The Low Voter Turnout,.

Czernobog

Gold Member
Sep 29, 2014
6,184
495
130
Corner of Chaos and Reason
I have heard various incarnations of the following statement, the last few days: "America rejected your agenda......get over it." The reson for this is that the premise goes as follows:

We had a record low turnout in this years election. The "reason" for that record low turnout is that American voters chose to stay home, and not vote to demonstrate their rejection of "the Progressive agenda". Okay. Let's try a little logic, and reason, shall we?

One is faced with two ideological proposals in an election. If one decides to reject ideology "A" in favor of Ideology "B", is the reasonable, logical decision to sit at home, do nothing, and hope that enough other people show their support for ideology "B" that it is adopted, or is the reasonable logical course of action to go out, and actively demonstrate one's support of ideology "B" with one's vote to ensure that it is the ideology that is adopted? I think the answer is fairly obvious.

Thus it makes no sense to suggest that America "demonstrated its rejection" progressivism by doing nothing. So, why did a vast majority of Americans not vote? Well, I do agree that some of the reason is voter suppression, and the various voter ID laws around the nation. However, I think that is only a small part. Let's face it, if "independent" voters truly felt that Democrats were standing up, and fighting for them, the only effect all of these restrictive voter ID laws would have had would have been to piss them off, and make them more determined than ever to make their votes heard, and get the people elected to office that were going to fight to have such restrictions repealed.

No. Much ore to the point was that independents saw Republicans attacking Democrat candidates over, and over, not for any legislative decisions that the candidates, themselves, had made, but simply for the "crime" of being associated with president Obama. In reply these independents saw the Democratic candidates...do nothing! They watched them throw Obama under the bus. The watched them run from Obama as fast as their cowardly little legs would take them. They watched Obama fold on Single Payer. They watched Obama fold on Immigration, and take the coward's route of waiting until after the elections to demand action from the House. They watched Obama continue, and expand the Republican practices of the NRA. They watched Obama continue, and expand the Republican practices of QE. They watched Obama employ the Republican strategies of Middle East aggression. They watched all of this and chose to stay home, rather than vote for Democrats that they had no reason to believe would support their ideologies.

So, if you want to gloat over the fact that Democrats lost, that's fine. They did. But, please do not fool yourselves into thinking that they lost because Americans suddenly embraced your conservative ideologies. That is the same stupidity that causes you to presume that everyone hates Obamacare for the same reasons that you do - which they don't. The vast number of progressives hate Obamacare because they see Obamacare as a betrayal of Progressivism, and an attempt at Conservative appeasement. Believe it, or not, ladies and gentlemen, when Progressives criticise the President, and Democrats, most of the time it is not because they have magically become Conservatives in their sleep; rather it is to send the message that the President, and Democrats have not been Progressive enough for their taste.
 
omg. it JUST CAN'T be the voters REJECTED the Dem/commie AGENDA.

there must be another EXCUSE

FACE IT, they rejected your Fascist commie Socialist AGENDA. They started IN 2010 but you didn't learn then and came up the same lame ass excuses. Well THEY TOTALLY rejected your asses and agenda this time

now get used to it. you have been REJECTED....bye bye
 
Last edited:
There were more Blacks, Latinos, Asians and young people who usually vote Dem, voted Repub this time.
Your argument does not wash.
There is always a low voter turn out for mid terms.
Actually that's a misleading claim. Actually, about the same number of Blacks, Asians, young people, and women voted for Republicans as vote for Republicans in every election. That's kinda what the Republicans have going for them. Their base is steady. They can always count on them, in every election.

However, since fewer Blacks, Latinos, Asians, women, and especially young people voted in this election - as often happens during a mid-term election - the percentage of those demographics which "voted Republican" were, understandably higher.

My premise still stands.
 
Mid term elections has been in decline since the 90's

Mid Term Year Voter Turn Out
201041.59%
200647.52%
200245.31%
199851.55%
199457.64%
199056.03%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
 
obama's voter base didn't show up if they did they were voting Republican
Young voters

Most strikingly, voters 18-29 nationwide were only 13 percent of the electorate in 2014 (compared to nearly a quarter for GOP-leaning seniors.) In the 2010 midterms, when Democrats lost a combined 69 House and Senate seats, young voters made up 12 percent of the voting public. In contrast, during Obama’s re-election victory in 2012, nearly one in five voters was under 30.

