Google Ads


Site Stats

SSP Daily Digest: 12/8

by: Crisitunity

Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 2:39 PM EST


CT-Sen: Following his loss in the CT-Gov primary after leading the polls almost all the way, I hadn't heard much discussion about Ned Lamont making a repeat run against Joe Lieberman for the 2012 Senate race. Lamont confirms that, saying he's "strongly disinclined" to try again.

FL-Sen: Here's a dilemma for temp Sen. George LeMieux, as he gave his farewell speech from the Senate floor. Acknowledge the man without whom he'd be utterly unknown and thus not in a position to run again for Senate in 2012... or invoke said man, whose name is utterly mud in Florida GOP circles, thus reminding everyone of those connections that can only hurt in a 2012 primary? In the end, basic human decency prevailed, and LeMieux thanked Charlie Crist for appointing him.

ME-Sen: This is pretty big news, as everyone has been treating newly-elected Gov. Paul LePage's imprimatur as a make or break for Olympia Snowe's hopes in a GOP primary in 2012. LePage, of course, was the tea party choice in the primary, and his say-so would go a long way toward either encouraging or discouraging a teabagger challenge to Snowe. LePage just came out with a statement of support for Snowe in the primary, saying he'd back her in the face of a possible primary challenge.

MO-Sen: Sarah Steelman continues to rack up support from the GOP's far-right, as she girds for a possible GOP primary showdown against ex-Sen. Jim Talent. Steelman met with Jim DeMint, the Senate's de facto kingmaker of the tea party set, and those involved expect DeMint's Senate Conservative Fund to back Steelman shortly (which would be his first endorsement of the 2012 cycle).

PA-Sen: Moran gets brain? Perhaps sensing the steep uphill climb of a challenge against the Casey name brand in Pennsylvania in a presidential year, random rich guy John Moran has done an about-face on a threatened possible Senate run that first emerged last week. Another central Pennsylvanian, though, state Sen. Jake Corman, seems to be interested in taking on Bob Casey Jr.

UT-Sen: In case there was any doubt about Orrin Hatch running again -- in his 70s and facing a likely difficult primary/convention -- well, he is. He released a statement this morning saying "I intend to run, and I intend to win." That comes in the face of the formation of a new leadership PAC by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, which would likely point to stepped-up fundraising efforts in the face of a intra-party challenge. (Hatch is sitting on $2.32 million CoH, while Chaffetz has $179K. If the targeted audience isn't all Utahns but a few thousand nuts at the state convention, though, money is less of an issue.)

IN-Gov: Soon-to-be-ex-Sen. Evan Bayh is issuing something of a timeline regarding whether or not he runs for his old job as Governor again in 2012. Bayh says he'll make a decision by the end of the year, and is saying it's a "possibility but [not] a probability." (Rep. Baron Hill and Evansville mayor Jonathan Weinzapfel are other fallback options.)There's no timeline, though, from Rep. Mike Pence, who probably would be the strongest candidate the GOP could put forth, but seems more interested in going straight for the Presidency. One GOPer who isn't waiting for Pence's decision is Lt. Gov. Becky Skillman, who has moved forward on fundraising although she hasn't officially declared anything. Soon-to-be-Rep. Todd Rokita warns not to underestimate Skillman.

MN-Gov: This is kind of a moot point in view of his concession this morning, but in case you're wondering what suddenly motivated Tom Emmer to drop his challenge to Mark Dayton and move on, this was probably the last straw: yesterday the Minnesota Supreme Court denied his petition asking for all counties to perform a reconciliation of number of voters with number of ballots cast. With the recount already done, the reconciliation would have been the only practical way of even stringing this thing out for a while longer, let alone finding an extra 9,000 votes.

MO-Gov: In marked contrast to the recent PPP poll giving Jay Nixon a clear edge, Republican Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder (now looking more like a candidate than ever) is pointing to an internal poll by American Viewpoint taken way back in late September that gives him a 47-38 lead over Nixon. The poll finds Nixon still popular, though, with 51% approval.

ND-Gov: Today was the first day on the job for North Dakota's new Governor, ex-Lt. Gov. Jack Dalrymple, who took over as John Hoeven resigned in order to join the Senate soon. Hoeven is the first-ever North Dakota Governor to resign voluntarily. Taking over as Lt. Gov. is ex-US Attorney Drew Wrigley. Dalrymple will be watched carefully as to what happens in 2012: he could either run for election to a full term, or move over to a Senate run against Kent Conrad.

MN-08: Newly-elected Rep. Chip Cravaack will have one of the tougher re-elects of any of the new House Republicans (he's in a D+3 district that includes the Dem stronghold of Duluth), but one of the bigger-name Dems in the district is saying he won't be the challenger. State Sen. Tom Bakk (one of the 5,589,358,587,568,120 people who ran for the DFL gubernatorial nomination this year) is staying where he is, especially since he's about to become minority leader.

GA-St. House: One more D-to-R party switcher to report, and it's a fairly big name within the confines of the Georgia legislature: Doug McKillip, who was previously #2 among Democrats. Interestingly, he's not from a dark-red rural district but represents the college town of Athens, and he says he'll be better able to agitate for the University's needs from within the majority... although, that, of course, would depend on getting re-elected again from that (presumably blue) district.

Crisitunity :: SSP Daily Digest: 12/8
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Not surprised
By LePage's actions. He and the Snowe's go way back, with her husband helping him get into college by pulling some strings for him to take the entrance exam in French.  

It still won't stop
her from being targeted.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Could the endorsement hurt her with
with moderates/independents/Democrats?

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

[ Parent ]
It depends.
If he campaigns for her, then maybe.  If he doesn't and this is just a verbal endorsement, then probably not.  Remember, LePage is an accidental governor who would not have been elected if it had not been for the split field against him.  He's also a massive jerk who thinks that if 35 states sues against a law, then it is automatically nullified.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Not necessarily
It's not like Susan Collins's backing of McCain/Palin cost her support among moderate Democrats and Independents in '08. On the whole, I think this is of tremendous help to Snowe. Yes, she'll garner Tea Party challenges, but not necessarily formidable ones. Her worst cast scenario is going toe-to-toe with only one primary challenger, allowing the Tea Party crowd to run-up the vote on a single candidate. As it stands, I bet she gets 3 or more nominal challengers and wins over 50% in the primary.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
The tea party
is supposedly in talks to get 1 strong challenger in.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
MN-8
I have been trying to read the tealeaves about this race since the day after the election. Bakk taking over as Minority Leader is a strange decision, IMO. I didn't hear if current Majority Leader Pogemiller ran for leadership again or not. If he hd, and Bakk beat him out, that really says something about Pogemiller (Who was actually my state senator while in college). Tony Sertich, the current House Majority Leader did not run for a leadership position of any kind, however. That is a HUGE signal that he wants Oberstar's old seat. I had known for several years (I was a staffer for a Sertich ally a couple years ago) that Sertich was eying the seat, and I truly believe that 2012 will be his year, unless the maps are grossly drawn by the courts, and combine's Peterson with the Iron Range.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."


That is something
that probably won't happen unless the state loses a seat. Otherwise, it will probably just spread out a little further and take in St. Cloud.  

[ Parent ]
Sertich could beat Peterson in a primary....
... if the district included all the Iron Range. Not sure Sertich would go that route but if he did he would have at least a 50/50 chance IMO.

"Where free Unions and collective bargaining is forbidden, freedom is lost." - Ronald Reagan

[ Parent ]
I honestly don't want to see that.
In the unlikely, and unfortunate situation where they cede some form of central/rural district to Cravaack, and combine northern Minnesota I don't see them both running. Either Peterson would retire, or Sertich would wait until he does. Remember, Sertich is only 34.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."


[ Parent ]
OH-Sen
Are there any rumors out there about who is going to run against Sherrod Brown in '12?  

33, male, Dem, OH-13

I've seen Rep. Jim Jordan's name mentioned
NT

[ Parent ]
Jim Jordan is tops
Then comes Lt-Gov elect Mary Taylor, Rep. Steve LaTourette, and then SoS-Elect Jon Husted.  

[ Parent ]
Jordan.
Now that Jordan just received a leadership post in the House (Republican Study Committee), isn't that a signal that he isn't likely to run for Senate?

20, Democrat, Male, MI-06 (Home), MI-02 (College)

[ Parent ]
No
RSC is not a real leadership post. In fact, they sometimes oppose the leadership. Its nothing that would get in the way of a Senate run, and, if anything, it helps him strengthen his cred with tea baggers, so he makes it through the primary unchallenged. (Not that I think he was worried about that. OH seems to be a weaker tea bag state, with all the establishment picks getting through their primaries in House, Sen, Gov, and statewide races)  

[ Parent ]
Off
topic but do tea partiers often call themselves tea baggers? I have some friends who do, but kind of jokingly, you know like when fat people make fun of themselves. I've always wondered.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
Not many
Probabl y less than 1% do.  

[ Parent ]
So
most find it offensive?  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
They originally called themselves that
but then they realized it has another meaning.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
how do you not realize that?
I understand how the average person might not get it, but I got an e-mail about a year and a half ago from the RNC (i subscribe to most e-mail lists for info) telling to to help tea-bag Joe Biden!  One, i don't want him anywhere near that part of me!  two, how can there not be one intern there who knows what teabagger means?

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.

[ Parent ]
It was a major part of a comedy routine we saw in Tahoe last month
And clearly, most of the audience realized the non-polite meaning of the verb "to teabag" for the first time.

(The comedy routine involved some suggestive physical representations of the action.)


[ Parent ]
I <3 Tahoe!
Such a beautiful place!

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Keep in mind that we're talking about
old white people here.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
Our newest governors...
Gov. Jack Dalrymple of North Dakota, Gov. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, and Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin of West Virginia, in ascending order of seniority, have all been sworn in over the past few weeks. Aloha.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

People say that
now that we have a Dem gov, they can pass civil unions.  I say they go all the way and codify marriage equality there, especially with the Dems have State Leg. majorities so lopsided.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Do they have enough votes for full
Marriage Equality?  

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

[ Parent ]
Not sure...
They didn't have enough votes to override then-Gov. Lingle's veto of a same-sex civil unions bill, but Democrats actually made modest gains in the state legislature this year in addition to electing now-Gov. Abercrombie. (The only major seat that flipped to the Republicans was the mayoralty of Maui County.)

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

[ Parent ]
There
are a lot of socially conservative dems. I read somewhere (I'll try and find you a link) that there are many dems who are just dems because they don't want to be in the very low minority. Do not know whether full marriage could get passed, but even if it did Ab opposes it so it probably won't happen.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
If it does pass has he said he would
veto it?

