Thread by @BlueSteelDC

Leftier than thou- Lie

You have to be really to the left to inspire our side to come out to vote.

Fact

In Recent elections in NY and Delaware turnout rose sharply- causing landslide wins for the establishment candidates

This was always a lie because it presupposes that the left is only 1 type of voter motivated by 1 type of candidate.

In reality the left is a range of voters including 13% of those who consider themselves “ Conservative Democrats” Another 38% see themselves as moderate

A lot of Our Revolution and Justice Democrats purpose is to challenge the purity of candidates.

But as demonstrated a good 51% and a larger percent of the population don’t see being moderate or having complex views as a bad thing. Worse for Leftier, these voters are consistent

Voters who tell us they need inspiration to vote or describe voting in idealogical terms are just not likely to show up.

Remember Sanders lost state and precincts were college towns were nearby.

Voting is a duty of every citizen. These voters see it as optional.

Voters who need inspiration of this type change support.

In one year Ron Paul was inspirational the next year Bernie Sanders is. This is about personally types they find authentic

This year Sanders is polling poorly in this category.

The less likely you understand how voting impacts the way the world is governed the less likely that person is to vote.

Jill Stein got less than 1% of vote in the last election. Rhetoric of telling people it’s rigged affects turnout, even for you. @GreenPartyUS

It is the height of contradiction to say it’s rigged and then ask people for their vote.

If it’s rigged how would voting matter. Ppl who believe its rigged don’t vote.

I am looking at you Elizabeth Warren!

It’s really not helpful.

The reality voter turnout seems to hinge on:

1. Access: Making it as easy to vote
2. Competition

( I worked for an elected official who would get excited for competition. Often her support would rise.)

2.B The media’s take - No one thought DT could win, and said it.

In reality, the outlook that people are becoming more liberal needs a serious asterisk.

It’s often true nationally and on SOME issues. Ironically the clear liberalism is on identity based issues.

More Americans don’t see policing other people’s behaviors as their business

But when you burrow down into the states and even into some counties. It can have very different picture.

James Carville once called Pennsylvania, Philly and Pittsburgh on the ends with Alabama in the middle.

You also have to watch the # of registration you have in a state

It would interest the ppl peddling Democrats can run to the left in any District to know that

Republicans sometimes have a statewide registration advantage.

In some cases we still have a potential to overcome that in 1 of 2 ways swing voters or new registrations.

Swing voters despite what Berner believe tend to skew conservative.

The fact some independents voted for Bernie in the primary seems to give an impression independents are liberal.

Pump your breaks on that. That break for Bernie didn’t start to happen until he was losing.

And a lot of the exit polls in Indiana and West Virginia show that more of this vote was anti Clinton and not pro Bernie.

In a real election with large sets of swingy independents in play Conservatives Dems like JIm Webb are really more their speed.

The other option for Dems running in a state with an advantage in R registrations is to mine your demographic advantage if you have one.

Both Beto and Stacy Abrams are in Red states that are changing demographically

Mining your demographics and creating new voters is a long an expensive process.

New residents to a place typically don’t start voting the minute they move. My estimate is 3 yrs. And they need more reminders to vote.

Creating new voters is an expensive and arduous process for any campaign.

But maybe the only path in some places for Dems to win. It’s a tricky path and an expensive one. The number of contacts w/ these voters you need to boast turnout is HIGH

So when we are looking at the Map and trying to win and some Democrat who won her District in a low turnout race says she knows how we can win everywhere just be really liberal.

She knows nothing.

But media reports this “discovery” as brilliant. Looking at you @billmaher

People are different and don’t all want the same type of thing- even when they have general agreement.

We both may need a vehicle. That we agree but I get a Prius and you get a pick-up truck.

We both yell - I am thirst. You want a beer and I really want tea.

Berners have been famous in these last couple years of citing polls where there is general agreement but saying that means support for their specific solution.

And when you treat data - like it can be manipulated- reality has the final world. Ie Blow out losses.

Universal healthcare has broad support

Being fair in the immigration process has broad agreement

Background checks in gun purchases has broad bipartisan agreement

Being specific on an approach that is only a slogan and has no clear plan is to throw your campaign in the trash

Thanks for reading this thread.

It really bothered us past and current operatives that the political pundit types kept perpetuating myths on how campaigns worked.

Campaigns are people and data driven. And the set of circumstances aren’t alike to call it from one location.

Citation and supporting data for the thread

When you say voting doesn’t matter it suppresses turnout
npr.org/2018/09/10/645…

Citation:

Young voters and the authenticity trap.

Young voters tend to value authenticity over even policy.

By measuring unfilteredness as authentic even when they shouldn’t these politicians are more prone lying.

mitsloan.mit.edu/newsroom/artic…