love to think that was true. I _don’t_ think so, but sure would love to! ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/90 "2014-11-08T23:04:05Z")
Unlikely. Success breed confidence, and confidence brings out the crazies. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/91 "2014-11-08T23:04:52Z")
> [@LC\_Strawhouse](#): > > As a committed centrist, I’ll give the Republicans credit for not handing the car keys to the crazies this time around. It is too early to tell if the Republican leaders will control this mountain of stupid: [http://ecowatch.com/2014/06/04/video-gop-climate-change-deniers/](http://ecowatch.com/2014/06/04/video-gop-climate-change-deniers/) > **[Colbert Shames GOP Climate Denier Who May Head Up Environmental Committee...](https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/stephen-colbert-james-inhofe-climate-change)** > > Stephen Colbert continued to gloat over the Republican midterm victory on Thursday as he looked forward to Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), a climate change denier, possibly leading the Senate Environmental… Specially when Mitch McConnell himself is also on the same denier team: [![]( " - YouTube") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1kx39GNbcc) (Starting at 1:27) > [@LC\_Strawhouse](#): > > If this marks the end of the Sarah Palin / Joe the Plumber clones, we’re all better off. Unfortunately, as Bill Moyers reported, Inhofe is set to lead the hearings on the EPA and many other ones that will deal about what to do about CO2 emissions. We’ll see if we are better off, but as Bill Moyers said when pondering about the prospect of Republicans like Inhofe making policy when they do think that the scientists are making a hoax: “God help us!” ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2014, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/92 "2014-11-08T23:25:50Z")
It’s tough to get younger voters to come out in the midterms. Being young, they’re far more mobile and don’t have the attachments to their area as older voters do. They move more often, and state level issues just don’t affect them as much. There has been a definite widening of the gap with older voters being far more Republican these days as the old New Deal type voters have died off. Younger voters trend more Democratic but it’s hard to get them to the polls in non Presidential years. They might not like Scott Walker or Rick Scott, but it isn’t an obsession unlike older voters who spend far more time following politics. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2014, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/93 "2014-11-09T00:14:58Z")
It also doesn’t help when you go out of your way to turn them off from voting. Democrats running against themselves kills any enthusiasm the base might have going into an election. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2014, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/94 "2014-11-09T05:48:56Z")
Gigo, you focus on the wrong things. Climate policy is not going to be made in the next two years, and even if Democrats had total control, they would not be making climate policy in such a way as to make an actual impact on emissions. No one, and I mean no one, has credible ideas for dealing with climate change. The best activists have come up with is to recommend that we do what they’ve wanted us to do even before they knew about climate change and say, “It’s a first step!” ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2014, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/95 "2014-11-09T06:44:52Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Gigo, you focus on the wrong things. Climate policy is not going to be made in the next two years, and even if Democrats had total control, they would not be making climate policy in such a way as to make an actual impact on emissions. This ignores that more world meetings on the issue will take place and Obama will continue to use the EPA as there will be no legislation coming from congress. (Although I do think that getting the Keystone to a vote then can include also a vote or a rider to pass also stalled green energy legislation). As NPR reported the EPA regulations will continue and will be a big aid when negotiating with other countries to control the emissions. But the Republican actions and promises mean that we can not count on it, your say so here is also ignoring that Inhofe and his gang will make a lot of moves to limit what the EPA could do. In essence what you claim here is totally wrong, the policy coming from congress will be of more obstructionism and denial to prevent changes that can make this issue to be less onerous or expensive to the future of the nation. > [@adaher](#): > > No one, and I mean no one, has credible ideas for dealing with climate change. False as many nations in Europe demonstrate and you are falling for the lie of Mitch McConnell. > [@adaher](#): > > The best activists have come up with is to recommend that we do what they’ve wanted us to do even before they knew about climate change and say, “It’s a first step!” This only exudes ignorance, you are not even wrong, as the IPCC and many other reports made by top economists tell us that even with current technologies we can make changes that are fordable now. You and the Republicans are making the mistake of only looking at the activists and not looking a the experts. > **[Economist Says Best Climate Fix A Tough Sell, But Worth It](https://www.npr.org/2014/02/11/271537401/economist-says-best-climate-fix-a-tough-sell-but-worth-it)** > > Yale's William Nordhaus has been running the numbers on Earth's climate troubles. He says charging a fair price for any dumping of carbon