After January, I predict that the DC media will re-discover the evil of the filibuster and also re-discover how it obstructs government so terribly. I further predict that the phrase “60 votes needed for passage” will be struck from the media lexicon, to be replaced with “majority vote needed for passage”.
I’ll just leave that prediction here and check back in a few months to see if I’m right.
Belafon
The filibuster never existed.
LER
Sadly, you’ll be right…Who knows maybe the “all republican congress” can start right away with their impeachment plans…you know it’s on the agenda.
Eric U.
can’t they just get rid of it? My understanding is that Reid made a big mistake keeping it in the first place
Alex
Similarly, I would be surprised if Harry Reid doesn’t re-discover the virtues of the filibuster and the glorious “minority rights” it protects. Politicians practice politics.
Belafon
@Alex: Except he never completely got rid of it. Only on nominations.
Edmund Dantes
If the Dems don’t use the filibuster, they deserve what they get. Make the republicans blow it up. I don’t want to see bad legislation pass with 54 vs 46. It better all be 60 plus unless the Republicans have eliminated the filibuster.
Alicia
Nope, you’re totally right. Also, if you tell the Republicans they used to push for the filibuster and 60 votes, they’ll tell you you’re crazy, they never said that, what are you talking about. The DC Media will sit there with their thumbs up the asses and agree.
If the Democrats do filibuster, expect the Republicans and the media to go crazy and lecture the Democrats to stop being “obstructionist” even though the Repubs have been doing nothing but that for the past few years.
Corner Stone
“Upper Down Vote! Rule of Law!”
BGinCHI
Silver Lining Prediction:
The GOP will now proceed to do two things.
1. Overreach massively, demonstrating to even the dumbasses who voted for them that they cannot and will not govern except to wreck the economy and mess with vaginas, gays, and browns.
2. Tear each other apart in a grab for power within the party, with purists and establishment types going hammer and tongs at each other. This will be bad for government but good for entertainment. It will also show that they are in it for power, not governing.
If these two things occur, the GOP will be left with their narrow support among olds and stupid white people, so may the grim reaper do his beautiful work.
boatboy_srq
@Alicia: I’m waiting for a headline like “Democrats Continue to Obstruct Senate Business Despite New Minority Status”.
Belafon
So, a question. I’m hearing a lot of “they weren’t progressive enough” and “we’ll need a strong, progressive presidential candidate in 2016.” How is – from the standpoint of getting someone elected – “a strong, progressive presidential candidate” different than Cruz’s “a true conservative that stands on their principles”? I know which one I want, but that’s not the question I’m asking.
I’m just having trouble buying that if our candidates had only been more progressive, they would have won. Candidates that were progressive lost, candidates that embraced Obama (Christ literally) lost, etc.
boatboy_srq
@BGinCHI: IOW, 2011 redux?
/semisnark
ETA: “It will also show that they are in it for power, not governing” shouldn’t be news. The GOTea’s platform seemingly includes the “Gubmint is Bad, and Should Be Drowned In The Bathtub” plank – and when people (and I use that word loosely here) are elected to public office with that precise intent, we shouldn’t be surprised that they’re interested in anything except governing.
NonyNony
Democrats aren’t going to filibuster much because they won’t have to – Obama can veto anything the Republicans pass whether it’s with only Republican votes or only Republican +5 votes. If they’re getting more than 5 Dems to sign onto it in the Senate then the filibuster is worthless anyway. (and we might as well make that a +4 because they’ve already got a +1 – Manchin will attach himself to almost anything the GOP Senate delagation is willing to vote for – hell I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that he’s negotiating a party switch right now to make it an official 56 GOPers in the Senate because he’s worried about what his future as a Democrat looks like in WV today).
The party with the President never needs to filibuster anything if the president is willing to use his veto pen. Hell Obama doesn’t even have to worry about re-election – he can veto everything that comes to his desk without fear of any consequences at this point.
piratedan
@boatboy_srq: ding ding ding… and why won’t the President work with Congress to dismantle his landmark legislation…..
Cluttered Mind
@Belafon: Alan Grayson didn’t have much of a problem getting himself re-elected, despite Florida.
ETA: And as for how it’s different than Cruz’s strategy for getting elected and wielding power…it’s not. Cruz’s strategy is incredibly effective at motivating his base. We should be so lucky as to have prominent Dems that can generate that level of excitement.
Served
@Belafon: Well, in Illinois at least, voters overwhelmingly voted for (non-binding) minimum wage hike and millionaire tax initiatives, but elected an anti-wage hike, billionaire to Governor. So, the policy was popular, but our candidate and messaging sucked, basically.
shelley
Lordy. So there was probably much popping of champagne corks among the GOP with the feeling ‘We’re in charge now, fuckers!’
To do what?
Endless votes to repeal Obamacare, which will go nowhere.