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

[ Parent ]
Abercrombie Supports Full Equality
Neil Abercrombie has been pretty vocal in his support of marriage equality. His HRC score is 100% and he hammered Mufi Hanneman in the primary over the issue. From what I understand, Abercrombie's support for civil unions is strategic: full marriage equality probably can't pass the Legislature, but civil unions can.

And who wants to bet that openly-gay House Majority Leader Blake Oshiro can muster the votes to get it through that chamber? And with a 24-1 giganto-super-majority in the state Senate, a bunch of Dems can defect and the bill would still pass. Aloha civil rights!

http://wglb-tv.blogspot.com/20...

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.


[ Parent ]
Are you serious?
A 24-1 majority in the State Senate? That is utterly ridiculous. That's crazy strong.  

[ Parent ]
Incredible...
I had no idea there was only one Republican in the Hawaii Senate. It's the only legislative body in the country where a major party only has one member. Sam Slom is majority leader, policy leader, floor leader, and on every committee, which, according to Wikipedia, is a physically impossible task.

More info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

NY-01/NY-19


[ Parent ]
And!
There's only one Republican in the Hawaii Senate... and he's a 68-year-old Jewish divorcee from Pennsylvania. I'm not sure exactly why, but this made me smile for America.

Hawaii Democrats mostly chose the pro-equality candidates when they had the choice and neither did the general electorate turf many gay allies. Abercrombie over Hanneman & Aiona. Majority Leader Blake Oshiro, in his first re-election battle since coming out, defeated strong challenges from social conservatives in both his primary and general re-election battles. In his race for a third term, the other openly-LGBT rep, former Green Party member Joe Bertram, won a three-way primary with 44%, but lost the general by 172 votes (that's a 51.5%-48.5% margin). That's actually pretty good in view of this nugget in the election results story from the Honolulu Star-Advertiser:

Bertram faced criticism last year for defending a friend convicted of Internet enticement of a minor. Bertram's remarks that the enticement statute penalized "imaginary crime" became a campaign issue.

D'oh. Bad. Bad Bertram. Still, we're up 43-8 in the Hawaii House. And let's not forget America's most powerful transgendered politician, Kim Coco Iwamoto.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K...

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.


[ Parent ]
Hmm....
I remember hearing that he supports civil unions but not full marriage equality. Mufi supported neither. See the link below. He may end up signing it into law if it actually made it to his desk, IDK, I hope so. Though the link doesn't give me confidence.  
http://www.staradvertiser.com/...

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
Oh
and the mayoralty of Maui County went Indy actually. The winner was a former Republican but a pretty liberal one, kind of like Lincoln Chafee.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
Ha, that's good
Anyone who pokes the GOP in the eye is a friend of mine.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

[ Parent ]
I bet the entire Senate GOP Caucus votes no.
He said so himself. LOL

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."


[ Parent ]
Obstructionist.


Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
Is Hawaii the only state?
That swears in new Governors (absent a special election) in December of the election year?  I always thought Jan 1 was the earliest.  Four weeks of transition is all you get there apparently!

[ Parent ]
I think Alaska does it in December too


21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



[ Parent ]
Yep: Alaska did it on December 6
http://kcaw.org/modules/local_...

21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



[ Parent ]
yup
And I LIVED there!  But in my defense, it was when the Frank/Lisa Murkowski Senate/Governor/Senate  dance was happening, so I didn't even realize it.

[ Parent ]
Ha
You think that's bad? Indiana state reps take office the day after the election.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
That is fast
I suppose they don't give elected officials much more time than that in most Westminster systems, though. I remember then-Prime Minister Gordon Brown had to move his stuff out of 10-11 Downing Street in a jiffy after the Conservatives won the right to form a government earlier this year.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

[ Parent ]
LA-State Sen: 2 top Dems switch parties
2 top Democrats have switched to the Republican party in La. One is former Democratic state house speaker and state senator John Alario, considered the father of the modern Dem party in LA. His move is entirely politically motivated. He plans on running for Senate president in 2012 (A position appointed by Jindal, and Jindal would be unlikely to appoint a D Sen pres if Reps control the Sen). The other is state Sen. John Smith. Dems now control the senate 20-18, with 1 vacancy that is likely to go Republican in January. Then the Senate would be 20-19, and there are likely to be more defections, especially now that Alario has switched. http://www.nola.com/politics/i...

thanks for the reminder
that it could be worse. I would hate to be a southern Democrat, where this kind of stuff happens so often. At least I've heard no chatter at all about Iowa Senate Dems defecting.

[ Parent ]
I don't recall any party defections at all, either way, by Iowa political figures in my lifetime......
Every elected official in Iowa I can think of in my lifetime remained a member of the same party in which s/he first ran for office.  I can't even think of a state legislator or local official who switched, or at least made any news in doing so.

I switched myself twice my early years as a voter, from Indy on my 18th birthday in the 1986 cycle, to Republican during the 1988 cycle, and then to Democrat in August 1989.  I'm sure there are, and long have been, plenty of native Iowans like me, private citizens who needed times to find their political identities and then decide where they best fit.  But I don't know of anyone who entered politics as a candidate and later flipped.

That's life in a purple state where either party can take over at any given time, and party control of either state legislative chamber or U.S. House seats or the Governorship flip regularly.  There's no mileage in switching parties.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
I know of a few Republicans
who (after they were out of politics) switched their party affiliations. One is former State Representative Julia Gentleman. She is very pro-choice.

Ed Campbell was a college Republican before going to work for Governor Harold Hughes in the 60s. Campbell later worked for Senator John Culver and served as chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party, but I don't know if he counts as a party-switcher, because he never held elected office.

Chet Culver's final campaign manager, Donn Stanley, was a college Republican in the 1970s, but he left the party very soon after they added the pro-life plank to the platform, which I think was around 1980.  


[ Parent ]
None of those "count" in my book, and Campbell is the same as me......
I was not only a registered Republican but an active College Republican at Iowa State.  I campaigned for Bob Dole in the in the 1988 Iowa Caucuses.  I even bussed up to Minneapolis to phonebank for Dole for the Minnesota Caucuses.  All this while I always was uncomfortable with Ronald Reagan and openly found myself disliking quite a bit of what was in the GOP.

So I switched relatively quickly, at the start of my senior year.  I was volunteering for Harvey Gantt in the 1990 NC Senate race just months after starting law school at Duke.

So a switch by Ed Campbell after his college days is underwhelming.  Millions of people switch parties like that, when they're still "finding" their place in the political world.

To me, a truly significant party switch is switching when you've got something to lose.  And that means you're an elected official still in the game, or a party official or appointed public official who is in a position to take flack.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
I like how in the article...
He just states directly that he wants to be the State Senate president, so he switched. As they say, honesty is a virtue.

20, Democrat, Male, MI-06 (Home), MI-02 (College)

[ Parent ]
I am positively shocked
that there is self-promotion in politics!

In all honesty, this is Louisiana being Louisiana. Since there is no obvious way that giving Republicans more power there will make any difference whatsoever, I really can't get too excited.

 


[ Parent ]
Haha yeah
He doesn't mince his words. Everyone knew of his ambition, and he was historically one of the most liberal white members of the leg, so it was obvious this was a political move. I have to wonder though, will he get the chance to be President? Republicans have never liked him, and this switch has not changed that. There are many Republican state Reps in his district that could probably beat him. Also, is Jindal likely to pick Blanco's former Speaker to be his Senate President, or will he pick a loyal ally, Sen. Mike Michot, who is also interested? I wonder though, if the Senate does switch before the fall elections (one more switch+win in Jan special election), would he ask President Joel Chaisson (D) to step down and replace him with a Rep? When the House switched, it already had a Republican speaker. The senate does not.  

[ Parent ]
Some context.
You say he was one of the more liberal white Democrats in the Louisiana legislator, but what kind of district is he from? A suburban district that went Republican all the way back in the 50's? A yellow dog rural district that was willing to elect populist Democrats to a certain point? Because maybe its just his survival instinct kicking in, though it sounds like he's deluded enough to think all he has to do is to switch parties to get what he wants.

20, Democrat, Male, MI-06 (Home), MI-02 (College)

[ Parent ]
He's from Jefferson Parish, which is suburban New Orleans
It's pretty Republican leaning but Mary Landrieu won it in 2008.  Not really Yellow-Dog territory like a lot of rural Louisiana was.

21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



[ Parent ]
Again - nothing unusual
Alario wasn't a liberal, but Smith is even more conservative. In fact - more conservative then some Republicans in Louisiana's legislature, and surely - one of the most conservative Democratic state Senators.

I hear about Noble Ellington's potential switch - and not surprised again. There is still about 10-12 conservative Democrats in Louisiana's legislature, who could easily switch without changing their voting records even a bit. And practically, coming mostly from districts, which go heavily republican in most races - that makes political sense. There are similar Democrats in Mississippi's legislature too, in Arkansas's, Alabama's (even after recent switches), few - in Georgia and some other Southern states. Democratic party in the South is mostly black/hispanic (in the Southwest). Plus - some urban and college white liberals. That's essentially, all...


[ Parent ]
where are they now? Iowa edition
Terry Branstad plans to appoint Rod Roberts to head the state Department of Inspections and Appeals. Roberts ran for governor and got 9 percent in the GOP primary. I believe he siphoned off votes from social conservatives who might otherwise have coalesced around Bob Vander Plaats. (Branstad got 50 percent, BVP 41 percent)

Branstad named BVP's campaign co-chair Jodi Tymeson to head the state Department of Veterans Affairs.

Vander Plaats has a new gig as head of The Family Leader, an umbrella political advocacy organization that includes the Iowa Family Policy Center. The IFPC seems to have let go a few longtime staffers to make room for Vander Plaats and his big salary.


Mississippi party switch: The Public Service Commissioner did it!
http://majorityinms.com/2010/1...

Like many predicted yesterday the party switcher in Mississippi was Public Service Commissioner Lynn Posey.

21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



Yep, just as predicted.
When AC1 posted it up without further comment, we feared it was Jim Hood.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
And here I thought that it was Colonel Mustard...
...in the study with the candlestick...

[ Parent ]
MI-Sen: PPP Stabenow Numbers (repost from yesterday's DD)
PPP has their numbers out for Debbie Stabenow, and she leads all Republican challengers but not overwhelmingly. The strongest GOP contender appears to be Candice Miller, who trails 43-41 but has +15 favorables. Terri Lynn Land also has good favorables but trails by 4. Pete Hoekstra, the likeliest candidate, actually does the best (trailing 45-44) but his favorables are -3.

Link: http://www.publicpolicypolling...