dioxide into the air is a cost-effective solution. But at least half the planet must cooperate, his math... > [@](#): > > “The real point of the pricing is not to gouge people, not to extract resources from people. It’s to tilt the playing field in such a way that people, firms, government — everybody moves toward carbon-free or low-carbon activities,” he says. > > Nordhaus has laid out how to do this in his book, Climate Casino. The not-so-subtle point of the title is that we’re gambling with our future if we don’t do anything about climate change. And Nordhaus knows that the challenge isn’t the economics — it’s human behavior. > > His studies show that it makes economic sense to start paying the price now, even though the benefits would be decades away. > > “That’s a pretty tough one,” he admits. **“We have to be grown-ups, I think. There are lots of things we do where the investments come way, way in the future. Educating 4-year-olds … that’s an investment that goes way into the future as well.”** > > But for such a plan to affect climate, at least half the planet needs to cooperate, he says, or it will be all pain and no gain. > > Nordhaus is hardly a saber rattler on this subject. Though he sees the potential for very serious problems down the road, he still says that some climate change can actually be good for agriculture — at least up to a point. And he says we shouldn’t do any more to address climate change than makes economic sense, even if that means letting the planet warm more than the international target of 2 degrees Celsius. > > His calm approach has at times infuriated environmental activists, who are dismayed at the pace of global action. > > “What can I say about calm?” he replies when asked about that. “I like to think of the economics as a cool head in the service of a warm heart, and that’s my approach to this.” The problem here is that among the Republicans in congress this issue is indeed managed by people that have not grown up. And they got more like that now in congress. And we should not forget that this came to focus because of you pointing at one of the great misleaders like George Will. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2014, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/96 "2014-11-09T06:52:28Z")
You’re talking about subsidies for technology that may or may not pan out, with or without federal involvement. That’s known as hope, not a plan. ---
**Author:** ![Npatient1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Npatient1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Npatient1)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2014, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/97 "2014-11-09T06:58:25Z")
LLS!!! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2014, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/98 "2014-11-09T06:59:41Z")
Right now, we subsidize the behavior that is likely to kill us all. If that’s a plan, its a hopeless plan. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2014, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/99 "2014-11-09T07:25:30Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > You’re talking about subsidies for technology that may or may not pan out, with or without federal involvement. That’s known as hope, not a plan. Tell that to the ones that in the past [organized the control of the emissions that caused acid rain and succeeded](http://www.epa.gov/airquality/peg_caa/acidrain.html), your is indeed just begging for uncertainty that is less valid. And what is happening in Europe is not a figment of the imagination of many: [http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/roadmap/index\_en.htm](http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/roadmap/index_en.htm) > [@](#): > > For the short term, the EU has put in place legislation to reduce its emissions to 20% below 1990 levels by 2020, and data show it is well on track to reach this target. Europe is also offering to step up this cut to 30% if other major economies agree to do their fair share of a global reduction effort. > Need for bigger climate efforts > > With its Roadmap for moving to a competitive low-carbon economy in 2050, the European Commission has looked beyond these short-term objectives and set out a cost-effective pathway for achieving much deeper emission cuts by the middle of the century. All major economies will need to make deep emission reductions if global warming is to be held below 2°C compared to the temperature in pre-industrial times. > > The Roadmap is one of the long-term policy plans put forward under the Resource Efficient Europe flagship initiative intended to put the EU on course to using resources in a sustainable way. > > The Roadmap suggests that, by 2050, the EU should cut its emissions to 80% below 1990 levels through domestic reductions alone. It sets out milestones which form a cost-effective pathway to this goal - reductions of the order of 40% by 2030 and 60% by 2040. It also shows how the main sectors responsible for Europe’s emissions - power generation, industry, transport, buildings and construction, as well as agriculture - can make the transition to a low-carbon economy most cost-effectively. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2014, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925/100 "2014-11-09T07:35:57Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Right now, we subsidize the behavior that is likely to kill us all. If that’s a plan, its a hopeless plan. That should, and hopefully will, end. But government should not pick winners and losers. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-democrats-ever-figure-out-why-they-lost/703925.md?page=6)