2016 Postmortem

alarimer

(17,146 posts)

93. Winning comes first, especially on the state level where redistricting happens.

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 05:03 PM

Nov 2016

We have got to change the maps. We cannot have more people voting for Democrats, yet winning fewer seats. That's messed up.

So, in the short term, it doesn't matter if the Dems are Blue Dogs. Win with them on the state level, redistrict to a fairer map, then we can talk about more progressive candidates.

I think redistricting has to be non-partisan and based SOLELY on population numbers. Not demographics, not party affiliation. Districts equal in population (and none of those weirdly shaped ones). If more House races were competitive, instead of "safe" for each party, we would stand a better chance at control of the House. I would prefer that it never be safe for either party, rather than one having control because they have made the rules regarding redistricting in an unfair way.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

131 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

It was a mistake to abandon the 50 state strategy [View all] struggle4progress Nov 2016 OP

A huge mistake democrank Nov 2016 #1

We can't offer unrealistic things to voters in those states like 2,000 mile long walls.... dubyadiprecession Dec 2016 #128

That's my take. TexasProgresive Nov 2016 #2

Here in Texas it was the first national election in many decades that I saw a political ad by Dustlawyer Nov 2016 #5

that would be great NewJeffCT Nov 2016 #31

Registration of all of the Hispanic population in the Rio Grand Valley Dustlawyer Nov 2016 #51

Not sure where you live, but Clinton ads were running almost constantly here the last month or two TwilightZone Nov 2016 #53

I would like to see some support from the DNC for local races. TexasProgresive Nov 2016 #55

and that is why I cannot understand why Howard Dean didn't continue as DNC chair still_one Nov 2016 #3

Pres. Obama seems cold towards Dean....I don't know why. Demsrule86 Nov 2016 #6

I know, it is a mystery to me also still_one Nov 2016 #9

I mean Debbie was a disaster long before 16 Demsrule86 Nov 2016 #10

Debbie and Pelosi were disasters metroins Nov 2016 #38

Pelosi had nothing to do with it. Demsrule86 Nov 2016 #50

Pelosi was re-elected leader today. Ken Burch Nov 2016 #103

I heard that. My son was not happy but I think it is for the best. Demsrule86 Dec 2016 #113

Unnnnh.....Pelosi is still our minority leader in the House, and she's likely to keep that gig. MADem Nov 2016 #76

Pelosi Got Done Me. Nov 2016 #80

I agree that Pelosi did everything Obama asked, but I never once heard any MADem Nov 2016 #85

That Particular Bit Had To Do With DWS Me. Nov 2016 #90

I think that little story might be a "Some people say" conflation. MADem Nov 2016 #95

A Bit Of Background Me. Nov 2016 #96

Take everything you hear from POLITICO, especially shit from "former" operatives on the D team, MADem Nov 2016 #97

I Didn't Like The Whole Bernie Situation And The Way She Was Treated Me. Nov 2016 #98

Kaine was part of a team that beat the Orange Anus by north of two million votes. MADem Nov 2016 #99

Yes, I Will Say Me. Nov 2016 #100

I thought he was a swell guy. Surprised at his command of Spanish. MADem Nov 2016 #105

I Too Want Competence Me. Nov 2016 #106

We need competence, and that's Dean. MADem Nov 2016 #109

On That Me. Nov 2016 #111

He was told to pick her awoke_in_2003 Nov 2016 #43

Oh bull shit. Demsrule86 Nov 2016 #48

No, she is who HE wanted. nt MADem Nov 2016 #75

Then we know where to lay it. nt awoke_in_2003 Nov 2016 #77

I say we "lay" it right where it belongs--at Putin's feet. nt MADem Nov 2016 #83

Obama got to choose...and it is probably not fair to blame Debbie for all our losses. Demsrule86 Dec 2016 #117

She was chosen because she is one of the BEST fundraisers in the USA. MADem Dec 2016 #119

Wasn't she Clinton's campaign chair in 2008? jalan48 Nov 2016 #58

Probably because Dean didn't favor him in 2008. MADem Nov 2016 #11

Maybe. Demsrule86 Nov 2016 #49

Howard Dean understands rural voters NoGoodNamesLeft Nov 2016 #66

I agree with you there. He understands, but he doesn't pander. MADem Nov 2016 #74

Yes, Dean doesn't get nearly enough credit NoGoodNamesLeft Nov 2016 #91

I'm from MA....but I preferred Dean to Kerry as a candidate. MADem Nov 2016 #94

I am 100% in agreement BlueMTexpat Dec 2016 #131

Jealous of his skills? Maybe Dean never" kissed his ring?" Dr. Mullion Blasto Nov 2016 #64

I don't fault Obama for advising Trump. Qutzupalotl Nov 2016 #92

I agree...can't stand the 'let's get along bullshit. Demsrule86 Dec 2016 #116

Rahm Me. Nov 2016 #78

I did not know that ....thanks for the information. Demsrule86 Dec 2016 #115

So did most of the party, by the end. Ken Burch Dec 2016 #120

I Simply Never Understood Why Obama Did That Me. Dec 2016 #124

I think in the beginning he was understandably nervous RelativelyJones Dec 2016 #126

Could Be Me. Dec 2016 #127

The Clinton team (at the time) didn't like Dean. Gore1FL Nov 2016 #19

Dean wanted the job at HHS. BlueMTexpat Dec 2016 #130

You realize that's not why we lost, right? brooklynite Nov 2016 #4

Running the right candidates in all 50 states will help. Demsrule86 Nov 2016 #7

That won't be popular here! But you are ENTIRELY correct. One must cut the cloth to the measure. MADem Nov 2016 #82

The country seemed to take rightward turn to me...hope I am wrong. Demsrule86 Dec 2016 #114

