Is that you Rahm?

the reason the Democratic base "collapsed" was because this wasn't a national election and they just didn't care. In the daya and weeks before this election, I didn't see anyone talking about in my age group, and I live in New Jersey. No one cared, the World Series is on, it's Football season, whatever.

I think we need to stop overanalyzing...The Democrats almost never led in either governor's race, and they actually won the damn race Upstate. Oh, and did we fail to mention how Bloomberg was nearly defeated?

And if it is true, that only true progressive causes bring out Democratic voters, explain Maine kos.

I smell Rahm's greasy presence here

Unless Markos is saying that he himself didn't bother to vote, it sounds like he's just making empirical statements to me.

The fact that you get more votes if you energize your base, and you get fewer votes if you don't, is just reality and I sure hope no one denies it.

You can rant and rave all you want about how "well, if that's how the base behaves, then the base sucks!" but successful politicians figure out how to prevail given the realities of human behavior.  There's a reason we spend millions of dollars on this thing called GOTV.

I live in one of the most Democratic counties in New Jersey.  A year ago I had to wait an hour in line to vote for Barack Obama.  This year it was literally just me and some old lady.  That's a problem.  It's not Obama's fault, but it sure becomes a problem for him if the same thing happens for the midterms next year.

OK I may be stepping into something I should just stay away from, but . . . when has that ever stopped me before.

NJ Corzine was in trouble even with his base. I don't think any amount of outreach could have saved him in the long run.

And Deeds good grief could anybody have run a worse campaign.

If this is a referendum on anything I agree with Kos run better candidates. Where I might disagree - this doesn't mean more progressive or more moderate just better candidates. Democratic candidates that can not only appeal too your based in your district or your state, but a large enough swath of indies to get elected. Deeds nor Corzine were not this candidate.

Markos has consistently been in touch with the democratic electorate and progressive movement.

There is a reason why he is called to be on Meet the Press while other democratic bloggers... have not.

That said, he was just speaking empirically.

How are you defining "the base"?  I have not had time to follow any of the analysis of yesterday's results (and frankly find most of what is said in the media to be facile and irrelevant), so perhaps I am missing something.  But I would expect it is the people who could not get energized to vote for the Dem candidate as the ones who disappointed.  I wouldn't tend to think of these people as the base at all.

You have placed me in the unpleasant position of having to defend Markos.  If he is to be considered an activist, I think the use of threats (see, this is what will happen if you don't move to the left) is completely appropriate.  The republican party had its ascendancy because it listened to the conservatives, who brought along the votes.  I think the same approach is needed from the left.  Make demands, cut off heads, use your power.  That is how you build a movement.  The repubs. collapsed because of their values, not their methods (well, excluding their illegal methods).

by two things: rage over 8 years of Bush/Cheney, and Obama novelty.  Nothing is going to bring that back.  Not passing a single-payer health-care bill, not pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan and closing Gitmo tomorrow, not anything.  Pols should strategize accordingly.

"The president's restrained approach is ultimately an encouraging trait for the leader of "a nation that prefers passion to reason," writes Jazzcomedian. "Since 1968 we've elected a crook (Nixon), a politically incompetent humanitarian (Carter), an amiable dunce (Reagan), a mediocre patrician (Bush 41), a gifted, good hearted philanderer (Clinton), and the trifecta, a neo-con, amiable, dunce (Bush 43). Now we have President Obama who I view as intelligent, hardworking, and pragmatic with a genuine interest in the working and middle class."

Call me a cheerleader. I remember Eisenhower and was raised the son of news-addicted died-in-the-wool Liberal Democrats. I was weaned on this shit. Jazzcomedian nailed it, and if you live long enough you'll call these the good old days. Don't let yourself regret that you didn't bask in the joy of this moment. The chances of living long enough to see another are slim.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/04 /huffpost-readers-judge-ob_n_344082.html &cp

Like other netroots bigwigs, Kos thought he invented something in 2006 and 2008. He was playing with the wind at his back. Not exactly complicated. I stood on the 16th tee today knowing I could hit driver, 3 wood, 5 wood, hybrid, long iron, anything. Then on 17, playing in the opposite direction, I couldn't get there with my two best pokes.

No different in politics. Situational influence is never properly weighted. The guys who left this site to start the other one a couple of years ago likewise didn't want to believe all their energy and syllables were artificially floated by the climate. Kind of amusing, actually.

Post-1992 I sensed that Democrats had no energy, since the White House had been the elusive goal for more than a decade. It's similar this time, other than Bush and Iraq provided such a frenzied boost that we had two downwind cycles, with congress the first target, followed by the presidency, once the situational benefit was ours. We were never going to defeat an incumbent with his party in power only one term, Bush's situation in 2004.

This stuff is easily evaluated years in advance. In 2012 we'll be fine, with the incumbent/one term factor benefiting Obama, along with the demographic shift, down to 73 or 74% whites in the electorate. But next year we'll only pretend to care, kind of like sporting teams that say all the right things but simply don't need the game as much as their opponent. It's going to be a loss, regardless of anything Obama does in the next year. I hope we can save as many governorships as possible, because the only way the GOP can survive the negative demographic tilt is to fortify their bench with as many prominent and nationally electable governors as possible We downplay the governor races at our own peril.

His point is pretty simple: look at the demographics that did not show up. Even with Corizine, look at where they did not show up even compared to Corzine's prior run (and not just last year). That tells us what we need to know about what's happening. That there is a base problem. They are not showing up. If some estimates are right, no more  Republicans showed up than usual. What was unusual was the lack of Democrats in enough percentages to matter in Virginia and NJ.

I didn't realize that November 4th was Must Be Bitch On Kos Day.

Every ballot needs to be a choice between a Palin-style Republican and a Kucinich-style Democrat. We need to get away from this namby pamby middle ground and force the independents to choose a side once and for all.

Deal with it. Well, unless you scare the hell out of 'em about how scary and monstrous the Republicans are compared to the Democrats. More and more people aren't going to buy that unless the Democrats, including Obama, achieve some noticeable leftist, progressive victories. Don't see them. Sorry, the Lily Ledbetter and Hate Crimes legislation ain't gonna get the job done.

Deal with it instead of whining about the base and Kos, who's just presenting what happened, that the base didn't show up.