The Humiliating Statistic From This Year’s Elections That Republicans Don’t Want to Talk About

2014-voterIt’s only been a week since this year’s midterm elections, but it seems like it’s been much longer. Since the elections, there’s been an endless parade of Republicans on just about every news outlet boasting about the massive victories experienced by their party this year.


And they’re right. For Republicans it was a great election night. At the end of the day, their party did indeed score huge wins all across the country.

But there’s one stat that I’m fairly certain you won’t see any Republican want to address – the abysmal voter turnout.

How bad was it? Well, we just experienced the worst voter turnout in this country since 1942. You know, right in the middle of WWII.

In fact, only 34.6 percent of the voting-eligible public voted this year. To be fair, voter turnout during midterm elections is always lower than during presidential election years – but not this low.

It’s like I’ve said before, the huge victory for the GOP came on one of the saddest days for democracy we’ve seen in decades. And now we have even more stats to back it up.

This election shouldn’t be a celebration for anyone who loves democracy. This isn’t a “government of the people, by the people, for the people,” as Abraham Lincoln once said. This is a government that’s been determined by just over one in three Americans who were eligible to vote.

Essentially two-thirds of this country had no voice in this election.

Now, is that the fault of Republicans? Not entirely. I’m sure some will blame voter ID, but while those ridiculous and unnecessary laws might have lowered voter turnout in some areas, I think disgust and apathy are the real culprits behind this embarrassing turnout. These are feelings that are directly related to the unprecedented gridlock we’ve seen in Congress since 2010. And that is the fault of the Republican party.


While Democrats and Republicans have almost always disagreed on many things, we’ve never seen blatant obstruction like we have since Republicans took over control of the House of Representatives in 2010. Since that moment, the only goal of the GOP was to oppose anything and everything President Obama supported.

And that’s exactly what they did.

Because of this obstruction, millions of Americans saw this year’s election as pointless. They believed that no matter who won, nothing was going to change.

I guess they were partially right.

Because of gerrymandering, it was essentially impossible for Democrats to take back power in the House. And no matter how much power Democrats took or kept in the Senate, it wasn’t going to matter because John Boehner and House Republicans were never going to let anything get accomplished. That’s exactly what we’ve seen and been forced to put up with for the last four years.

So while Republicans all across this country continue to celebrate, voter turnout is one stat you sure as heck won’t be seeing many (if any) Republicans mentioning during their numerous cable news appearances.



Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Pipercat

    18% Mandate!

  • Brian

    I’m sure others will say it, as Pipercat did, but voting should be mandatory with a tax penalty for non-voters.

    • Richard Verdejo

      While the sentiment and desire is well-intentioned, the reality of what were faced with is all too real.

      The two major parties have spent the last 150yrs gerrymandering the electoral process to where we’re left with a choice of a soup sandwich or a shit-filled twinkie on election day (my apologies to Hostess).

      Until WE THE PEOPLE fix the process at the STATE LEVEL, voter turnout will continue to suffer – as faith in “my vote counts” wanes.

      The result is the piss poor representation of the populace by lifelong Pols more concerned with their FEDERAL WELFARE and SOFT MONEY than in serving the nation.

      • Steve Brains

        What did LewisBlack say? “The people who get elected shouldn’t decide WHO GETS TO VOTE!”

      • Jim Bean

        That’s like saying teachers unions shouldn’t get to fund the election campaigns of the school officials who will represent the tax payers interests in collective bargaining with the teachers.

        I agree.

    • Jon Graves

      While on the surface such a proposal sounds good for getting people to vote, it could have some very serious consequences. Notably, those who are forced to vote but don’t really care can write-in any name they want, or just choose randomly. Some of those people would attempt to rebel by leaving votes blank or in some other way invalid. Look to the failed Australian system as an example.

      • BilbySA

        I’m curious as to how you came to the conclusion that the Australian system of compulsory voting has failed? Everybody over 18 votes. I’m sure that there are a few blank or humorously altered ballots submitted, but the vast majority of voters don’t want to waste that vote. Therefore, mandatory voting has been a big success here in Australia for decades.

        Granted, this last election could indeed be viewed as a major failure, with the most destructive and most hated federal government in living memory currently in charge of the country, but this is not a result of a failed electoral system; it’s a result of lack of real choice in our political candidates and party policies.

        The US really should try it – even just as an experiment. If it fails, go back to the old system. But you might just be surprised.

      • Jillz

        I’d like to see mandatory voting here (Canada) too.

      • Damien LeGallienne

        Mandatory? Who are you, Stalin? What if you don’t like any candidates? Folks, Jillz wants to live in cold war Romania for chrissakes.

      • Claire Schuler

        If you don’t like them, you leave it blank or write someone in.

      • Jillz

        Stalin? You compare me to a murderous dictator b/c I would like to see more people vote? Geez, go to extremes much?

        You must be a Republican (i.e. knows that low voter turnout = better chance of Republican win).

        If you don’t like any candidates, you leave the ballot blank.

      • Brian

        Then write “abstain” in. The point is that you actually make the effort.

      • DavidD

        Who are you, Ayn Rand?

      • Damien LeGallienne

        Canada has mandatory voter idenmtification too — do you know any Democrats who want to face up to that rule? I don’t. They want people in the inner cities to vote 20 times. How dumb,.

      • Jillz

        We (Canada) are registered, with our names/contact information on a list at our assigned voting station. When we arrive to vote we check in and show a piece of identification to prove who we are.

        I’ve never seen someone who appears on the registration list be turned away for not having ID (and it’s happened a few times at the voting station I vote at).

        On the other hand, during this past municipal election, my partner went to MY voting station, showed ID and was permitted to vote there instead of at his own assigned voting station – the admin side of this was handled by elections staff on site. No drama.

        Voter fraud may happen, as it will anywhere, but it is minimal and our government does not attempt to suppress our votes like your GOP does in the USA.

      • DavidD

        We are not Canada or Australia for that matter but.I support mandatory voting just like I support a draft and jailing for non payment of taxes or ditching jury duty unlawfully..
        Your comment about people voting 20 times is not true but a racist whine backed by no real evidence.
        Things either go up or down and if we don’t practice electoral democracy we will lose it..