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08


Miller looks formidable
She's been out of statewide office for nearly 10 years, but still has relatively strong name ID and good fav ratings. She would also start out with nearly $1 million.  

[ Parent ]
Perhaps
But MI residents here are saying she's old news and faded away some.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Miller or Land?
I think Candace Miller is more likely to stay in the House, I'm hearing a lot more buzz about Terry Lynn Land being the other person in the primary with Hoekstra. I doubt there is room for both to run (too much identity overlap).

Stabenow is vulnerable and given the population loss in Detroit the GOP and Snyder's big win the GOP POTUS candidate will probably target the state (at least initially - along with Wisconsin), that means plenty of support from the NRSC too so this will be a hot ticket all the way to November.

"Earnestness is stupidity sent to college"
P. J. O'Rourke


[ Parent ]
I think Miller...
will stay in the House too.  I, however, don't see Terri Lynn Land running either.

Michigan has lost population but not all of it came from Detroit.  Additionally, you can't assume that the people who left were all Democratic voters.  

Snyder won in large part because of Democrats and independents.  There were 566,000 fewer votes cast for governor than in 2006.  There was no big shift in the political beliefs of the state...Democrats stayed home and independents went Republican.  

Snyder may not be a positive for the GOP in 2012.  Given that MI's unemployment is still one of the highest, Snyder won't get much of a honeymoon period.  I believe a lot of Snyder's economic policies will turn off many voters who supported him.      


[ Parent ]
Snyder and Michigan GOP
Remember that Snyder also ran far ahead of the rest of the GOP; people who split tickets to vote for Snyder but not the rest of the GOP won't reflexively vote GOP in the future.

[ Parent ]
How big is Detroit's population
loss supposed to be? A brief glance at Wikipedia tells me the estimate is for the city's population to go from 951,270 in 2000 to 910,920 in 2009. Perhaps it's been accelerated in the last year or so and will continue until 2012, but that's not that severe. And it's not as if all of those people were adults that could vote or were adults that were even registered to vote.

Michigan seems to be sort of like Pennsylvania for the Republicans, except even more so, in that it always looks like they can grab it but never end up doing it. Stabenow could be vulnerable, but Obama is likely to take the state even if he ends up losing, unless he goes down like Carter in 1980, but I don't see this being nearly as attractive an option for them as, say, Missouri or Montana.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
Detroit may be losing population...
but many act as if all the people left the state.  Some may have moved outside MI but many are moving into the suburbs.  


[ Parent ]
There's that,
but it's not really clear exactly who is leaving and why. For all we know, half of the people that left could have been potential Republican voters that were sick of the city's decline and moved to Wisconsin or something.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
I think she would...
turn off many voters who did vote for her as SoS.  She has built quite the conservative record during her time in Washington.  Many who voted for Snyder because he was a moderate may be turned off by Miller once they become aware of her record.    

[ Parent ]
At worst, Obama should be able to drag Stabenow across the finish line
She may well end up in as OK shape as Patty Murray in this past cycle. I'd label this Tilt D, with the presidential race leaning more toward Likely D, almost Safe D.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
Presuming that the president will have any coattails...
He has all but divorced himself from the Democratic party and his new message is that Democrats suck and he prefers to work with Republicans.  Even in a blowout, I think Obama's going to have limited coattails 'cos he's doing his triangulation thingy now, and it's not an isosceles triangle (ie. Dems are screwed in every which way),

[ Parent ]
re-elected presidents rarely have coattails
reagan and nixon, for their 20+ point victories won very little in terms of senate seats.  clinton had a flatline coat tail, bush's coat tails came from old tyme dems retiring down south (plus the whole south dakota thing).  dems seem to split their tickets in re-election, unless the president loses badly (carter, Hoover badly).

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.

[ Parent ]
It depends on Obama surge voting and on whether the opponent is polarizing......
If the GOP nominates Palin or Gingrich, there will be coattails.  The voting public will punish the GOP for that.  No one else is that polarizing.

And Obama can manufacture a unique turnout model that can have downballot effects, and obviously did in '08.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
08 ofc
but they seems more and more like lightning in a bottle.  i could be wrong, i could easily be wrong, but when i hear everyone talk about him getting more money than he did last time, the same electorate showing up, i just don't buy it.  he was new back then, people were voting on hope, now it's voting on "things are coming back" or "look who they nominated!"  not exactly the best message.

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.

[ Parent ]
Perhaps his active supporters won't be exactly
as powerful and numerous as they were last time and maybe he won't get exactly as much money, but whatever he lacks because he just isn't new any longer will be replaced by the advantages of incumbency. There's also the possibility that whatever problems people have with him will not matter as much in two years, especially as the choice between a Democrat and a Republican becomes a lot clearer. Indeed, I have to think that the people that are definitely sitting the next one out for one reason or another were never a big enough part of the base to begin with.

Also, just how much of a problem does he have with his base? I've seen at least two polls which show that he's got at least 80 percent of Democrats and 85 percent of Liberal Democrats in his corner. His approval rating amongst blacks is about 90 percent. Maybe this will change over the course of a few months, but right now, it doesn't look like he has a huge problem with his base.

Oh yeah, I imagine that not being the other guy is far more powerful when people had initially high feelings to begin with, even if those feelings have gone up and down over the course of a few years, than when the people never really loved you, even if they never hated you.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
These polls are all pre-deal...
Let's see what happens the next few months.  If the president keeps on giving away the store, those numbers could definitely change.

[ Parent ]
Yes LordMike...
People are really going to refuse to volunteer because President Obama made a deal with the Republicans to get unemployment benefits extended and a payroll tax-cut which will benefit low-income and middle-class voters almost exclusively.

Or is the horror of not raising the marginal tax rate on all income over 250k really that great... If so, then I could tell a lot of people to grow up.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
The problem is the way obama treated this more than
the content of the deal. He pretty much went on TV and told his liberal supporters to  go f@#k themselves. that's probably more damaging then the compromise itself  

[ Parent ]
The problem is the way obama treated this more than
the content of the deal. He pretty much went on TV and told his liberal supporters to  go f@#k themselves. that's probably more damaging then the compromise itself  

[ Parent ]
He so did not
But sometimes I wish he would. The hyperventilating over this is beyond ridiculous.

[ Parent ]
Well,
maybe that is how they took it. I don't know how they reacted, and nor do I care. It's likely that he misspoke because he's frustrated, and if he did anything that was truly boneheaded, even something that I cannot completely see, I am sure his advisers will tell him this. But his base is going to abandon him in 2012 over a comment he made at one press conference two years earlier, it was never that strong to begin with.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Yup, some liberal activists really live COMPLETELY inside an echo chamber......
Most Democrats and liberals are either yawning altogehter or only mildly object to the tax deal.  Most liberals are either ordinary voters with no deep interest in politics, or practical activists who understand their point of view is not a majority on quite a few things, certainly not on taxes.  In other words, they don't live in an echo chamber, they live in broader circles where it's apparent plenty of people don't view things as they do.

I'm open to the idea that maybe a better deal than Obama got was possible with a little more patience, but that's the inside game and only Senate Democrats really have enough information to speculate on that.  We're talking about a squeezed timeframe with a lot of things needing to get done before Christmas, so patience was not a virtue in this instance.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Totally Agree!
Thank you for saying what I have been saying. I mean yes it sucks to give up the upper income tax and the estate tax but getting the EITC, UIC and payroll tax reductions are going to help a lot of low to middle income people who care less about politics. Not getting everything you want is about governing. Punishing these people because you don't get all that you want is silly and stupid. They did not have the votes for the Obama tax plan as they had only 53 votes. They were never going to get UI extensions with a new Republican Congress. People really don't care about the deficit they want the economy to heal and the stimulus that he extracted will help that process.  

28, Male, Democrat VA-08  

[ Parent ]
I'm starting
to think that he made the right call politically, even if a larger portion of the base is pissed off at this than I realize. Think of this way: what's harder for him, earning the support of people who aren't part of his base or people who are? What's a larger group of people, for that matter?

Slightly simply put, he might have made enemies out of ten people, but whether he made friends with 11, or 15, or 20, he now has more friends than enemies. And most those enemies are likely to become friends before the next election, particularly when they realize how radical the other side will be.

Also, show me the damn votes. I keep hearing he could have dealt with this issue way before the election, and that's certainly possible, but can anyone demonstrate, as best they can, that the votes were there for him? I not sure.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
I don't get it.
I have to say, I just don't get it. Is the opposition to his decision to support extending all of the tax cuts based on some weird obsession with the deficit, or is it based more on the fact that some people, for whatever reason, make more money and thus get more in tax cuts, which they may or may not really need or deserve? I used to think, whatever it was, it wasn't the latter. Now, I am not so sure. And can it be the former when the tax cuts that most Democrats wanted extended--those for the middle class--were responsible for the majority of the addition to the deficit that came about from tax cuts?

What's really the reason so many are pissed? Is it simply because he broke a promise? If not that, then what? Don't get me wrong: I think the rich should pay more and wouldn't really feel that much of a pinch if the tax cuts were reversed. But the way some people were reacting, you'd think that Obama just agreed to sign some sort of bill that would outlaw abortion.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
Why so angry?
The deficit does have to be dealt with eventually.  Maybe this isn't the right time, but it has to be dealt with eventually.  

And it was being dealt with, painfully, on Republican terms.

Unemployment extensions were at least delayed.

Food stamps were cut to fund school lunches, because we couldn't drive up the deficit.

Extending tax cuts for the poor or even the middle class can be justified temporarily as at least stimulating the economy.  Tax cuts for the highest earners have no short-term economic justification; they are nice to do if we have the money, but they can wait until after the deficit (and even the debt) are under control.

Borrowing a few extra pennies for food stamps is one thing.  Borrowing a third of a trillion so that people who are not struggling can have larger tax cuts sooner... not so much.


[ Parent ]
First,
what are you referring to when you say "Unemployment extensions were at least delayed" and "Food stamps were cut to fund school lunches, because we couldn't drive up the deficit"? Something hypothetical or something specific regarding legislation that was recently passed?

At the risk of not going into too much policy talk, let me say that I really, really, truly get that the deficit has to be dealt with eventually. The thing is, there's no point in trying to bring it down now, because we have bigger issues, namely the continuing weakness in the labor market. If anything, the deficit should be bigger, with spending directed at areas like infrastructure or whatever else can add lasting value to our country while also helping employ people. Besides, by far the biggest issue with spending in the future comes in regards to health care. Everything else is an ideological distraction.