Endless Issa-like ‘investigations’ and impeachments which will go nowhere.
Immigration reform? Can’t upset their base for 2016
Job creation and infrastructure? Don’t make me laugh.
Linda Featheringill
I’m glad to see the comments to the effect that the Dems don’t really need the fillibuster. I fear that the Repubs will dismantle it altogether. But if it doesn’t really make any difference . . . .
Tone In DC
@BGinCHI:
They won’t stop at hammers and tongs. With apologies to Tarantino, they’ll grab blowtorches and get medieval on each other. It happened between 2006 and 2008.
KG
@Belafon: I don’t think it has much to do with ideology (true progressive vs true conservative). It was a combination of factors for Democrats: a bad map; poorly run campaigns by several candidates; no unifying message/theme/issue to nationalize the races; and, the Dems running away from their successes. That last one baffles me – republicans will run reelection campaigns that always point out what they did, but Democrats for some reason have decided that the right answer is running away from accomplishments rather than pointing out what they’ve done and why it’s good for voters.
Eric U.
@Belafon: they have to differentiate themselves somehow. They don’t even have the guts to say, “well, I’m the one that’s not crazy, my opponent is”
I suspect the thing that killed dems that is under the control of Obama is the aggressive enforcement against undocumented workers. I know he’s doing it trying to get amnesty through, but it hurt him amongst Latinos and the Fox news crowd think that obamacare gives free health care to illegal immigrants no matter how many raids they perform.
Mnemosyne
I have a prediction of my own that occurred to me last night: I think the mysterious drop in women voters is going to be attributable to the voter ID laws that mean women who changed their names when they got married and/or divorced have to bring in reams of documentation to prove they are who they say they are.
Once again, we got outmaneuvered by conservatives — we thought they were going after poor people with those laws, when they were really going after women voters, a much larger and more active group of voters that skews more and more Democratic as the years go by.
boatboy_srq
@Belafon: Candidates that leaned away from POTUS and their own party seemed to do worse than those that didn’t. Look at Grimes: up against the least popular Senator (I first typed “Senarot” and I’m still not sure it was a typo) in the country even among his own constituents and she still lost because Waffle and Hedging and I’m-Not-Gonna-Say-Whether-I-Voted-For-The-NiCLANG. When your target voters are apparently energized more by POTUS than by issues, steering clear of the figure makes a point they don’t care to hear.
The last few elections have offered a choice between the at-least-marginally competent and the b#tsh!t crazy. I’m opposed to Voter ID, but I wonder if a certification of mental health might be worthwhile for at least the candidates.
Snarki, child of Loki
Fox News will unilaterally redefine a “filibuster” as
One “Democrat Party” senator
Standing up, and asking one simple, short question
Because obviously the Senate is totally stalled while being “filibustered”. Especially when the questions are clearly out of bounds and uncivil and shit, like:
“How are you suggesting we pay for these tax cuts you are proposing?”
Really, how are those GOP statesmen expected to put up with such barbarities, amirite?
boatboy_srq
@Cluttered Mind: Orlando. An outlier of semi-sanity in a fever swamp of IGMFY. Yoho and Buchanan both kept their seats, too, and don’t ask my opinion of either. And Ros-Lehtinen and Diaz-Balart ran unopposed, so there wasn’t even the energy in those districts to present an alternative.
Joe Buck
Here’s how it will play out: during the lame duck session, Republicans will loudly say that if the Dems try to do anything at all without 60 votes (including confirming a replacement for Holder) the Republicans will, reluctantly, get rid of the filibuster. Dems will quail and quake and serve out their time, and the Republicans will formally end the filibuster in January, no matter what.
The purpose of the filibuster is to stop Democrats from doing anything. It was never intended to impede Republicans.
C.V. Danes
@BGinCHI:
I think the lesson from Kansas, though, is that it doesn’t matter what the Republicans do. Stupidity is infinite, and it does what it does.
PIGL
@BGinCHI: this narrow support is demonstrably sufficient to maintain a death-like grip on power, and a ruling majority in Washington.
Matt McIrvin
One thing they can do is keep Supreme Court seats empty if one of the liberals dies. They can keep doing that for years, if necessary, until either a Republican President gets elected or they lose the Senate. Expect attempts to get it back up to nine to be characterized as “Court-packing.”
Botsplainer
So I do have one funny thought.
Imagine being married to on of those doom-y voices that accuse or frighten on GOP ads.
Listening to a voice over and over again in a tone that only comes out during arguments has to suck.
C.V. Danes
@Belafon:
How about we just get some Democrats who aren’t ashamed to be Democrats and start from there.
SenyorDave
@Tone In DC: I no longer believe it is possible for the GOP to overreach. Brownback is the poster child for this. He actually wrecked the state’s finances, created long-term problems, and he still won. And he faced a pretty decent candidate.