      • Jon Graves

        I’d like to apologize for saying the Australian system failed. I have read about some failures related to the mandatory voting, but that doesn’t mean the entire system should be scrapped and I’m sorry for implying that.

        No system is perfect, especially not democracies in general. If I had my way, we’d all be living in a Technocracy, as I can see many ways that that would be an improvement on the current systems dominating most nations’ governments.

      • Brian

        At least it puts people at the polls. However, Australia’s system didn’t fail. Aussies are just more right-leaning as a whole.

    • Steve Brains

      I agree. you should PAY a penalty for NOT participating in your nation.

    • Matthew Reece

      Mandatory voting with a tax penalty for not doing it is a form of slavery, as it violates both private property rights and freedom of association. And the very act of voting is an act of aggression that imposes violent rulers upon peaceful people while creating an illusion of legitimacy for institutions that deserve none..

      • Brian

        Ok

      • DavidD

        Any rule of law is slavery to you.

      • Matthew Reece

        Not so. Any statism is slavery to me. Rule of law requires anarchy because if there is a ruler, then there are no rules; just the ruler’s whims.

  • Teresa Groves

    Mail-in ballots across the country. That’s completely do-able. What I (and everybody else) would like to see is a limit on the number of days allowed to campaign. By election day, I hated ALL the candidates. Not because they were all bad, but because I was so sick of their faces and voices.

    • Bill Baylis

      while I agree with most of your statement,, mail in ballots get “lost”,, there was one news item about a polling place employee caught dumping thousands of ballots into a dumpster

      • Catherine Amor-Clark

        That report of “dumping” was found to be false.

      • Steve Brains

        But the Georgia Government NOT validating registrations is TRUE!

      • lillibird

        How can they get lost, we put our in the drive up box at City Hall….or you can drop in the mail.

      • Steve Brains

        The Post Office loses VERY little. They are one of THE most efficient organizations in the WORLD!

      • U Mad Bro?

        And they are Unionized! Which further pisses off the Right.

      • Jim Bean

        What pisses off the right is that they are non-self-sustaining.

      • Julie Echo Tyler

        If the right hadn’t required that they fund pensions for a hundred years in the future, they would be self-sustaining. The right is regulating the Postal Service into bankruptcy in a coordinated effort to privatize it.

      • Jim Bean

        If the union of a an organization that loses money every year didn’t demand lavish pensions that there is no reason to believe they can fund, there would be no need to require them to fund it so far into the future in order to prevent them from sticking someone else with the bill down the road. Because if they if they weren’t forced to set it aside, the union would scarf it up in their paychecks.

        If it was privatized, it would become profitable.
        Government does nothing efficiently because there is no need to.

      • Gammie Juarez

        Oh Jim, you get an “F –” on homework!

      • Angel Rosario

        Mister Bean you have no clue what you are talking about. The union employees of the Postal Service, have the same pension benefits as any other Federal Government employees. No other company in the world has to set aside money for the retirement of employees that are not even hired yet. If UPS and Fedex were made to do the same, they would lose 5 to 7 billion every year. The Postal Service has overpaid into the retirement fund and yet, congress will not let them have the over payments back. Like is said before you are clueless.

      • Jim Bean

        In fiscal 2013 USPS defaulted on pension payments to the tune of 5.6 billion.

        In fiscal year 2012, the Postal Service lost a total of $15.9 billion, including $11.1 billion in defaulted payments that it owes to prefund health benefits for retirees.

        Those are the clues I have. Check them out.

      • Daddycool67

        Employees that are not even hired yet?
        I think you mean not even BORN yet!

      • theyak47

        If t was privatized you can forget daily rural delivery, $1 stamps, and zero English speaking carriers.

      • Jim Bean

        No one needs to get their mail delivered every day, six days a week. No one needed that even 50 years ago, long before most communications business could be conducted electronically.

        But we still have it – only because we need to keep the hours up for the workers. And all the while, the Postal Service cries ‘whoa-is-me’ financially.

        I Big Gov had had a link to daily deliveries by the milk-man, we’d still have that. A government bureaucracy is the closet thing to eternal life you’ll ever see.

      • Jacob Equal Citizen Leatherber

        I totally call bullshit here. How about the Multiple people who rely on the USPS for their medications? You’re going to say they can’t get their medications because it’s not delivered to them? what about the people who rely upon the USPS for their business? every day they are closed is a loss of money.. Oh but you want to go with the more expensive option of Fedex or UPS.

      • Dennis Frisby

        BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS? How about rural folks who may not have internet or are not comfortable with it? Your right wing corporate schtick is lame.

      • Russell Smith

        Jim Beam there is one thing you and no one else have mention the Post Offices are in the Constitution. Another thing ,Government agencies and the post office are not supposed to be for profit!

      • Jim Bean

        Thay hain’t opposeta be 4 eternal loss neither.

      • Jim Bean

        It does not say in the constitution that they must be run is such a way that they represent a sucking chest wound on our economy.

      • Russell Smith

        It is only a loss right now because of the 5 billion that is due on jan 1st. Name one company that is made to pay for future pensions 75 years in advance ? then in turn gets absorbed into the general fund!We flush trillion down the drain on weaponry! Why aren’t you up in arms over that? IT is not supposed to be a for profit!

      • Jim Bean

        A trillion spent on weaponry is a trillion spent on providing Americans with jobs. Its not a loss.

        The amount asked to be set aside for the USPS future pensions is not more than the amount that will be needed to pay that bill when it comes due. And since there is no reason to think the USPS will be any more profitable when they come due, it is prudent to make sure they make provisions now.

        UPS and FedEx have retirement plans too, you know, and they have a business model that provides for making good on them.

      • Russell Smith

        One they are not a chest wound on our economy. They are not meant to make a profit like the military they are here to serve the people. We the people!

        During the war in Iraq in 6 days we would spend 5 billion. It is ashame you don’t like America and proud American institutions who hire Veterans!