As far as the Bush income tax cuts go, most of the money went to the middle class. Most people didn't get that much, but that's because most of the country isn't rich. It was a big sum of money divided up amongst a lot of people. Out of the $4 trillion or so that it would cost the government in lost revenue, only about $700 billion was meant solely for the rich. That's a huge sum, but far from the entire ball game.

Now, maybe I missed something, but most of the people from the Democratic base weren't making specific arguments for why they should expire. I'm sure some have good reasons, but there's no coherence, as far as I can tell, around using the revenue for new spending or for deficit reduction. People seem to want them to expire because Obama said they should be and promised they would expire and are angry only because that's not happening, because he's supposedly broken yet another promise. Maybe I am being unfair to the Daily Kos crowd, but I don't think I am. If nothing else, the fact that progressive economists like Dean Baker say the deal is worth supporting, even if it's not perfect, should mean something to them. But it doesn't, from what I can tell.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
reference to recent food stamp cuts
what are you referring to when you say "Unemployment extensions were at least delayed" and "Food stamps were cut to fund school lunches, because we couldn't drive up the deficit"? Something hypothetical or something specific regarding legislation that was recently passed?

The unemployment extension delays referred both to the last few extensions that were held up by filibusters over how it would be paid for, and to the current proposed extension after benefits ran out at the end of November.  (And even that still won't help the 99ers ...)

The food stamps cut was around the end of September; for example, see http://michiganmessenger.com/4...
and http://michiganmessenger.com/4...

Out of the $4 trillion or so that it would cost the government in lost revenue, only about $700 billion was meant solely for the rich

The last analysis I saw said that 1/3 of the cost was for cuts to income tax in brackets starting at a quarter million.  (And, as you note, even the richest also benefit from cuts aimed at even the poorest; it is just that those cuts don't matter as much to them.)  

Someone earning 6 figures in this economy is doing pretty well.  Larger tax cuts for a family like that will not really stimulate the economy -- which means that we cannot afford it now, if we're already at the point of cutting food stamps.


[ Parent ]
Everyone will be there next time who was there last time......
The current angst among activists is all ephemeral.  Come spring/summer 2012, people will come back on board.  Democrats and liberals don't want to lose the Presidency to a Republican.  And Obama's fan club remains the same as ever, his approval ratings with Democrats and liberals prove that.

And the money will be a lot more than in 2008.  Obama was raising money against the Hillary juggernaut last time, not to mention whatever went to other candidates, and he wasn't the incumbent, either.  This time he monopolozes all the money available on the Democratic side.  Political analysts have written he could raise up to a billion dollars for 2012, and I think that's right.  If Palin or Gingrich is the Republican, he'll easily exceed a billion against either one of them.  Remember that McCain's pick of Palin resulted in Obama topping $100 million raised in September 2008, just one month.

The only way Obama suffers is if the economy stays way down, his job approvals dip into the low 40s or worse, and the Republicans nominate a particularly strong candidate, in which case not-enough-volunteers will be the least of his troubles.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
You make several good points, except
that you drastically understate how much money he raised in September of 2008. He raised about $150 million that month, no doubt helped by McCain's pick of Palin, which helped him raise $10 million in a single 24-hour period. This more than doubled what he raised in August of that year.

Anyway, you raise an interesting idea that because he will have no primary opponent, his totals will basically be naturally higher. Maybe that's true, but I am not sure if really needs to be. He raised about $532 million last time, which I assume includes all of his primary donations. Unless his donors simply abandon him entirely, he basically needs to have half of them chip in an an average of $500, which is about a quarter of the legal limit. Then he's at $500 million without having a primary opponent and with the advantages of being the president.  

The only way Obama suffers is if the economy stays way down, his job approvals dip into the low 40s or worse, and the Republicans nominate a particularly strong candidate, in which case not-enough-volunteers will be the least of his troubles.

This.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
Gingrich is pretty polarizing....
He seems to have a legitimate shot at the nomination, too, if PPP's polling is to be believed.

Santorum would be pretty bad, but he's not even close to being competitive at any level.  


[ Parent ]
Gingrich wins if the GOP primary crowd wants experience, but deems Romney too moderate
No matter what, I think Romney's winning New Hampshire, but I do think there's an outside chance Gingrich pulls an upset in Iowa. Should that happen, I think Huckabee would drop out, and, even if Palin remains in the running, Huck's departure would probably give Gingrich the room he needs to win South Carolina and take the nomination.  

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
Obama's going to have a very hard time manufacturing...
...a turnout model like 2008.  He's doing everything in his power to alienate those folks who participated in that turnout model.  He'll need to raise a lot of money to hire folks 'cos his volunteer base is drying up fast.

[ Parent ]
also
unemployment is highest among youth & ethnic minorities who were part of Obama's core constituency. He won't do as well among independents as he did in 2008.

[ Parent ]
Where did you buy your Delorean?
I want one.

[ Parent ]
LOL! And, ethnic minorities still overwhelmingly support Obama and have barely budged...
...in that regard.  Perhaps Asians have dropped a small amount, and perhaps Hispanics an even smaller amount, but Obama ultiamately is on track to clean up with people of color no less than in 2008.

For people of color, voting behavior is first and foremost based on a belief that government is more part of the solution than part of the problem on most issues, and the recognition that that belief lines up much more closely with Democrats than Republicans.  And that is why Obama's job approval has remained strong with minorities, because it's understood whether or not his attempts to revive the economy have succeeded, he's actually been using government to try, rather than the GOP approach with which most of us disagree.

Other issues like immigration and the general racism and xenophobia harbored by the GOP also are factors, but overwhelmingly there is support for this President based on believing his Presidency is best for the country at this time, however difficult our problems are.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
If the base didn't turn out in '10 after all President Obama did so far
I have to ask, what good does it do to for President Obama to pander to the base?

Before the '10 election, I had some hopes for a mini-reverse '02 effect, courtesy of OfA. And it made sense to me -- until '10 -- for President Obama to pander to the base, as indies don't normally turn out in off-year elections.

To be fair, base turnout did increase, relative to '06. But the '10 problem is that base turnout from the other side increased more.

As for doing well among independents in '12, compromise from President Obama is exactly what they want. As more indies will turn out in '12, some compromises are necessary.


[ Parent ]
It's amazing to see the DK world now
It's as if President Obama has become the next incarnation of George W Bush, and they don't know what to do with him.

In any case, based on the '96 experience, even a triangulating President has coattails in the House.


[ Parent ]
coat tails?
lost two senate seats, and gained 9, after losing 54 the election before.  i wouldn't call those coat tails as much as regression to the median.

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.

[ Parent ]
The D vote in the House
almost matched the D vote for President

and the vagaries of Senate races make that comparison somewhat irrelevant, unless the 33 seats up that year were a decent representation of the electorate as a whole.


[ Parent ]
Dems won 22 House seats
though lost 13, mostly in the South, 22 is a pretty serious gain.  

[ Parent ]
He has made himself into Bush...
The Bush Tax Cuts are now all on him.  I never liked the Obama = Bush analogy, but here it's apt.  He just pushed for a renewal of Bush's signature achievement on Obama's terms.  Add the fact that he continues to peruse the wars and is about to gut social security in order to "save" it, and it's becoming really hard to argue otherwise.  If you think about it long enough, it's really enough to make one very depressed.

[ Parent ]
Wow, you spend way too much time on the other blogs
weren't you the one who showed video of Obama fighting to end tax cuts on the rich on OpenLeft in a Quick Hit in September, then said "we need to have his back" and got a big "meh" reaction from the site?

Stay off DKos and OpenLeft for a while, it could really cloud your judgement of reality.  


[ Parent ]
Ha, yeah...
It looks like Obama made a fool out of me, too on that one.  I'm not a fan of the openlefters at all, but right now, they seem to be the ones who are right and I'm the one who's wrong.

Anyways, the Village and MSM is all about how Obama is Bush right about now, so it isn't just the dKos'ers and openlefters.  The fact is, the've got a point...

I just hope the the president fights back on something the next two years, or it's going to be very ugly.

 


[ Parent ]
So all that stuff
about how "it would be ok if he gave in, as long as he fought first" that i hear all that time was just complete and utter bullshit?

Because even you admitted he was fighting months ago.

the Village and MSM is all about how Obama is Bush right about

No, it really isn't, you haven't watched anything besides MSNBC, have you?


[ Parent ]
Politico had an article today...
...where they compared Obama to Bush, not exactly a left wing source.

I'm not upset that he made a deal.  Elections have consequences, and we got schellacked.  I'm disappointed that he gave away the family cow for a couple of magic beans.  Defective ones at that.  The GOP really wanted this tax cut extended and Obama had a lot of leverage.  He pretty much gave it all away so he could get a vote on START.

We got crumbs... a really, really lousy deal in every respect.

A few days before the deal was announced, there was talk about including raising the debt limit, and getting other legislation passed... sounded pretty tolerable.  We got something we were going to get anyways (unemployment extensions) and that's it... very weak tea.

Anyways, I'll stop... I get a bit carried away sometimes.


[ Parent ]
Also, a vote on
DADT repeal and possibly on DREAM.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
That was not part of the deal...
The reaction would have been much more positive had those priorities been included.

[ Parent ]
Well, the vote on
DADT repeal in that DA bill was part of the deal for sure.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
No, it wasn't...
It's still in limbo.  Collins seems to give the goahead today, but it's not assured by any means.

The deal was on tax stuff only.  


[ Parent ]
Reid is smart and will give Collins the amendment votes and debate time required....
...to get DADT repealed.

Democratic elected officials know this is a big thing to clear the decks with gays and liberal allies.  And they're smart enough to realize it's a shiny object that deflects a lot of liberal angst from the tax deal, which itself deflects a lot of the voting public's angst with Democrats.

If Reid fails to cut the procedural deals necessary to get this done, it will be unprecedented, as he's a master dealmaker.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Reid is smart and will give Collins the amendment votes and debate time required....
...to get DADT repealed.

Democratic elected officials know this is a big thing to clear the decks with gays and liberal allies.  And they're smart enough to realize it's a shiny object that deflects a lot of liberal angst from the tax deal, which itself deflects a lot of the voting public's angst with Democrats.

If Reid fails to cut the procedural deals necessary to get this done, it will be unprecedented, as he's a master dealmaker.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Well I for one want a vote on START......
It's pretty clear to me that what liberal activists on blogs get focused on, and angry about, isn't attached to any proper perspective on what's important compared to what's less important or unimportant.  President Obama doesn't have that luxury, he actually has to keep proper perspective to govern competently.