There's no place, though, where it helps us to run Dems Ken Burch Dec 2016 #121

Ken I disagree and the ACA is a bad example because Demsrule86 Dec 2016 #122

Card-check on union elections is another example. Ken Burch Dec 2016 #123

but one in places like Michigan and PA would have DonCoquixote Nov 2016 #8

At least the MI vote awoke_in_2003 Nov 2016 #44

Who? tavernier Nov 2016 #12

Campaign Lotusflower70 Nov 2016 #32

We had a powerful turnout machine and they had a 3.5% increase in voting population across the uponit7771 Nov 2016 #13

ALL the states should matter. They dont. Thats the point. democrank Nov 2016 #17

"Powerful turnout operations" that had people showing up to the doors Chakab Nov 2016 #23

Hillary didn't visit Wisconsin once and only refocused on NWCorona Nov 2016 #24

But getting resources to the Rust Belt would have. It didn't happen. Democrats on the ground there KittyWampus Nov 2016 #25

Could be -- though I'm not so sure as you about "why we lost" struggle4progress Nov 2016 #67

Plus 1 Auggie Nov 2016 #86

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2016 #101

I think people like to use buzzwords to describe things they don't get. Drunken Irishman Nov 2016 #14

No, I can't agree that this point is 100% wrong. mountain grammy Nov 2016 #16

Everything I said was 100% true. Drunken Irishman Nov 2016 #33

I agree 100% Grey Lemercier Nov 2016 #41

I wasn't talking about this election mountain grammy Nov 2016 #42

Thank you. Indeed, the damage WAS done over decades, and the Dems Nay Nov 2016 #73

That's not what stopped her. Exilednight Nov 2016 #63

A 50-state strategy has everything to do with a presidential election. democrank Nov 2016 #18

Take a look at Obama's map in 2012. Drunken Irishman Nov 2016 #35

In this case what you wrote BumRushDaShow Nov 2016 #20

She didn't campaign much at all in PA. Drunken Irishman Nov 2016 #36

Hate to say but that is a bit of bullshit BumRushDaShow Nov 2016 #57

I agree at the presidential level mythology Nov 2016 #22

It would put Democratic offices/resources in areas we could monitor elections for fraud. KittyWampus Nov 2016 #29

She didn't invest much of anything into the Rust Belt. And Democrats there asked for resources. KittyWampus Nov 2016 #28

You have to pick and choose your battles. Drunken Irishman Nov 2016 #37

Not arguing that point. But we need to have rural Democrats with some basic training/organization KittyWampus Nov 2016 #87

8 years ago zipplewrath Nov 2016 #54

We had some good candidates. People like Russ Feingold. Drunken Irishman Nov 2016 #110

Yep. As I wrote below, "50-state strategy" is just a catchy phrase. Not a reality. Garrett78 Nov 2016 #68

Here's what the state legislatures look like struggle4progress Nov 2016 #71

all of the tweeks together would not total half the monumental mistake of certainot Nov 2016 #15

THIS BumRushDaShow Nov 2016 #27

left has to go on offensive -no more university sports on RW radio certainot Nov 2016 #45

As an interesting but sad sidenote BumRushDaShow Nov 2016 #62

Agreed. It was a stroke of genius for RW to use the radio to the max. It's how Nay Nov 2016 #79

we need 50 state elections! mopinko Nov 2016 #21

That would have the opposite effect SomethingNew Nov 2016 #59

there is nothing about it that negates a 50 state strategy. mopinko Nov 2016 #60

At the presidential level SomethingNew Nov 2016 #61

and there is a problem with that why? mopinko Dec 2016 #112

Yup! NWCorona Nov 2016 #26

We failed to address the needs of those at the bottom who have suffered the most, TonyPDX Nov 2016 #30

I would agree with that Lotusflower70 Nov 2016 #39

I think that we SHOULD have a 50-State Strategy Proud Liberal Dem Nov 2016 #34

Winning comes first, especially on the state level where redistricting happens. alarimer Nov 2016 #93

I agree with you 100% on redistricting. Proud Liberal Dem Nov 2016 #108

My experience has been that those who yell loudest for the 50-state-strategy sweetloukillbot Dec 2016 #125

Sad but true Lotusflower70 Nov 2016 #40

Yep. I wish for Howard Dean as DNC chair WhiteTara Nov 2016 #46

We aren't ready for 50 state strategy hollowdweller Nov 2016 #47

I think you can zipplewrath Nov 2016 #56

I think Howard Dean should come back as DNC chair. We had our strongest showings with him hrmjustin Nov 2016 #52

50-state strategy is a catchy phrase but never has been a reality. Garrett78 Nov 2016 #65

When we don't aim at the whole map, we lose: Obama's adventures with Congress struggle4progress Nov 2016 #69

No candidate from either party has aimed at the whole map. Garrett78 Nov 2016 #70

We need a better machine struggle4progress Nov 2016 #72

Even more to the point, having a Democratic president is useless if he is Nay Nov 2016 #81

After 2008 the DNC ceased in it's main function... vi5 Nov 2016 #84

Agree. And this is why we need Howard Dean back as the DNC chair (nt) question everything Nov 2016 #88

Yes. One of several. n/t lumberjack_jeff Nov 2016 #89

Dem PTB have run from Dr. Dean's plans for a long time, elleng Nov 2016 #102

Yes, it was! LisaM Nov 2016 #104

Yes to 50 state strategy, no to Howard Dean PatsFan87 Nov 2016 #107

Totally agree. Obama ousted Howard Dean, Obama kept DWS on - two big mistakes. Justice Dec 2016 #118

I don't know how many times BlueMTexpat Dec 2016 #129