In some key Senate races, young voters participated at an even lower rate.

Those voters 18-29 showed up even below that national number in North Carolina (12 percent of the electorate

*** Single women

More than one-in-five voters this cycle – 21 percent of the electorate -- was an unmarried woman, and a majority -- 60 to 38 percent – voted for Democrats.

Single women made up 23 percent of the electorate during Obama’s 2012 coalition, and they broke significantly harder for Obama in 2012 than for Senate and House Democrats in 2010. Then, 67 percent supported Obama, versus 31 percent for Romney.

*** African Americans

This cycle, black voters made up 12 percent of the national electorate. That’s compared to 11 percent in 2010 and 13 percent in 2012. Democrats particularly needed high black turnout in Southern states like Georgia and North Carolina.

Because exit poll data isn’t available for many of those states – which weren’t contested in the 2008 and 2012 presidential election – it’s not possible to make an apples-to-apples comparison to past presidential contests.

But here’s one data point we do have: In North Carolina, where Democrat Kay Hagan lost her seat to Republican Thom Tillis, black voters made up 21 percent of the electorate. In 2012, that figure was 23 percent.
Where Were All the Dems Here s Who Turned Up to Vote - NBC News
 
There were more Blacks, Latinos, Asians and young people who usually vote Dem, voted Repub this time.
Your argument does not wash.
There is always a low voter turn out for mid terms.
Actually that's a misleading claim. Actually, about the same number of Blacks, Asians, young people, and women voted for Republicans as vote for Republicans in every election. That's kinda what the Republicans have going for them. Their base is steady. They can always count on them, in every election.

However, since fewer Blacks, Latinos, Asians, women, and especially young people voted in this election - as often happens during a mid-term election - the percentage of those demographics which "voted Republican" were, understandably higher.

My premise still stands.

No it isn't
Republicans won 10 percent of the black vote on Tuesday. That 8217 s actually a step in the right direction. - The Washington Post

  • In 2012, 93 percent of blacks cast ballots for President Obama, with 6 percent voting for Romney. In the 2010 midterm, the split was 91-9.
  • In 2014, Republicans saw a very slight bump nationally among African-American voters, who were 12 percent of the electorate. Ten percent of African Americans voted Republican, with 89 percent voting Democratic.
  • The 89-10 split on African Americans is the best for the GOP since 2006, when it was 89-11.
  • The GOP hasn't received more than 11 percent of the black vote since 1996.
 
It is pretty silly to suggest that the agenda of the Democrats was not rejected in this election. The fact that so many people did not turn out to vote (which, by the way, really isn't that different than the last midterm) means they were unhappy with all of the choices--in other words, they rejected everyone.

So while it is true that Republicans are not being embraced by any means, it is also true that voters made it very clear they were not happy with the way Democrats in the Senate have been leading.
 
You do know that southern ignorant hayseed hicks like Patrick Cannon were (fraudulently) voting In NC.
:dunno:
felon democrat busted US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
It was more of a sarcastic yet ironic statement on my part that I was hoping the OP might catch. I doubt he will.
 
I have heard various incarnations of the following statement, the last few days: "America rejected your agenda......get over it." The reson for this is that the premise goes as follows:

We had a record low turnout in this years election. The "reason" for that record low turnout is that American voters chose to stay home, and not vote to demonstrate their rejection of "the Progressive agenda". Okay. Let's try a little logic, and reason, shall we?

One is faced with two ideological proposals in an election. If one decides to reject ideology "A" in favor of Ideology "B", is the reasonable, logical decision to sit at home, do nothing, and hope that enough other people show their support for ideology "B" that it is adopted, or is the reasonable logical course of action to go out, and actively demonstrate one's support of ideology "B" with one's vote to ensure that it is the ideology that is adopted? I think the answer is fairly obvious.

Thus it makes no sense to suggest that America "demonstrated its rejection" progressivism by doing nothing. So, why did a vast majority of Americans not vote? Well, I do agree that some of the reason is voter suppression, and the various voter ID laws around the nation. However, I think that is only a small part. Let's face it, if "independent" voters truly felt that Democrats were standing up, and fighting for them, the only effect all of these restrictive voter ID laws would have had would have been to piss them off, and make them more determined than ever to make their votes heard, and get the people elected to office that were going to fight to have such restrictions repealed.