I notice no one on the left has said a word on the START treaty on any blog I regularly read.  And yet this is very important.  There was a time in (young) adult life when this sort of thing was a huge deal.  Objectively it still is, but no one notices.  So this will be yet one more major accomplishment that LordMike and so many other "liberals" dismiss come campaign time in their angst over Obama being a corporate shill or whatever other horseshit narrative they peddle.

It's a fact of life that President and other elected officials have to focus on issues based on what's important proper proportion and perspective, not just on what activists and/or the general public choose to care about.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
you mean this one?
http://www.politico.com/news/s...

It doesn't compare him to Bush, it means he's having a tough time getting the support he needs to roll Bush's policies back like he wants to.


[ Parent ]
you mean this one?
http://www.politico.com/news/s...

It doesn't compare him to Bush, it means he's having a tough time getting the support he needs to roll Bush's policies back like he wants to.


[ Parent ]
Exactly what sort of moves has he made
to gut Social Security?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Simpson-Bowles deficit commission...
That was the President's baby and the result shocked even conservatives at how favorable it was to their side.  Very scary precedent for the future...

[ Parent ]
And what exactly was the end result
of that commission? Did he endorse the plans in it relating to Social Security?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
He prefers to work with Republicans
When they are in the majority, he kinda has to work with them. Just working with Dems will get him nowhere.  

[ Parent ]
He's much more excited to give the GOP everything that they want...
...than he did with dems.  Heck, if he had worked half as hard to get a public option in the health care bill as he has pushing the Bush tax cuts, we'd all have single payer right now.

The fire in his eyes as he insulted his base at the presser the other day and the enthusiasm he's showing by completely capitulating to the GOP on tax cuts tells the whole story.  Losing the midterms is exactly what he wanted, and he's ready to give away the whole store if necessary to get a few crumbs in return.


[ Parent ]
yeah
lay off the blogs a bit  

[ Parent ]
Heh...
Yeah, I get carried away sometimes.. ;-)

[ Parent ]
Let the House Republicans govern.
Then if (when) they F up royally in the next 2 years we can count on that chamber returning to Dem control in 2012 (depending on redistricting), and Obama winning reelection in a landslide!

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)


[ Parent ]
We can only hope...
But, I'm very skeptical.  Once republicans get a house seat, it's really hard to knock them out.  It took forever for Dems to claw their way back to a majority the last time.  The fact is people may not like Republicans, but they are drawn to voting for them 'cos they are "tough and macho" or whatever.

It won't help that Obama is telegraphing that he's ready to rubberstamp everything the GOP does, which makes it harder to define a contrast.

The things that give me hope are Cook saying there will be a counterwave in 2012 or 2014 and Tom Jensen at PPP saying that much of the GOP's gains will be reversed with a presidential turnout model.


[ Parent ]
So there were 60 votes in the Senate
for a public option?

I've heard some fairly hysterical commentary in the last few days, but this might take first prize.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
We will never know...
...since no one pushed for it at the top. It had been given away in June.

[ Parent ]
Um, what the hell are you talking about?


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
MI will be competitive if Romney is the nominee
n/t

[ Parent ]
It might be competitive, but
if someone like George Bush couldn't take it in 2000 or 2004, why would Romney take it in 2012? What else does he have going for him besides the fact that his father used to be governor four or five decades ago?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
I think he's referring to the Senate race
As for the presidential race, a gentle reminder how Romney wanted to liquidate GM and Chrysler probably would be too much of an anvil to bear.

[ Parent ]
If he is losing now he won't win


[ Parent ]
New Executive Director of the DGA
Hey, look, someone from MD-01
Hello!

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Hi
Is there a lack of Frank Kratovil constituents on this site? I rarely post but read it everyday.

20 M MD-01

[ Parent ]
You're the only one, I think.


Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
I hope this isn't too off topic but
does anyone know where to get turnout data by congressional district for 2010 and/or past elections? Thanks!

21, Progressive Democrat, MN-08 (home), MN-05 (college)

It should be pretty easy
to get the numerator of the ratio (i.e., the number of votes cast); getting the denominator is the problem.

[ Parent ]
Even the numerator is more tricky than it appears
A lot of media sources only include election night numbers and never bother updating them.  To do it properly you would need to get official returns from all 50 states.

28, Unenrolled, MA-08

[ Parent ]
The numerator should be fine
because SoSs usually update them. The demnominator is ridiculous though. Minnesota gives voters registered as of 7 am on election day per CD, precinct, whole state, or any other type of district but only does turnout as a percent og eligible voters for the whole state.

21, Progressive Democrat, MN-08 (home), MN-05 (college)

[ Parent ]
turnout comp
I did one for CA using the secretary of state's web page.

Excluding races that were uncontested in either 2008 or 2010, the biggest dropoff was 32.3% in Maxine Waters' district. The smallest was 16.6% in Dan Lungren's, one of two that was competitive. Jerry McNerney's was also toward the low end at 19.2%.  

41, Ind, CA-05


[ Parent ]
That's like what I'm trying to do
for a paper for my campaigns and elections class. I'm trying to do it on Minnesota congressional elections since 2002 but I only have turnout as a percent of voters registered before election day instead of eligible voters or voting age population. I suppose what I have will work though - I'll just have to explain the difference.

21, Progressive Democrat, MN-08 (home), MN-05 (college)

[ Parent ]
BoE or SoS
Go to each state's board of election or the Secretary of State's website. You might need to do it by precinct and then just convert it. If they don't have it you can always try the individual counties.

20 M MD-01

[ Parent ]
Run down of potential candidates for LA-Gov
http://www.dailykingfish.com/d...
By Daily Kingfish, a LA progressive blog run by a former member of SSP. I think Landrieu will be asked to take a look at it, but I doubt she does. Edwards seems like the most likely candidate to me.  

Make that
Edwards is the most likely Democratic. I still think Kennedy will run.  

[ Parent ]
You feel that
Kennedy will run?  Well, you did say he was ambitious.  How are his politics compared to Jindal?

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Does anyone really know?
Kennedy ran for Senate in 2004 as a liberal alternative to Chris John, and in 2008 as a strongly conservative Bobby Jindal-David Vitter Republican.  

[ Parent ]
His Consistency
Clearly he's inconsistent and hard to read on a party or ideology spectrum. But I wonder if there isn't a certain consistency in his rather reformist, anti-the powers that be approach. But maybe I'm over-reading that.

[ Parent ]
MN-Pres: Obama at 49/46 approval, up 5, 8, 10, 13, 18 over Mitt, Paw, Huck, Newt, Palin
http://publicpolicypolling.blo...

At 49% approval, I definitely think he can prevail in a state like Minnesota, though I think we're looking at closer to an '04-style result (mid-single digits) than an '08-style blowout. Pawlenty simply isn't viable whatsoever in 2012. If PPP's correct, Romney is surely looking like the most formidable GOP-er, at least of this field.  

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast


I recall a Republican blog
that described Romney as "the vanilla ice cream of Republican politics", which is as apt a description as ever.

Truth be told, if you put a gun to my head and made me pick a Republican president from the group of likely candidates, I'd go with Romney.  He's been selling out his old positions like mad, but he's not a zealot, and he's at least somewhat competent as a manager.

I don't think he can win the nomination, though; he massively outspent everybody last time and got nowhere.


[ Parent ]
Romney is the strongest in the BLUE states
which is actually of no value... losing by 5% is the same as by 18%.

Republicans need to win the red states and the purple states, and Romney is not the strongest in those.  In fact, none of the Republicans is "strongest" in all the purple states.  Romney's Mormonism will hurt him in VA, FL and NC, while Huck is toast in NH and NM, CO and NV.


[ Parent ]
what's weird
is that there are so few generic republicans.  gingrich, palin, santorum are all likely to under run a generic R on indies D's and possibly republicans.  Romney and arguably hucvkbee are superior.  all that leaves is thune, pawlenty and pence/daniels (i don't see anyway two people from the same state and party run).

Also worth noting it seems like all of the GOP's talent (jindal, Christie, rubio, arguably mcconnell) is situated for 2016 and beyond.  

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.


Mitch McConnell?
I've never heard any presidential buzz around him, and he'd be 70 in 2012. I'm guessing you meant Gov. Bob McDonnell (who would be a very good VP selection for someone like Romney or Daniels in 2012, assuming his job approval is intact then.)

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08

[ Parent ]
yes, i did mean mcdonnell
i get them confused because of the similar names.  it's arguable that he could run in 2016 isn't it?

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.

[ Parent ]
Yeah
The big issues with him are the college thesis, which didn't wind up hurting him in 2009, and the Confederate History proclamation. If he can get over those, and his finishes his term with good approvals and a decent economy, he'd be a strong candidate from a key swing state.

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08

[ Parent ]
i think the thesis will hurt him more
if he's attacked PROPERLY on it.  i believe there was a part in the thesis about how women shouldn't work.  from what i heard, deeds mainly just read parts and said they were wrong.  A better attack might go like this.

"My opponent doesn't think women should be allowed to work.  in this economy, most families don't have the luxury of deciding if one or both parents work, both work, or the bank takes the house.  America, as I understand it, is about having the chance to work, regardless of your gender, race or religion.  This is the greatest country in the world because we're judged based upon your talent, hardwork, commitment and ingenuity, not our labels.  We got rid of the 'that only applies to men' footnote a long time ago and I for one, do not want to bring it back."

Or something like that.

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.


[ Parent ]
Has
his numbers recovered from that Confederacy proclamation debacle?

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

[ Parent ]
PPP has his approval at 44-36


21, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)



[ Parent ]
I'm not sure how good that is
On the one hand, PPP is often an outlier on the low side with approval numbers, and not many governors are above water now. One the other, that's nowhere near the numbers they've found for Bobby Jindal and Jay Nixon recently. Rasmussen found him at 64% in late July if that's worth anything (probably not.)

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08

[ Parent ]
Thats good for these days
Many govs would love to have those numbers. I think McDonnell is a very strong VP pick if we trail slightly, lead by less than 3, or are tied around August in VA.  

[ Parent ]
One of the sharper
remarks I've heard from a commentator recently was what Lawrence O'Donnell said on election night when it became clear exactly how badly Democrats were doing and who the new faces of the Republican party would be: the fact that people like Marco Rubio are being talked up for the presidency right now shows that the Republicans really don't have anyone that good to run. A lot of people are mentioned as possible contenders, and surely some are mentioned as people that could climb quickly, as was the case with Obama, but people are acting as if Rubio should essentially start campaigning for the presidency from the moment he is sworn in to the Senate. It's kind of nuts, really.