      • Dennis Frisby

        Seriously? If you privatize it will turn a profit? hehehehehe. No, just the top dogs would be raking in huge salaries and screwing the workers.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        The Post Office is “non-self-sustaining” because it can’t do anything without Congressional approval and Republicans in Congress are hell-bent on destroying the Postal Workers’ union. http://www DOT politicususa DOT com/2013/08/30/postal-service-death-republicans.html

      • Jim Bean

        The Publicans are acting prudently. The postal service runs huge debts and the organization the guarantees pension is also running deficits. Pubs are making sure the USPS -who can’t make ends meet and yet whose union demands lavish pensions – doesn’t welch on the obligations they committed to and leave someone else stuck with the bill.

      • Craig Fuller

        Are you for real? The Republicans pushed through a bill ( in a lame duck session) to fund the USPS pension for 75 years, and required it be funded in 10. You wonder why it is coming up short.

      • Steve Mitchell

        You’re very wrong, the Republicunts aren’t acting prudently, they’re acting like the traitors to America that they are, nothing you said about the postal service is even remotely true. Idiots like you are too stupid to understand what “tax-funded organization” actually means. Or why the USPS is one of the smallest contributors to the debt.

      • Jim Bean

        In fiscal year 2012, the Postal Service lost a total of $15.9 billion, including $11.1 billion in defaulted payments that it owes to prefund health benefits for retirees.

        In 2013, they default on 5.6 billion in pension deposits.

        I guess it depends on your definition of ‘smallest contributor.’

      • regressive teaparty trash

        look up the years PRIOR 2 the repubs screwing the post office

      • Jim Bean

        Making someone take personal responsibility for an obligation they voluntarily committed to is a ‘screwing’ only in the Leftern Hemisphere make-believe half of the world.

      • regressive teaparty trash

        they were doing OK until your regressive got in the way ( see: big government intervention)
        =======================================
        go back a few short years and look up THOSE facts–

      • Jim Bean

        The ‘facts’ looked OK on paper but only when the paper didn’t include the unfunded health and pension liabilities that were growing exponentially.

        HEY! I KNOW!!!! Remember how you squealed about Bushes unfunded wars? Well, this is very much like that. Just replace the word’ ‘war’ with the words ‘retirement benefits’ but keep all the rest of your thinking the same.

        I’m excited. I think you’re going to pick up on this rather quickly.

      • regressive teaparty trash

        james,,,,,,,,,,,,,,are we really going to compare that whicg caused the deaths of nearly 4500 Iraq deaths in our military –plus THOUSANDS more maimed for life– with an institution which was doing fine– turning a profit- til your merry GOP screwed it up?
        really jimbo?? u are “speshul”

      • U Mad Bro?

        If you are referring to Unions or the Post Office, cite your misinformation so we can show you the pile it really is.

      • Jim Bean

        5 billion in losses so far this year.

      • U Mad Bro?

        And I say again, cite your sources. You have neither a citation down nor a link nor facts. And you lack of anything regarding a cogent answer seems to indicate you’re blaming losses on the Postal Union rather than fluctuations in business or the fact that they are being squeezed to do something NO ONE ELSE HAS TO DO. Supply 100% if all the retirement and pensions for everyone working there immediately if not sooner.

        SO if you can’t actually cite anything, I’m afraid you’re dismissed.

      • Jim Bean

        FP doesn’t allow me to post links but it really doesn’t matter because if you actually wanted to see the evidence you would have already accessed it on your own. You just want to make noises.

      • U Mad Bro?

        Actually, if you were being honest you would have a cited source, a name of a study or an article from something well respected and ethical. Since you didn’t it can be rightly inferred you fear impugning of your sources. Breitbart and Limbaugh are ideologues and had you cited them or anything tangentially linked to them you know, as well as I, that you’d have been laughed at roundly.

        Whether you can post a link or not is secondary to the fact you’ve been shoving your opinion(that’s what those of us who aren’t being disingenuous call making noise) as fact with nothing to hold it up as more than agitprop from the RWNJs and toeing the party line.

        Try googling Repubs Force USPS to Fund 75 Years of Health and Pensions.

        See how easy it is?

      • Jim Bean

        I googled ‘USPS loses 5 billion’ and USPS loses 15.9 billion. I got all sorts of sources. You try it then you decide who to trust.

        NY TImes, maybe? Bloomberg? Washington Post? Or how about the USPS’s own website which reports the same thing? Would you agree with that or would you dismiss them as well?

      • U Mad Bro?

        And each of your named sources articles are Headed by what you claim but in the meat of EACH ONE OF THEM is a stated loss of 11.1 billion to the pension fund they are being made to fund for 75 years in advance.

        You are not citing anything, you’re posting headlines as if that is all there is to the article because it suits your narrative to be disingenuous and act as if nothing more is to be said than what your ideology and party line claim.

        Kool Aid, thy name is Regressive.

      • ML

        Jimmy, jimmy, try reading past the headline!

      • Heather McCammon

        You are right I love USPS

      • Steve Brains

        The GEORGIA Secretary of State REFUSED to validate 140,000 registrations until the day before the election. That should be JAILABLE.

      • mildmannered

        It’s a felony.

      • LummiLover

        ballots cast at polling sites get put in the trunk of cars, locked in a room, shoved under someone’s bed…. “lost”

      • Steve Brains

        How often? Show Me a single prosecution for ANY of it! ANYWHERE in the US!

      • tuttleroad

        Don’t hold your breath.

      • Joanne3905

        Bill Baylis, you may be confusing this with the young man who worked for a private company hired by the Republican party in Virginia to register voters. He was caught throwing out voter registration forms.

      • Dennis Frisby

        Florida and Colorado as well I believe. Internet Voting should be allowed.

      • Angelique Michelle Garza

        I didn’t even get one in the mail this year .-.

    • Steve Brains

      YEAH! Give ’em 90 days or less, depending if they get the Nation’s Business completed first. these are urgent issues and
      After Boehner terrorized about how dangerous ISIS is, I think “,,,come over here and kill us ALL!!” were his exact words, THEN he says, even though 90% of them’ll come back, it’s “we are gonna wait until next year with the NEW Congress…”
      We need a clock on EVERY bill, 4 weeks in committee, 6 weeks for debate and a VOTE on EVERY BILL!!