No. Much ore to the point was that independents saw Republicans attacking Democrat candidates over, and over, not for any legislative decisions that the candidates, themselves, had made, but simply for the "crime" of being associated with president Obama. In reply these independents saw the Democratic candidates...do nothing! They watched them throw Obama under the bus. The watched them run from Obama as fast as their cowardly little legs would take them. They watched Obama fold on Single Payer. They watched Obama fold on Immigration, and take the coward's route of waiting until after the elections to demand action from the House. They watched Obama continue, and expand the Republican practices of the NRA. They watched Obama continue, and expand the Republican practices of QE. They watched Obama employ the Republican strategies of Middle East aggression. They watched all of this and chose to stay home, rather than vote for Democrats that they had no reason to believe would support their ideologies.

So, if you want to gloat over the fact that Democrats lost, that's fine. They did. But, please do not fool yourselves into thinking that they lost because Americans suddenly embraced your conservative ideologies. That is the same stupidity that causes you to presume that everyone hates Obamacare for the same reasons that you do - which they don't. The vast number of progressives hate Obamacare because they see Obamacare as a betrayal of Progressivism, and an attempt at Conservative appeasement. Believe it, or not, ladies and gentlemen, when Progressives criticise the President, and Democrats, most of the time it is not because they have magically become Conservatives in their sleep; rather it is to send the message that the President, and Democrats have not been Progressive enough for their taste.
Most of the people who didn't vote are voting against A and B. The Democrats in Congress have done practically nothing in the last 2 years primarily because Republicans have stopped them. Likewise Republicans have done nothing but block Democrat legislation.

So at a cost of $30 millions a day congress spent two years creating bills they know will never become law, meeting with staff, meeting with reporters, meeting with constituents, attending committee meetings, meeting with lobbyist, holding press conferences, and of course, campaigning for the next election. The one thing they have not done is their job, creating meaningful legislation and next two years don't look any better.
 
omg. it JUST CAN'T be the voters REJECTED the Dem/commie AGENDA.

there must be another EXCUSE

FACE IT, they rejected your Fascist commie Socialist AGENDA. They started IN 2010 but you didn't learn then and came up the same lame ass excuses. Well THEY TOTALLY rejected your asses and agenda this time

now get used to it. you have been REJECTED....bye bye

Thank you.

I can't believe you read all that bullshit; I can't stomach more than a line or so of bloviating propaganda.
 
There were more Blacks, Latinos, Asians and young people who usually vote Dem, voted Repub this time.
Your argument does not wash.
There is always a low voter turn out for mid terms.
Funny how the left just refuses to admit that blacks turned out in South Carolina, to elect a black Republican to the US Senate.

They are fleeing the plantation, and it scares the Hell of perverts who have counted on their votes to promote their agenda for years.
 
Most of the people who didn't vote are voting against A and B. The Democrats in Congress have done practically nothing in the last 2 years primarily because Republicans have stopped them. Likewise Republicans have done nothing but block Democrat legislation.

So at a cost of $30 millions a day congress spent two years creating bills they know will never become law, meeting with staff, meeting with reporters, meeting with constituents, attending committee meetings, meeting with lobbyist, holding press conferences, and of course, campaigning for the next election. The one thing they have not done is their job, creating meaningful legislation and next two years don't look any better.
Most of the legislation congress does manage to create is not meaningful nor productive. I would kind of prefer that congress and the president remain at a stalemate rather than creating crappy law.
 
Most of the people who didn't vote are voting against A and B. The Democrats in Congress have done practically nothing in the last 2 years primarily because Republicans have stopped them. Likewise Republicans have done nothing but block Democrat legislation.

So at a cost of $30 millions a day congress spent two years creating bills they know will never become law, meeting with staff, meeting with reporters, meeting with constituents, attending committee meetings, meeting with lobbyist, holding press conferences, and of course, campaigning for the next election. The one thing they have not done is their job, creating meaningful legislation and next two years don't look any better.
Most of the legislation congress does manage to create is not meaningful nor productive. I would kind of prefer that congress and the president remain at a stalemate rather than creating crappy law.
I would prefer, and apparently so would America, that bills passed by the House received due process in the Senate, which has not happened as Harry Reid has blocked legislation from being voted on, and possibly reaching President "Present".

No more of that shit now, Obama will have to veto bills in full view of the people.
 

Forum List

Back
Top