I agree that it'll be different in 2016, because if/when the party loses in 2012, and there's an open contest on both sides, and there's the usual eight-year-itch, but the bench is still pretty thin. Maybe there are five to ten people that I am just not familiar with, but even with the replenishing of the ranks amongst governors and congress, there just don't appear to be that many up and comers. Compare that to Democrats, who even after getting smacked around pretty badly still have Gillibrand, Giffords, Klobuchar, O'Malley, Murphy, Malloy, Cuomo, Warner, and a few others I am not thinking of. And that's before you even get to the others, like Kamala Harris, that need to have an executive or legislative role.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
Don't forget about Schweitzer
He'd be great for it, but that's a ways off.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Rubio is dangerous...
He could be a real winner... that is if the GOP base is willing to accept a hispanic as their nominee especially when his almighty tebaggerness ends up being pretty establishment.

[ Parent ]
Was Mel Martinez dangerous too?


Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Was Mel Martinez
Eligible to be President? Was Mel Martinez a talented politician?

[ Parent ]
That's not my point.
It need not be presidential.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
And yes
he was an ok politician.  We don't know about Rubio.  He'll probably be the same.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Yes, Martinez was pretty talented.
He was trying to prevent the GOP from going off the deep end on immigration and resigned when he realized that his efforts were too little, too late.  Martinez was no slouch either, he was a party chairman and a cabinet member.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Trust me, in 2012
Republicans will wish they still had Martinez.  Before long, they'll be full of little Tancredos and Gohmerts.  Rubio will not advance the GOP away from that sentiment either, especially after flip-flopping on SB1070 when the zombie hordes of the tea party came after him for opposing it.  Now, he's conveniently against it to get them off his back.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
I meant
As a politician. I knew he was good on policy, but I always got the impression from here that he was a terrible politician.  

[ Parent ]
I agree
Watching him on television I never understood how he became a US Senator with so little gravitas. It cannot be argued at this point that GOP had anything but a huge improvement replacing Mel with Rubio. Younger, more popular, also hispanic, conservative but not scary (almost got 50% vs left and center-left), and a better speaker.

Now Rubio could realisticallyy flare out or do something stupid. At this the GOP is quite happy with their choice. I know Democrats would prefer the more reasonable Mel.  


[ Parent ]
Rubio is charismatic, good looking, and very likable...
He has the potential of serious political stardom aka Scott Brown or even our Obama.  He's a very good candidate in every respect.

[ Parent ]
He would have lost
had Crist not realized how hard it was being indie and had no other competition to possibly split the vote.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
He came within a point of 50%
I'm sure much of Crist's support would have gone to him, and he would have won with over 50%. Rubio would have won Rubio v Meek and probably Rubio v Crist.  

[ Parent ]
Blame that on
Crist's campaign floundering.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
And Scott Brown, seriously?
The guy is an empty suit.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
I could say something to this
But it would likely get me banned.  

[ Parent ]
Well, that was to
LordMike, not to you.  But Scott Brown has flip-flopped several times.  He voted for MassCare as a state Senator and then opposed something very much like it in the Senate.  He's like clay, easily molded and shaped with no real shape of its own.  Empty suit was too much of a simplistic and cruel way to put it.  I should have been more detailed.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Scott Brown is a very talented politician...
He makes people comfortable in their skin.  So many people in January voted for him even though they opposed everything he stood for.  They were just mesmerized by the guy.  So far, the honeymoon hasn't worn off.

[ Parent ]
But what is there
past that facade?

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Not much, but it's irrelevant....
People vote for the face, not the substance.

[ Parent ]
I know
MA is a prime example of that.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Yeah the funny thing is
Martha Coakley was very substantive, but not charismatic.  

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

[ Parent ]
I
think a candidate should have both.  But I do know that charisma has the upper hand by default.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Which is probably
why I have never gotten Scott Brown.  His appeal is entirely superficial.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
And
I'm sorry for using "empty suit" to characterize that.  I guess I didn't know how offensive it was.  I just wanted something short to sum that all up.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Its not offensive
Just ironic to me, and I'll leave it at that.  

[ Parent ]
.
I see the nuance there, but Scott Brown is much more amorphous and moldable.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
The...
truck. Remember the truck. Even though Brown auctioned off the truck to charity that will be the most memorable thing about him and those Cosmo picks...

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

[ Parent ]
GOPVOTER
I was thinking the exact same thing be decided against it at the last moment

[ Parent ]
Then why even write stuff like that?
It's basically just as provocative as if you had actually written it. If you could say something but won't, then...don't!

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
I just thought it was funny
that I was about to write the same thing

[ Parent ]
Its lets him know how I feel
Without directly saying it.  

[ Parent ]
yes, you're a Republican
you support Republicans. There's no need to even say anything about it.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
For the record
I was not offended, and don't have a problem with what users GOPVOTER and Ireland said.

My guess is that it's OK with the moderators, as they've shown some tolerance for --ah-- less indirect jibes from R guests here.

So I'd hope that such subtle winks will be allowed on the SSP-R that's apparently in the works.  


[ Parent ]
SSP-R can't arrive fast enough for me......
I'm looking forward to SSP Classic having fewer Republicans.

I have a feeling a lot of Democrats here are going to be surprised and irritated to learn what regular R posters here really think if-and-when the new SSP-R gets going.  When they don't have to watch what they say anymore, on their own site, it's going to be eye-opening for some people here.  Not for me, I have a pretty good sense of what people will see there, and it won't look pretty to Democrats.  I think some people are going to learn that campaigns and elections are not bipartisan.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Any D here who is serious about electoral politics
needs to understand what Rs really think and say.

Yes, you're right,

it's going to be eye-opening for some people here.

but for anyone who is serious about electoral politics, whether it be in debates in college, in community centers, or as actual candidates

it's important to know what Rs are saying, in the Sun Tzu sense of "know thy enemy as you know thyself"

and thy (Ds) shall always be victorious.


[ Parent ]
I read RedState
I don't post there, because any single mention of anything against teabagger orthodoxy gets you an instant ban. I honestly don't think the Republicans that post here (for the most part, they seem to know what they are talking about) would have the same knee-jerk reaction the RedStaters do. I assume that the Republican posters here now will be some of the key posters on the new Republican site, and I doubt they would be as intolerant as their RedState brethren.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."


[ Parent ]
There will be trash talk galore about Democrats, and perhaps even...
...trash talk about commenters on this site.  Hell, perhaps even trash talk about me, who knows?

I'll be shocked otherwise.

And I don't care, because that's part of politics.  I don't apologize for my smack talk here about the GOP.  But I'll be happy to say goodbye to the smack talk that Republicans here get away with posting, having it go to the other site.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
You got that right
We all hate Red State, and that is a key reason for us doing this. We will have mainly the same rules SSP has. All of you guys are allowed there, as long as you are respectful to our party like we are to Dems here. We think the mods here do a great job of knowing when to tell Republicans when to cut it out, and when they know its time any Republican user has said too much and overstayed their welcome. It will be the same there, except insert Dem where I have Rep.  

[ Parent ]
Interesting questions and challenges
Unlike what user DCCyclone suggests, I've observed limits to the "trash talk" that's allowed here in both directions.

While personal conflicts are unavoidable, to me it makes sense to limit the trash talking of users.

But I fully expect SSP-R to trash talk D politicos as much as we trash talk R politicos here.

While a perfectly parallel universe would be best, you're human. I hope that the Ds here who come over recognize it.

When I do come over and post, I'll probably use something like the following sig line

some of my best friends call me a Demoncrat


[ Parent ]
Brown
He isn't a policy wonk, but he's a pragmatic wheeler-dealer with good political instincts and a smooth MO.  

41, Ind, CA-05

[ Parent ]
You know, I can imagine Rubio getting the nomination in 2012.
He's essentially in the same place that Obama was in 2004.

At the same time, I don't see Rubio as popular as Obama was back in 2004. I wasn't following politics back then, but from what I hear it seems like Obama had rockstar status amongst politically involved Democrats. People like Rubio, but they don't seem to be very passionate about him.

Scott Brown, on the other hand...

http://mypolitikal.com/


[ Parent ]
I dunno
Obama had 2 years in the senate before he announced his Presidential bid. Rubio would have to announce within a matter of weeks, or a couple months at most after being sworn in as a senator. That is a big difference, IMO

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."


[ Parent ]
He might well be a VP contender, but I can't fathom him running
Hell, even Bobby Jindal's too much of a newbie to pull the trigger in 2012.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
He's definitely someone to watch, or so they say,
but besides him, who else is a potential national candidate?

And here's the thing to remember about Rubio: while he supposedly has a lot going for him, he's still not a national brand in the way Obama was because he hasn't had any chance to define himself. Instead of having his fist appearance on a national stage be something inspirational and positive like Obama's 2004 speech, he's got nothing. He hasn't made that first impression on people. Most people probably don't know who he is. That's not really a bad thing, but it could be, because it gives the opposition a much easier chance to define him.

I don't mean to sound like I think he's never going anywhere. He could very well be elected president some day. But before some buy a new tuxedo for an inaugural party, it's important to consider that he's got a steeper hill to climb that Obama did.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
While
we're debating if Obama just became a persona non grata with the progressive base and MSNBC, new Gallup poll shows the tax cut compromise is very very popular with the public in general.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145...

Two major elements included in the tax agreement reached Monday between President Barack Obama and Republican leaders in Congress meet with broad public support. Two-thirds of Americans (66%) favor extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for all Americans for two years, and an identical number support extending unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed.

52% of Democrats, 85% of Republicans, 67% of Independents support extending the tax cuts. Of course only 39% of liberals support extending the tax cuts, but this may of not been a bad play on Obama's part.  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12


Only half of democrats as a whole support it...
That's pretty crappy numbers if you ask me.  If I was a congressional democrat, I wouldn't touch this thing with a ten foot pole, much less vote for it.

I wish gallup polled support for middle class tax cuts alone and upper class income taxes, too.


[ Parent ]
If the Democrats are getting high and mighty now...
then the truth is they should have dealt with the tax issue LONG ago.  It is simply unacceptable that they had 60 votes in the Senate for 8 months and did not pass something as important as the tax code.  They shouldn't blame Obama for ceding to the Republicans if they weren't willing to vote on this before.  Let's face it, Obama's hand was forced by one of the most heinous senate minorities in history.  If Congress wants to get things done, then it has to DO THEM.  Let's see some goddamn leadership from some Democratic senators and not just pussy footing for two years wasting time.

[ Parent ]
Obama shares the blame...
According to Politico, the WH started to campaign on the issue back in March, and then abruptly stopped fearing that they would look "too liberal".  The White House stopped pushing after that.

[ Parent ]
That's what I wonder
about a lot of these things: they might have had 60 senators, but did they have 60 votes?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Had the house passed a budget...
...they could have used budget reconciliation for fiscal year 2011.  But that option was nixed.