      Me too.

      • John Mietus

        while I agree that Boehner’s rhetoric flawlessly combined scare tactics and his own personal touch of procrastination, a Vote on every bill is impossible, Thousands of bills are introduced over the course of a year, and even with a clean state at the start of the new congress the bills pile up and most of them such drivel that giving each one its due time is not possible within a year, also you’d have republicans proposing exponential amounts of “dummy bills” to run out the clock before any real bills can come to a vote

      • rickr442

        Wait… Didn’t Obama promise to make every bill public before the votes??? Bush’s fault, right?

      • Betsy Coddington-Galterio

        yup

      • ML

        They’re all public record, rickr442. Didn’t you KNOW that?

    • Michael Cookson

      I totally agree! Campaigning shouldn’t start until 90 days prior to an election! Also, ban negative adds! In most cases, they are out right lies or spin! Anyone running for office should be running on his or hers ideas! Not because the other guy sucks! Also, there should be limits on donations! In fact, there should be no money involved!

    • mildmannered

      Colorado did mail-in ballots. After hedging and waffling, our county clerk publicized the postage to mail was 70cents. A regular stamp is 49cents. I don’t know anyone who had a 21cent stamp sitting around. Do you?

      I would have preferred ballots with return postage or making the contents a few hairs lighter so they could go for the 49cents.

  • Jaim-o

    Democrats lost because Obama’s policies were on the ballot. Pure and simple.

    No amount of whining and crying over spilt milk is going to change that fact now. Dems spent a boatload of cash trying to get voters to the polls and even sent Obama and both Clintons out to campaign to get them out. If they didn’t show up, it’s a sad day for the Democratic Party, not the USA.

    Allen is just trying to rationalize a butt-kicking. A skull-f’ing, actually.

    • conor1051

      Jaim-o, every liberal agenda put on the ballot, ie raising the minimum wage & marijuana, won last Tuesday. Congress has an approval rating lower then the voting age. Obama has an approval rating 3x’s Congress, so it’s not a sad day for liberals, it’s a sad day for democracy, as people are becoming very cynical with this process. Obama is not the issue, the lack of compromise and boat loads of finger-pointing is the issue. Tell me, do any current pols really inspire you to be better in your life? Or is it still Reagan?

      • strayaway

        You make a good point in your first sentence except (small point) the Florida marijuana initiative lost by 2% because 60% was required. Maybe getting things done at the state level works better for Democrats. Obama really worked like a charm for Republicans though. All Republicans had to do was recite a mantra of keywords like Benghazi, debt, Fast and Furious, Obola, ‘immigration’, executive orders, Lois Lerner, and the curtains came down on Democrats.

      • schwarherz

        I would argue that the “curtain came down” on the democrats not because the republicans did anything that worked (they really didn’t) but because the Democratic candidates said “Yeah that Obama guy sure is terrible right?” to try and get some conservative votes and pissed off their own base.

      • Steve Brains

        YEP, BACKSTABBING your boss NEVER amounts to much.

      • Steve Brains

        The problem there is that so many communities are multi state. We need to END the states and create 2 sets of Representative districts. A one made of rectangles North to South, the other East to West. They will over lap significantly but EVERYONE gets 2 representatives who occupy the 2 halves of asshole Central.

        Heres the trick, ONE grid has 159 guys, the other 753.
        hehehe A computer will hack that out in about an hour, easier than scheduling Major League Baseball.
        the Districts never change unless… one loses or gains 10% in population. THEN you have a new grid and ALL reps are FIRED with 90 days notice.

        A new election with 2 new sets of voters. We split the grids in 1/3s and alternate every 3 years. NO ONE EVER gets more than 3 terms in a lifetime.

        The President is ONE 7 year term and must win BOTH grids!

        OH.
        A) there ARE no more parties!
        B) ALL contributions MUST come from within EACH grid and EVERY AD must be 100% truthful. A 10 year FELONY if you DO NOT VOTE as you promised.

    • Bill Baylis

      that might be true,, but facts don’t lie and while it might be that this past election was a referendum on Obama and his policies,, only slightly more than 1/2 the 34 % of those who did vote, may have voted against Obama, or for some people, the way they voted could have been for some other reason entirely and nothing to do with Obama.They could have just not liked the way the Dem candidate combed his hair or whatever. The Dems got beaten yes,, but alot of races won by the GOP were by razor thin margins. I know I can’t read anyone’s mind and I don’t think you can either,, and no one really knows what a person is thinking once the voting booth curtain closes and God only knows how the other 66 % would have voted

    • Larry Wagner

      If 65% of the population “voted” for neither candidate, they BOTH got their butts kicked.

    • schwarherz

      All the democrats that lost were distancing themselves from the president in their campaigns and every liberal issue on the ballot won. Tell me more about how “obama’s policies” lost.

      • Steve Brains

        This was a hatevote crime against your fellow citizens.
        I have come to WELCOME the “RED’s have the STAGE” opportunity.

        Remember when Obama caught Romney LYING during the debate in 2012? “Please, by all means… go on ahead!”

        hehehe The red’s are so eager to humiliate president VETO/EXECUTIVE ORDER, they won’t even get it out of their pants before they need a kleenex.

        And how about that lawsuit. Mr obama sholud be HAMMERIN for a jury selection by now!!! OH!! That’s RIGHT!! The sham suit can’t find a lawyer who will SHAME himself with a guaranteed losing case.

        THIS is time for OBAMA to humiliate Boehner. I wanna see OBAMA interrogate that drunken waste of sperm on the stand UNDER OATH. MAKE him plead the 5th 250 times!!

  • Larry Wagner

    Lying in campaign ads needs to be a treasonable offense.

    Free Speech should be restricted to telling the truth.
    Otherwise, every two minutes remind listeners everything being said is strictly fictional and mis-information at best.

    • Steve Brains

      An advertising suspension. 1 DAY for EVERY misleading or false AD. They must ALL be approved (fact checked) by the FEC. And a FEE must be paid for the checking! $10,000 an ad.

    • Sieben Stern

      AGREED – SO much misinformation in pamphlets and commercials… it should be a fine if you LIE. >_<

    • Matthew Reece

      It isn’t freedom of speech if there are restrictions that go beyond prohibiting speech that violates other logically provable rights.

      • Larry Wagner

        Freedom of Information, i.e. truth, vs fiction which is either enterainment, or mis-information.

        No one WANTS to hear lies and mis-information masquerading as TRUTH.

        People want the right to truth. Not the right to be deceived and manipulated.

      • Larry Wagner

        So you are saying you and politicians have the INALIENABLE RIGHT to lie to people. Really ? Do you want to be able to be certain that you never hear and honest word ?

        Most people expect TRUTH 99% of the time. Think man. Republicans hide behind lies to justify lies, greed, and lack of compassion. And in total irony, claim to be Christian. The man that religion follows based everything on compassion for others.

        Try to make a million jobs, nor a billion dollars

      • Matthew Reece

        A person has the right to lie, as long as no person or property is damaged by the lie. Lying goes against argumentation ethics and should therefore not be done in rational discourse, but it is not a crime unless there is a victim, and one’s feelings and/or starry-eyed perception of other people does not count.

      • DavidD

        Slander is not free speech but a malicious attack of lies that harms individuals materially.
        Case law supports this all the way to SCOTUS.

      • Matthew Reece

        I am not talking about case law, but a priori theory. Even so, the burden of proof is on the slandered to show that material damage has been done. If not, then no victim equals no crime.

    • DavidD

      Reform the slander laws and hold people responsible in civil court not criminal for malicious falsehoods.
      Free speech is a right upheld by the constitution but slander with malicious intent is not free speech.

  • Obola

    “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. PERIOD.”

    • Beartx

      Your name says it all. Careful, chicken little, your sky is falling.

      • regressive teaparty trash

        obola is a brand new TROLL profile made from a previous TROLL who was banished from these blogs-

    • Hunter S. Thompson

      Unless you F*cking health care plan doesn’t actually do anything but collect money for the insurance companies! The heath care plans that people lost were the ones that didn’t cover shit. You paid a small sum to say you had insurance, but if anything major happened you were shit out of luck! Sheep stupidity!

      • strayaway

        Now seniors can get health care policies that cover reproductive issues and provide coverage for someone else’s kids until they are 26. The premiums are higher of course but how dare those insurance companies not provide bells and whistles some people are never going to need. Why should people have the right to choose what they want in their policies and pay for anyway? Isn’t that the responsibility of governments and insurance companies?

      • Hunter S. Thompson

        Where are the premiums higher for seniors? You mean the ones that get free Medi-Care or the people that are too rich to qualify for Medi-Care? If you consider emergency care bells and whistles than I feel real sorry for you!

      • Steve Brains

        hehehe!

      • strayaway

        Are you equating Medi-Care with (un)ACA policies? As you know, its a different program. I gave examples of bells and whistles like coverage for kids no longer in the household and reproductive services that have to be included in everyones’ premiums to subsidize others. After all that, the program is not any more societally affordable than what preceded it. After Obama adds additional millions of illegal aliens and all the relatives they can bring in, it will be even less societally affordable. Medicare isn’t free. Neither are (un)ACA policies. Taxpayers pay for or subsidize them. Where is the $2,500 of annual health care plan savings that Obama promised the average American family? That’s my question.

      • Sulk Hogan

        Considering that the majority of people over 50 have sex, that syphilis has increased by a staggering 50% in the senior set since 2007, chlamydia by 30%, 12% of all new HIV/AIDS diagnoses are in people over the age of 50, and that single seniors have the lowest rate of condom utilization of any cohort perhaps a little “reproductive” (sexual) healthcare wouldn’t go awry.

      • Steve Brains

        DAMN!!!! That won’t work though, STRAY is immune to the truth and to logic as well.

      • strayaway

        All good points but they aren’t having many babies. I think of seniors as over 64 not 50. Seniors smoke and drive too but the federal government doesn’t necessarily have to subsidize their fun.

      • Steve Brains

        YOu mean those people with MEDICARE?

      • Steve Brains

        It was also DUPLICITY from the Insurance Companies. they AGREED to change the plans to meet the standards and they RENEGED.

    • GL

      Note, if your health plan is subsequently dropped by your insurance company, that statement becomes false, but only because of action taken by a spiteful corporation looking to make a man into a liar, not because the statement itself was made with fraudulent and malicious intent.

      • Steve Brains

        Bingo!

      • strayaway

        Tin foil hat alert!

      • GL

        Actually, it’s just an application of logic. Corporations do not like regulation. When modern Republicans are in charge of policy, regulation falls by the wayside. People do not like to vote for politicians they believe lied to them. So if they can somehow make a Democratic President into a liar… which is easy when you promise something that you have no control over.

        So long as you start with true premises, deductive logic is a wonderful tool.

      • strayaway

        But those 5M health care policies ended because the (un)ACA required additional coverage not included in those plans. As Mr. Goober pointed out, if Americans had realized that the (un)ACA was going to be paid for by raising the costs of other policies, it never would have past.

    • Jillz

      Talk to your insurance company about that – they are the ones who cancelled plans rather than to make your plan compliant.

      • Steve Brains

        Bingo!!

    • Steve Brains

      Then damn! Go buy some tampons!!!

    • regressive teaparty trash

      ^^^ new TROLL profile^^^,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,new TROLL profile……………………….. 1st comment/ new TROLL profile,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
      *****************************************************************************
      geee———— was it OY HUMID? itismyball? which regressive crybaby TROLL is now using the OBOLA moniker as his new TROLL profile?
      +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
      ^^^ new troll profile (obola)^^^ new troll profile ^^^

  • FD Brian

    How about if voter turn out is not 70% or higher, then no person is elected and it starts over with 2 new candidates. (just an idea), Go!

    • conor1051

      At this point I’d be happy with 51%

    • Steve Brains

      67% (2/3) and each candidate only gets 15 minutes of fame a day in any broadcast zone. these guys were like Telemarketers @ suppertime this year.