[ Parent ]
Then
Democrats would of been kicking the can down the road only a few years. The reason why these tax cuts were scheduled to expire is because legislation passed through reconciliation that adds to the deficit cannot be made permanent. Republicans couldn't wrangle up 60 votes in 2001 because Chafee and McCain objected over the deficit. If only HCR reform didn't take up all of 2009, Democrats might of been able to permanently extend the middle class tax cuts in late 2009. But what's done is done.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

[ Parent ]
Has anyone considered
that this is some sort of huge fake out? It doesn't seem likely, but it doesn't seem entirely ridiculous, either. The White House cuts deal with the Republicans, but the Democrats go nuts and it blows up, sending the tax rates on everyone back up. But since Obama tried to broker a deal, he comes across looking good, which is good for him since he's only one person, as opposed to the many congressional Democrats who won't be blamed specifically. Then, when the new congress begins, they can try to put a tax deal that cuts taxes on everyone but the rich.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
The WH is doing a full court press to get this to pass...
...like nothing ever seen before.  They are telling congressfolk that if they scuttle this deal, they will be to blame for Obama losing in 2012.

There is no 3-D chess here.  Obama wants this and wants it bad.


[ Parent ]
He wants unemployment benefits
And middle-class tax cuts bad. He is having to go along with a temporary upper-income tax cut extension to get that and nothing more. Why must you always be hysterical? I remember our conversations at OpenLeft in the middle of 2008 and you were the same then. "McCain is outcampaigning Obama!", "Obama is blowing it!", "Palin is a massive gamechanger!" At one stage post GOP convention you actually said it was over. And no, Obama had already moved back ahead before Lehman went under. The pant pissing is infuriating. And you are one of the more sensible ones.

[ Parent ]
I remember them too
User LordMike had a number of scenarios w/r/t the Midwest turning into Madmaxville if any of the big 3 automakers went bankrupt.

[ Parent ]
Auto bailout
Great example. This president gets all the flak and none of the credit he deserves. This whole thing is just like TARP. Everyone hated it. Me included. But it had to be done. And it worked.

[ Parent ]
The GM "Bailout" has been Obama's greatest success by far...
...and he can never get credit for it 'cos people still hate the idea.

I agree.

BTW, I was lobbying for TARP at the time.  It sucks that Bush gets no blame for that one nowadays.  Looking back, I would have insisted on a lot more strings.  The banks neede to do a mea culpa at the very least.

It should be known that I'm not opposed to the deal per se, but how he went about it and what little he got for it is BS.


[ Parent ]
I wouldn't say all people
hate the idea of the auto bail out. I'm not sure what any official polling says, but I read this today:

The focus group showed the disappointment and frustrations that swing voters have with Mr. Obama. But there was little anger, and the president appears to be getting some credit for his efforts. Most people in the group lauded his bailout of the auto industry - and even his efforts to prop up the banks - as a success. Mr. Passantino echoed the president when he said Mr. Obama had kept the nation from sliding into a depression.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/...

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
Are you disagreeing with that analysis?
Things were REALLY bad around here and they haven't gotten much better (hence Mr. Snyder's blowout win in MI).  The ONLY good news has been the increased investment by the Big 3 that would never have happened without the auto bailout.

[ Parent ]
So you're saying that civil society has broken down in the Midwest?
That's the implication of "Mad Max" and this statement

http://openleft.com/diary/10515/

Time to stock up on gasoline, canned food, an ammo... it's going to be like a Mad Max movie around here...

If that's what you believe, then I ask you to back up your assertions. How is the situation in the Midwest currently like a "Mad Max movie"?


[ Parent ]
Well, it isn't...
'cos the Big 3 survived.  Had GM, Ford, and Chrysler gone under, there would have been some major ugliness.  The upper midwest has been on the brink of economic disaster for some time.  A bomb like that would've been beyond disastrous.

You didn't appreciate my analogy?  Perhaps you prefer this image?

I kind of like that one, myself!! Don't you? :-)

Hey, I'm passionate about this stuff.  Aren't you?  Isn't that why you are here?


[ Parent ]
I find it's helpful to understate a case when arguing
It sounds nicer,
It appeals better to moderates,
It's an excellent contrast to typical wingnut hyperbole,
It supports rebuttals with "new" material
It usually makes the opponent show his hand, providing opportunities for counterpunching

In fact, the one thing that irks the heck out of me is when people who are on my side go overboard. It leads to undecideds concluding that "they're all crazy" -- and then they stop listening.

In addition, Ds by their very nature try to listen to both sides. While there's a lot of hyperbole flying around how President Obama has POed the "base" (primarily white liberal bloggers)

that response itself is a turn-off to D core voters: working class, ethnics, etc.  


[ Parent ]
Working class voters stayed home this election...
....or even switched sides. The results and exit polling showed that strongly. I think that suggests they aren't every happy with things.  I acknowledge that Obama's approvals are high with minorities, which is why I say that a primary challenge is folly.  But, minority voters are still pissed in many ways.  For example, Alan Boyd in FL almost lost his primary 'cos the AA voters in his district were sick of him and voted for his challenger.  When he won, many of those voters stayed home in the general.

That sounds like a restless base if not angry, and it's not just "white liberals".  19 million Obama voters stayed home in 2010.  That strongly suggests that the base as a whole is pretty unhappy.

Remember that the tea partiers are a minority of the GOP caucus as well, but they had enormous influence even if the entire "base" felt differently.

Anyways, the Dems need some passion, too... even a few crazies like Alan Grayson to balance out those on the right.  Fight fire with fire... it certainly works well for the other side.


[ Parent ]
I think it's more effective to fight fire with ice
especially given the rationalistic components of our base.

Fire leads to irrationality. In an irrational world, R arguments hold sway. "Fighting fire with fire" plays into their hands.

Examples -- look at what happened to Alan Grayson, after he fought fire with fire with his Taliban Dan ad. Something similar happened to Jack Conway after Aqua Buddha.

The facts are on our side. The only way to get people to listen to the facts is with rationality.


[ Parent ]
As for the rest of it
Millions of voters on both sides stay home in an off year election. AFAIK, the numbers suggest a higher D turnout than normal in '10 -- their side just turned out a lot more.

As for working class voters acting like Reagan Ds, that's a function of high unemployment. It is time to focus on jobs jobs jobs. The "deal" will actually help in that respect.


[ Parent ]
There was really
only one point when I felt that Obama might lose in 2008, which was in the first week or two after Palin was picked. I sometimes felt he'd not win as big as he did, possibly losing a state like Ohio or Indiana, but I always felt confident in his ability to get to at least 270. I don't want to say I panicked, but I was certainly nervous. Then I started to realize that he was cool, calm, collected, measured, and methodical, and he wasn't really changing his approach in a drastic panic like some, including me, might have. I'm reminded of that picture from the convention with the added caption "Chill the fuck out! I got this!" In the last few weeks, I started to not feel like that, but now I do again. Maybe he does, in fact, have an idea of what the hell he's doing when it comes to getting reelected.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
I'm an emotional guy...
...it's in my blood! :-)

BTW, I wasn't the only one who thought we had lost post RNC convention.  There was an entire election postmortem thread at MyDD that was huge where everyone was discussing what would happen to progressives after we lost.  The presumption was already made.  I was not alone in that.

BTW, I still held out hope, but I was very concerned as were many others.  It's not like the Dems had a good record in winning presidential elections coming from behind.


[ Parent ]
MyDD?
Are you serious? Anyway, just shows how wrong people can be.

[ Parent ]
You don't get politics if you think those are "crappy" numbers......
Obama isn't President of the Democratic Party, he's President of the United States.  If a majority of Democrats support the deal, and supermajorities of indies and centrist GOPers support the deal, then those are extremely strong numbers.

If Obama is seeing numbers like that in internal DNC polling or just public polls, he's very happy he cut a politically smart deal.  And he's right.

LordMike, you're eventually going to have to come to terms with the reality that only a very small percentage of the voting public shares your anger, or anything close to it, toward this tax deal.  There's no strong opposition to it.  That's what many on DailyKos don't get right now.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Precisely
Yet, what is so dangerous about these #s is that the Democratic support is low-enough for some progressives to believe a primary challenge is justified. The tax cuts won't prevent Obama from a second term. A bruising, left-wing primary challenger will.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
Could Dennis Kucinich have the same effect on President Obama
that Pat Buchanan had on George HW Bush?

[ Parent ]
i doubt it
buchanan was relatively new when he ran, a blank slate for angry right wing populism.  kucinich is less of a blank slate having two failed presidential runs under his belt.  granted not that many people pay attention, but there are enough proposals from him from the debates that people wouldn't like, as well as parodies of him on the late late circuit to make it harder than buchanan had it.

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.

[ Parent ]
Highly doubtful
Even if Afghanistan and the prospect of an anti-war candidate bested the economy as Democratic primary voters' top concern, I suspect Kucinich wouldn't leave a dent vs. Obama. He does have some support among the DailyKos/MoveOn crowd, I guess, but he lacks the stature and bonafides of a Howard Dean. He's hardly an affective fundraiser either, and I think you'd see only nominal support from members of the Progressive Caucus.

As for Pat Buchanan, he was running against a guy whose favorables among his own party were taking a significant hit - note that Obama's ratings among Democrats still are higher 80% or higher. Besides that, unlike Kucinich, who I'd presume would run an anti-war candidate, Buchanan wasn't a one-issue personality. Yes, he was presented himself as a culture warrior, but he also came off as very well-versed on a whole series of political issues. He was the guy who had Reagan's ear, and now he was challenging the guy who used to take Reagan's orders. Kucinich, despite two presidential runs, is still basically a nobody to the general public.  

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast


[ Parent ]
Say what you want
about Dennis Kucinich, but he strikes me as too much of a team player to even contemplate doing something like that. I'm sure he's well aware of what would damage the president's chances for reelection and wouldn't do anything like that, because he lived directly through eight years of Bush.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
On the contrary, no, these #s don't assist in any primary challenge......
The problem any potential primary challenger starts with in this particular polling is that 52% of Democrats up front say approve of the deal, and of the rest most likely only a very limited share are actually angry about it.

That's the problem any potential primary challenge has, that very few Democrats are truly angry at Obama.  And LordMike and the DailyKos crowd are among those few, without realizing how few there really are.

There's not going to be any "bruising" primary because there's not going to be any candidate who can offer one, and no money to pay for it.

The primary talk is absurd without a double-dip recession that no one now expects.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Not sure how trustworthy
But Ramsussen's latest numbers (post-"capitulation" LordMike) are very similar to Gallup.