      I believe in a NATIONAL 4 day Voting holiday in between Christmas and New Years. Schools are closed, many people take off anyway. and with a MAGSTRIP/ SMART CARD NATIONAL ID, you can vote in the MALL! ANYWHERE, 24/7. You register it like a credit card and it’s a one time use, machine captured item.

      When you register to get it, you give up a thumb print. And if you are home bound, an ELECTION COMMISSION EMPLOYEE will come to you.

  • strayaway

    “These are feelings that are directly related to the unprecedented gridlock we’ve seen in Congress since 2010.”

    There is good news! As of March, there were 195 House passed bills not acted on by Harry Reid. 31 of those bills were originated by House Democrats. His shelves were overflowing with House passed bills that he killed. Finally, Republicans replaced enough obstructionist Democrats in the Senate to get bills moving again. From now on, House passed bills will be more likely to make it to the President’s desk. President Obama has the right to veto whichever bills he wants but at least he won’t be able to criticize Republicans for being obstructionists.

    • GL

      See, the problem is, Reid may very well have wanted to move on bills. But thanks to a valiant effort by the Republican Party to filibuster every motion that came to the Senate floor, almost none of them got through the choke point. If you’re going to blame the Senate, pin the blame on the right animal. It’s the elephant, not the donkey, that’s been holding this stuff up.

      • strayaway

        Excuses, excuses… Didn’t Reid do away with filibusters on nominations by the President (aka “the nuclear option”)? Are you suggesting that Democrats not filibuster on other issues now that they are the minority? I’m not sure they would since the President can veto most everything. That wasn’t what I brought up however. Reid simply didn’t bring House passed bills to the Senate floor. Did you have a bill in mind that passed the House that Senate Republicans would have filibustered? What would be the point? Remember: “The buck stops here”.

      • Hoode

        almsot all the bills sitting on Reids desk included riders lowering taxes and destroying regulations…..and or increased military spending. The Rs PURPOSEFULLY put riders on they KNEW Reid wouldn’t pass. Got off your high horse. There is NO mandate from this vote. The president is STILL the president and he is still a democrat. Not much will change.

      • strayaway

        I doubt what your are saying is true although I would imagine there were a number of bills included in that number to curtail aspects of the (un)ACA. Once a House bill is passed, riders (aka compromise) are something that might or might not be added in the Senate. We will never know if Senate riders would have been voted down in the Senate because Harry Reid never allowed such opportunities. Now we will and Senate Democrats can still filibuster if they choose because that is something only Republicans aren’t supposed to do. In any event, President Obama can still veto most bills. The difference is that they will see the light of day instead of the President getting on his high horse trying to blame Republicans. Republicans will not have enough Senate votes to overcome most vetoes. What’s you problem with that?

        Also, I’m going to call you on Republicans being alone on military spending. A bill was just passed by an almost equal percentage of Republicans and Democrats to provide funding for anti-Assad rebels. It was a backhanded way of declaring war on Syria. Again, Democrats and Republicans supported it in equal measure. McCain is one of the few Senators who is more of a warmonger than Hillary. Tell me you won’t vote for Hillary.

      • Steve Brains

        BULLSHIT!

        He didn’t say the REDS were alone in militarizing the world. he SAID, that the R’s intentionally sabotaged bills to make the same lame campaign grist you have spewed 50 times in the last year. “Reid has 327 bills on HIS desk…” but the ones on Boehner’s desk are A) bipartisan and B) thing she AGREED to like immigration, the farm Bill, the Vets Bill, the Highway bill.

        it’s one thing to Spike the ball after a game, but SPIKING THE BALL before the game so no one can play is REALLY stupid.

      • strayaway

        What he wrote was, “almsot all the bills sitting on Reids desk included riders lowering taxes and destroying regulations…..and or increased military spending.”

        Neither did I write that he said, “REDS were alone in militarizing the world”. The bills referred to however came from the Republican dominated House. I went to lengths to say just what you are saying by way of example with the reference to anti-Assad funding.

        Your other point is that “R’s intentionally sabotaged bills to make the same lame campaign grist.” So what? Obama can just veto such bills. My point was to define the real obstructionists. Also, I used the 195 number based on March. I have also read claims of over 300 bills sitting on Reid’s obstructionist shelf but I chose to use the more conservative number. It is bad enough.

      • Burnavenger

        Let’s hope he repeals local gay marriage. State approved gay marriage should be abolished.

      • Steve Brains

        I think anyone who wants to marry a female, has to marry an man for 90 days first, Just to make SURE she’s not marrying a closet limpwrist.

      • regressive teaparty trash

        ^^^^^ burnavenger is a newly made TROLL profife^^as he was banished from these blogs before

      • Jacob Equal Citizen Leatherber

        Just HOW is my marriage to my husband hurting you? Oh that’s right, it ISN’T! Keep your nose out of business you don’t belong in and stop trying to regulate other people’s lives. Rather, work on yourself, because you are heartless. Love is love no matter how it comes. Heterosexuality is NOT the only way humans are wired, nor is it that way in the mammal kingdom we come from. Look at it this way: we take care of the unwanted babies you thrust out into the world. But go ahead and hide behind your internet facade, Troll.

      • Steve Brains

        YEP! AND if we changed the rules and ELIMINATED omnibus bills, we would have single purpose bills that either pass or don’t.

      • Steve Brains

        McConnell gets to set ALL NEW RULES, as does Boehner if the caucus let’s him back. I think they will pick McCarthy.

      • Jillz

        Didn’t they attach a rider about sanctions against Iran to a Veteran’s bill? Can someone help me to understand how a bill to support veterans at home requires a rider for sanctions against Iran??

      • Ronald Morrison

        Or one to repeal Obamacare to at least 52 other bills.

      • GL

        Because it takes three Iranian Sanctions, two Steel Ingots, and one Red Ribbon to craft one Veteran Benefit.

    • DavidD

      Harry Reid never shut the country down because he didn’t get legislation that didn’t suit him .The GOP had done that on now on numerous occasions and will do so again to obstruct the democratic process.

      • strayaway

        Like I think you meant to say, Harry Reid didn’t get exactly what he wanted. He didn’t want to compromise one bit and so allowed sequestration time to expire without even a counter offer. You should be happy though because now bills will make it to the President’s desk. He can pass them or suggest some specific changes to prevent vetoes, At least he doesn’t have to complain about bills being obstructed by Harry Reid anymore.

      • DavidD

        If you will refrain from putting words indicating a meaning never intended in my mouth I will show you the same respect.
        The bills you mentioned were written with the clear intent to sabotage the process not for any merit the bills might have contained.
        The GOP leadership have in public and in private advocated obstructing this president any way they can.
        Your scenerio is a political fabrication meant to blame so one else for your own behavior which is a common tactic.

      • strayaway

        The last budget bill offered by the Republican House had two principle provisions; to delay mandates for one year and to end the new tax on medical equipment. President went ahead and delayed the mandates on his own after Republicans capitulated. That leaves the tax on medical equipment as the main obstacle to having prevented a shutdown. Democrats didn’t even a counter offer. I don’t think that getting rid of a tax designed to be passed on to patients was too much to sacrifice or even negotiate on the part of Senate Democrats. Not wanting to negotiate and act by imperial fiat may have been one of the reasons there are now 55 Republican Senators and 56 maybe a month from now. Voters remember these things. Meanwhile, the President thinks he won the election and plans to make laws if Congress doesn’t obey his will.

      • DavidD

        The President was not running this last election but he did win in 08 beating Mc Cain and in 12 beating Romney.
        For the GOP to declare it has a mandate to do what ever it wants based on 18% of the electorate and record low approval ratings in congress is a ludicrous overeach.

      • strayaway

        I don’t think Republicans have a mandate either. If there was a mandate, it was instead that voters have had enough of Obama.

        “After the midterm elections that saw the Democratic Party suffer significant losses in Congress, a record-low 36% of Americans say they have a favorable opinion of the party, down six percentage points from before the elections. The Republican Party’s favorable rating, at 42%, is essentially unchanged from 40%. This marks the first time since September 2011 that the Republican Party has had a higher favorability rating than the Democratic Party.” -from the Nov. 12 Gallup article, “Democratic Party Favorable Rating Falls to Record Low”

  • Jaimo

    Dems are concluding they lost the elections because not enough people voted for them — and think this means they need not change. Good.

    Allen thinks it’s poignant to place a photo of two elderly white voters in the voting booth. Like it’s ok to make fun of them, and what their eventual deaths mean for the Republican Party. He can’t understand just how or why Dems lose elections. Very classic rationalization.

    • Steve Brains

      The sooner the BETTER. Soylent Green Meets COCOON!

  • Justin Barnes

    LOW turn out?? rethugs win….high turn out?? Democrats win….VOTE in the mid-terms….DAMMIT!!!

  • Guest

    The country VOTED for, and ELECTED Gore in 2000, yet Bush became President?! Tell me my vote counts again!!!!

    • Steve Brains

      It was the votes in Florida that did not count.

      • LummiLover

        and SCOTUS that gave the decision to GWBush

      • Steve Brains

        SCOTUS DID NOT HAVE the Constitutional authority to do so.

        An HONEST court would have ORDERED Florida to have a complete NEW election within 30 days.

        Completly new ballots, completely new machines. Borrow them from some honest state like Colorado if they have to, but THIS TIME, poll watchers from OUTSIDE Florida supervises the supervisors.

        An HONEST Governor would have RECUSED himself since his BROTHER was a candidate.

    • Brian

      Jeb rigged it, man.

  • Bobster Bissette

    Can we make voting mandatory? Is that possible?

    • Ronald Morrison

      most CIVILIZED and a lot of not-so-much countries require qualified people to vote.

  • Russ Klettke

    In what was probably more than $4 billion in election spending, it’s clear the intent had little to do with educating voters. So much negative — and provably false — advertising essentially turns off the least engaged among us. One can’t help but question SCOTUS’s contention that money-fueled “speech” is good for the democracy. Quite the opposite, it seems.

    • Steve Brains

      One can’t help questioning SCOTUS’ INTENTION by minimizing the “voice’ of the people who need representation the MOST!

      With lobbying NOT an option for HUMAN VOTERS, but ONLY for Corporations, Corporations, who BY LAW have NO VOTE in any election, should have ZERO VOICE in a government BY the people FOR the people and OF the people!

  • sockbunny08

    That is the only reason Dems lost, as usual. Turnout.

    • Laurissa Graves

      Sockbunny….Voter turn out?…Umm ya
      You lost because Americans do not support Obama’s policy’s and were fed up with being lied to by the current administration which could no longer be trusted.

      • GL

        Then why is it that whenever there was an initiative that the President supports up for vote, it won handily?

      • Laurissa Graves

        You mean such as Obamacare without 1 Republican voting for it or Executive order Amnesty?

      • GL

        I mean such as ballot initiatives for things like raising the minimum wage.

      • sockbunny08

        No idiot. Lowest turnout since 1942, during WWII. Just keep fooling yourself with fairytales, tool.

      • Laurissa Graves

        Sockbunny….So where was everyone? The Republicans showed up and kicked your ass!
        Yes, no one from your side showed up to support Obama’s Failed Policy’s and you lost and as Obama himself famously said, …”Elections have consequences.”…

  • Laurissa Graves

    Right off a cliff….”These are feelings that are directly related to the unprecedented gridlock we’ve seen in Congress since 2010. And that is the fault of the Republican party”…

    ——
    If the problem was the Republicans as you say, then why have they been elected Twice to replace the Dems?

    • Hunter S. Thompson

      Did you see the voter turnout of about 34%? Anyone who won their election still lost to the majority of voters in their voting district. If I win with 18% of the votes did I really win to a majority or the population? This election just showed how much our 2 party system doesn’t work! A lot of people think “why should I vote if they are both corrupt and don’t care about me?” And why is there money allowed in politics? Why should it be the person with the most money has the better chance of winning? Shouldn’t it be the person with the best message for me is who I vote for, not the loudest?

    • miketothad

      “Gerrymandering” and Citizens United, moron.

      • Laurissa Graves

        miketothad So Name calling is your response?…lol

      • GL

        No, his response is that gerrymandering plays a major part in the recent Republican victories. The name-calling is just a symptom of impatience.