"Despite the strong negative response from some Democratic leaders to the proposed tax cut-deal, President Obama continues to earn very solid ratings within his own party. Eighty percent (80%) of Democrats approve of the way he's doing his job, including 49% who Strongly Approve."

"Seventy percent (70%) of Republicans and 51% of unaffiliated voters favor the tax cut agreement. A plurality of Democrats (48%) share that view but 38% of those in the president's party are opposed."

Once again proving the base of the Democratic party is far bigger than the netroots.


[ Parent ]
We should be thankful
that we aren't Republicans.  If this kind of compromise happened to a Republican President, the tea party would have a 100% shot of knocking him off in a primary.  THat is the difference between Democrats and Republicans-- we understand the difficulties of governance and understand that ideological purity does not correspond with effective governance.

[ Parent ]
Democrats are just reasonable people by nature
Open-minded. Even the conservative ones.

[ Parent ]
Whoa....
Who said I was advocating a primary of the president?  I've been lambasted for basically saying it's impossible, and it basically is at this point.

Only half of the party base is OK with this deal, and probably many of those are just saying it our of support for the pres and still don't like it.  Those are pretty lousy numbers--I don't care how many indies you get.  Indies don't canvass or contribute $$$.  Indies can never be your "base" 'cos they swing like the breeze and don't stick with anyone too long.

This deal alone wouldn't get a primary challenge, but the new GOP congress is going to want to gut democratic priorities left and right.  How Obama responds to GOP attempts to gut social security will be a much bigger factor.

But, it's irrelevant.  Like you said, if there is even a modicum of competitiveness with a challenge, then there is no way anyone wins.  The big danger is a green party candidate making waves.  There are enough disaffected liberals to Naderize Obama in 2012.  That is a threat the president should not ignore.


[ Parent ]
Who is going to get
the sort of votes that Nader would get? I doubt Nader himself will get much support.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
It could be anyone, really...
But, I wouldn't underestimate a third party person wrecking havoc at this point. There are certainly as many or more progressives angry at the Dems than there were in 2000, and it doesn't take very many votes to throw a tight election.  Nader got like, what, 20,000 votes in 2000 in FL?  That was more than enough.

[ Parent ]
Nader got almost 100K votes in FL, but Obama is not Gore......
People learn lessons.  And there were plenty enough Nader voters who learned after 2000 that all they accomplished was to get Dubya elected, and a disastrous war in Iraq started.

I don't think they'll make that same mistake again, people have learned.

And Obama for his part has a strong personal following Gore never had.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Yeah, these third-parties have more or less collapsed
I think combined all of them (both left and right wing parties) got between 1%-2% of the vote in 2008 (slightly more than in 2004, but still nothing).

This is more or less the same thing as the PUMA thing in 2008, it's less than nothing and makes the people who talk about it look foolish (and it really falls in line with a credible primary challenge, it'll only happen if Obama's doomed anyways).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
If we had a parliamentary system
multiple parties would be more viable.  It would also help if the electoral college thrown out (it disincentivizes other parties from joining the fold due to the requirement to get the majority of electoral votes).

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!


[ Parent ]
Yeah, and I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to that either
In truth, I am to the left of the Democratic Party as it stands but the Democrats are the left-of-center party in the US and the only thing that keeps the lunatics on the Republican side from taking control of government.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
You very last few words are the most important......

Bingo.  Serious primary challenges don't "weaken" a President running for reelection, they just indicate a President is already doomed.

It's a myth that Buchanan weakened Bush 41, that Kennedy weakened Carter, or that Reagan weakened Ford.  These Presidents were already doomed, and would have lost by the same margins as they did absent primary challenges.  Their primary challenges came, after all, from the fringes of their respective parties, based on arguments that don't resonate with nonpartisan swing voters.

The same thing is true now.  All the "primary Obama" talk comes from the left, looking for someone to Obama's left.  A general electorate doesn't care what a party's fringe thinks, their reasons for opposing an incumbent President are completely different.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
True, though, if I were a betting man, I'd wage Nader runs again in '12
Though he's no longer a formidable "spoiler," he did garner more than half a percentage point in the following swing states in '08: Colorado, Iowa, Missouri (garnered 18K votes, Obama lost by 4K), Nevada, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. He won 42K votes in Ohio, which, if the state became a 1-point race and Nader performed the same, could surely tilt it in the Republican's favor.  

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
If Romney is the nominee
this effect should be compensated by an inevitable Christain right candidate who should get at least 1%, and maybe a lot more.

[ Parent ]
By the time Romney wins the nomination, won't it be too late for that?
I feel like, especially with Huckabee and Palin energized behind Romney, the mobilization and time just wouldn't be there to mount a formidable "religious right" candidate. I suppose a guy like Tony Perkins would consider jumping in, but I think the GOP establishment could sway him otherwise.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

[ Parent ]
Governing isn't about doing what is popular
Besides, there are plenty examples in recent history of things working out okay when people were against it to begin with. Not that Democrats actually even oppose it. And anyway, I don't remember liberals complaining about Dems going against the public on passing HCR or for bucking the American people on the Iraq resolution.

[ Parent ]
Dems never bucked the American people on the Iraq resolution......
On Iraq, going to war had broad support--misguided, paranoid, wrongheaded support.  Support that mystified me because it was obvious Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 nor was Iraq otherwise a threat to our safety or, being as weakened as it transparently was since losing the 1991 Gulf War, its own neighbors' sovereign integrity.  But it was broadly supported nonetheless.  It had about the same support from indies and GOPers as Obama's tax deal now, and only modestly less support from Dems.

Dems supported the Iraq resolution out of fear of the American people, not bucking them.  Hell, even my own beloved Tom Harkin, a liberal icon for whom I interned during my college years, voted for war.

But your broader point is right, it's often true that what's unpopular proves right, and what's popular proves wrong.

On the tax cuts, a lot of liberals don't seem to "get it" that as much as a lot of us, myself included, oppose the Dubya tax cuts as bad policy, the reality is they're popular, and it's hard to make a persuasive case against them when the concrete adverse consequences of aggravating deficits and the national debt are many years, even decades, down the road.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
That was my point
It is always fine to cite public opinion when it suits. The Dems who voted against Iraq were lauded in the netroots for doing the right thing despite the polls and rightly so. But they can't have it both ways.

[ Parent ]
They have short memories like everyone else
The next shiny bauble will get everybody in a new tizzy soon enough. And they are likely to get a few juicy bones tossed their way before that. This is all inside baseball anyway. To the vast majority of the electorate the only thing the matters are jobs. If and when those come back will be the only thing that decides the next election.

[ Parent ]
Who's going to
challenge Obama from his left who is even a remotely serious contender? And more specifically, who is going to be able to make a dent in his support amongst blacks in the primaries?

I'm almost tempted to say that if anyone tries to primary him, it'll help him, because it won't be anyone major, so he won't lose, but he won't look like a captive of the Democratic base. He'll in fact look like the opposite, which would in theory make him look like more attractive to the center.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?


[ Parent ]
I think the only person
who could be a remotely serious primary challenger is Russ Feingold.  But I seriously doubt he would take the plunge.  

[ Parent ]
You've pretty much crystalized why Obama...
...is practically bulletproof in the primary.  And he knows it...  

[ Parent ]
Irrelevant when it didn't have the votes
Senators showed where they stood when they got 53 votes for what we all wanted now they have to actually do what is possible and actually govern.

[ Parent ]
The frustrating thing is Obama is fighting the left
much more then he ever fought the right. I wish that he would at least try to attack republicans on something instead of always taking this "I'm post-partisan and both parties are equally bad" road. The fact that he seems so eager to avoid a fight that he will do pretty much anything to avoid looking partisan is kind of scary. What if republicans shut down the government or filibuster the debt ceiling extension? I seriously afraid that Obama will just give in to them to avoid a fight and they will come out looking strong and bold and Obama would have just pissed off more of his base.

What a joke
"By using rhetoric that calls us 'hostage-takers,' he believes, somehow, that the Left will give him some credit for hating us, or putting us in a bad light. But it just lowers him. He is whining, and no one likes a whining president... There is a lot of disappointment on our side. Quite frankly, this is going to be hard to forget."

From the mouth of Senator Graham (R-SC), not one of the most partisan members of the GOP.


[ Parent ]
Sounds like whining to me
And Graham does a lot of that, partisan or not. They're not going to forget it? What are they going to do, filibuster everything?  

[ Parent ]
Lindsay Graham really is an emotionally immature whiner......
There's something in his tone and temperament that suggests some kind of deep bitterness.  I don't know what it is, or why he has it.  I can see why he's close to McCain, but McCain has the exact same thing, the same deep bitterness.  They both occupy this narrow space on ideology and policy that is essentially establishment conservatism, but they have thin skins and take everything personally.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
Agreed big-time
It's the only thing that explains McCain's recent actions on DADT and the DREAM Act (both of which he's supported or at least been open to in the past).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
They both want to be courted like a spoiled high school beauty queen......
God forbid they not be given the limelight at all times, and be deemed pivotal in whatever they involve themselves in.

No humility in either one of them.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
Dude, he referred to them as "hostage takers"
I mean what are you people looking for?  

[ Parent ]
Obama NEVER says "both parties are equally bad" or suggests any such thing......
One thing Obama never does, that plenty of DLC Democrats do, is to rhetorically distance himself from his party or from liberal ideology.  He never criticizes the Democratic Party that I can remember, and he never manufactures moral equivalence between them or between liberals and conservatives.  All his talk about post-partisanship comes without criticizing Democrats or liberals.

There are people who pull that crap.  Bill Clinton did so out of necessity in 1992 with his Sister Souljah stunt and when he said "the era of big government is over."  Evan Bayh has always done this.  Joe Lieberman has done it.

But Obama's been much more careful.

Now, where Obama gets frustrated is with liberal interest groups who've criticized his Presidency.  I think that's a mistake on his part because he's let it get to him, given that I think all his comments are out of frustration, not part of tactics or strategy.  I think Obama's mistake in this regard has been failing to recognize what roles these groups do play and need to play in the political process, and that the role doesn't always involve defending the Administration.  Obama doesn't get it that having these groups criticize him isn't always harmful to him, and occasionally can be helpful either to his image or even in getting legislative deals more to Obama's own liking.  He hasn't figured that out yet, or how to harness their virtues in a way that helps us all.

One thing about Obama that has always been clear to me:  he is a liberal in his own heart and mind, and has never suggested otherwise.  None of his talk of bipartisanship or post-partisanship has ever implied that he's something other than a liberal Democrat.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About the Site

SSP Resources

Blogroll