      • Laurissa Graves

        GL….Thanks for the clarification.

  • Twicker

    But in Kansas, we could have gotten rid of Brownback. And now we’re facing bankruptcy with the person who engineered it at the helm.

  • npeben

    We have all mail ballots in Oregon. Our voter turnout this election was nearly 70%. We are mailed ballot and materials a month in advance so we have plenty of time to look at the issues and research while we fill it out. It is awesome! Seems like it may be more economical too — no polling places to run, no electronic machines to hack.

  • Damien LeGallienne

    It doesn’t matter if 20 people showed up to vote. The results of the election came out almost exactly as they were predicted. Even if that weren’t true, it would still mean that Republicans are better citizens — they showed up to vote. Democrats cannot accept reality, They’re like children who act out. They seem to have some kind of arrested development. Liberalism is truly a mental illness.

    • miketothad

      LOL
      50% of the “death panels” GOP base doesn’t even know what GOP means.
      “Conservatism” runs on civic ignorance. Don’t flatter yourself, Jethro.

  • Dane

    They were able to gerrymander districts because people didn’t turn out to vote in 2010, and the republicans took over many statehouses, as well as the congress, and in many states the party in power draws the districts, (this happens in any year that ends in a 0,aka a census year)which should be drawn but an independent, non partisan agency, like is done in calif, and Washington,but the republicans gerrymandered the districts in this states making it almost impossible to vote them out,

  • poppaDavid

    I ran the numbers last night on the nationwide Senate votes, and Independents Senate candidates received 3.3% of the votes cast. Democrats received 46.1%, and Republican Senate candidates received 50.6% of the votes cast.

    It means that Republicans DO represent the slim majority of those who voted. But, in all honesty, 0.6% over half the votes isn’t a mandate. And getting beat by 4.5% isn’t a “shut out”.

    The fact that 46.1% of the votes doesn’t give you shit in the House says more about the failure of the “one man, one vote” principle than anything else.

  • Allison Moss-Fritch

    No ayes and nays…make every vote a head count. That makes a FULL record of the idiotic things they will pass. That means they (the Repubs) won’t be able to blame their activities on ANY of the opposing members. That should help those folks who throw up their hands and say” I’m hating everyone”…or, “they are all alike”…(hardly!)

  • Jim Bean

    If there is anything humiliating here, I would say its the Left’s argument that the people most likely to vote Democrat were too stupid and lazy to show up. A reasoning person would think, ‘Well, that’s probably beneficial to the nation as a whole.’

  • Claire Schuler

    To be fair, even though I voted, I think voter turnout sucked partially because we (cause I am SURE I am not alone in this) got bombarded with parties asking for money. BEGGING for people to vote.(and give money) It sure pissed me off. I think they should do like the census and STOP these career politicians. It is ridiculous.

  • Tim Ray

    Please cite the gerrymandering data for a Republican house. That is an opinion without any data backing it up. I am positive there was gerrymandering after the 2010 Census, always is, but that does not lead to any different causality then any other election after a census.

  • Sandra Brown Ryan

    Register to Vote in 2016…..NOW!

  • manofthewoods

    Given all the efforts at voter suppression, the Republicans are very happy that many people didn’t vote.

  • Macdoodle

    Poor liberals still trying to put a positive spin on their bitter defeat.

  • Jay Silla

    It’s incorrect to say that two thirds had no voice. They had a voice, and chose not to use it. And while I’m still looking for hard numbers, it’s evident that turnout was far lower among Democrats than it was for Republicans. This had been predicted for months. Perhaps it’s because President Obama was not on the ballot, and perhaps more than a few people have decided that little can be accomplished so long as he remains in office.

  • Steve Mitchell

    The Republicans were cheating again. Bribing people outside the polls to vote conservative $100 a head, throwing away ballots in liberal areas. The traitors did not win this election legally, I know that for sure.

  • ThomasCampbell

    So, as far as I can tell, this whole site isn’t actually about reporting
    “news”; it’s just “reporting” about Conservatives, so they can piss off
    liberals and continue to sew divisiveness in America. Or am I missing
    something here?
    Just about every article listed is about either the
    GOP or some other conservative issue. Where’s the part that’s supposed
    to be about going Forward and being “Progressive”? it all seems to be
    just a hodgepodge of creative conservative-bashing–basically, a rehash
    of all the negative campaign ads I saw during the recent election
    madness..

  • Jreach

    I get that people want to blame the opposition for everything, but we have to ask ourselves what happened in a completely democrat senate with a democrat in the white house in 2008? The answer is not a whole lot. Health Care was clearly saved for reelection year. I agree that the republicans are the primary halters of progress, but there’s more going on here than what this article states.

  • Kevin Daugherty

    While I understand some voting requirements are restrictive, it is the voter’s responsibility to meet the requirements until those rules are changed. And apathy never solved anything.

  • Puppyme1

    Democrats B like… Whaaaaaaaaaa! Liberals freaking out in 3.2.1.

  • C64

    Make voting mandatory. Simple.

  • devildog21

    Low voter turnout is exactly what republicans count on to be successful. It’s why they have introduced voter suppression laws in every state in which they have complete control of the government. Only republicans see voter suppression as having anything to do with fixing a non-existent voter fraud problem.

  • Kelly Lape

    As long as Democrats keep running as “We’re not Democrats either” then the Democratic party will continue to lose.

    When Democratic candidates “man-up” and say “Yes I voted for Obama” and here’s why – we will win again.

    Thanks to poor candidates who ran from the President and his success we deserved to lose.

  • nichole

    If colleges were able to register kids for voting, and if they had actual areas to vote on campus, more of us would do it. Sadly, I would have had to go to the other side of town to register (I’m in a town without a reliable bus network, and no one I know has a car), then go to the opposite end of town to vote at the only voting place they have. It’s ridiculous!
    I want to vote. Most people I know want to vote. Most people I know currently live on campus with no way to get to the registration office or the voting booths. Give us a place on campus to do both and you’ll see the biggest turn out of college aged kids in the history of this country.