C.V. Danes
@NonyNony:
If I were Obama at this point, I would just give the Republicans everything they want and follow Bush into oblivion. Stop fighting the stupidity and be done with it.
kindness
@Belafon: It isn’t so much that Democrats who run for office need to be liberals. I think it’s more important that they stand up proudly for Democratic policy. Case in point Alison Grimes. She ran away from all the good things Obama brought. And I doubt she got one independent vote for her embarrassment.
Same thing happened after Clinton’s last term. Democrats allowed the media to call the man a pariah and no one defended him including Al Gore.
Running as Republican Lite won’t get you elected. That is the point.
Oh yea – and the media. The nations media is in the tank for Republican rule. Democrats have to attack it just as well in order to get their framing out there. The media won’t.
C.V. Danes
@SenyorDave: Exactly. I have no tears for Kansas at this point. Let them self-immolate in their stupidity.
Cluttered Mind
@Botsplainer: James Carville doesn’t seem to lose much sleep. Or money.
Kay
Redfern is out:
National Democrats should fire some people, too. If they want small donors there has to be some accountability.
Belafon
@C.V. Danes: I agree.
BGinCHI
@Served: Exactly. The Democratic party needs to take a hard look at its process. The Machine is broken.
Asking people to vote for Quinn was not a motivating idea.
Mike R
@C.V. Danes: If that ain’t the truth I don’t know what is, it does suck more than a black hole.
gratuitous
Also, the phrase “the will of the people” will once again be uttered after a complete absence since the 2008 election, and politicians will be hammered with questions about why they’re going against the will of the people. You will not be allowed to remember whether that question was ever posed to, say, Ted Cruz or Mitch McConnell from 2009 to 2014.
C.V. Danes
@kindness: Yup. What does it say to the electorate when a Democrat is afraid to admit that, as a Democrat, he or she voted for a Democrat for president?
Personally, though, I think the Democrats are just addicted to losing.
Botsplainer
@Cluttered Mind:
Yeah, but Matalin isn’t on voice overs that he hears 50X a day.
Imagine hearing one of those “I’m upset/enraged/disappointed” tones in the voice of your SO over and over and over again.
B-r-r-r-rrrrrrr….
Sherparick
@BGinCHI: The one thing that makes me pause is that house Republicans chose McCarthy for majority leader after Cantor got bounced in his primary. That at least indicates that a large majority is worried about there own Tea Party extremes. They don’t really want to touch Social Security and Medicare but that will light a rebellion in their older white base.
Although it does depress me to see so many assholes and fakes win, and I do worry about long term trend to oligarchic republic that we have been on since the 1970s, the history of such mid-term shellackings of Presidents in their second terms goes back over century (FDR lost 81 seats in 1938) so this is nothing unique to Obama. http://www.usmidtermelections.com/midterm_summary.php?year=1906_2014&chart=midh&rank=Y
The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik
@SenyorDave:
Pretty much. This election’s one unifying message seemed to be ‘GOP isn’t allowed to suffer any consequences for batshit crazy.’
Violet
@Mnemosyne:
Yep. Lesson to women: DO NOT CHANGE YOUR NAME. EVER.
samiam
Every 6-8 years the chambers of power change hands. This is nothing new. In 2-4 more years we will get back the house. Haven’t looked at where the senate is at 2 years from now but I think a lot of the retirements on the Dem side are out of the way now.
All this boils down to is people not voting. It doesn’t mean anything other than that. Not a vote for or against anything. When 75% of the electorate are old white blue hairs this is what happens. I mean Scott Walker and Rick Scott re-elected! Come on.
Just a blip as far as I’m concerned. Will probably get it all back in 2 years and demographic shifts are still unstoppable.
gene108
@BGinCHI:
GOP overreached in Kansas, Maine, Florida, etc. and did not pay the price. The only state, where the GOP paid the price was PA.
Any state government with a GOP legislature and Democratic Governor has not been able to overreach. Whatever internal quibbles go on do not make the news and the Democratic in the Executive branch keeps the worst of GOP policy at bay, thus benefiting the GOP, so they can say “hey we are not as crazy as they say, look nothing crazy has been enacted.”
I just believe the people they will run for President, in 2016, will be so terribly unlikeable that they cannot keep it hidden given the close scrutiny Presidential candidate get versus other elected offices.
BGinCHI
I’m also really tired of hearing about how the politicians are failing the country.
How about The Country is Failing Itself?
We are getting exactly the government we deserve. It just hurts those of us who live in a reality based reality. I’m ashamed at how like a stupid bully we are behaving. But this has all been said before….
I’m tired of the experiment in democracy but it’s the only one we’ve got.
This is probably the worse post I have ever written.
Served
@BGinCHI: We were due for Dem fatigue though. 12 years of governance by one party is pretty long even for Illinois, and our relentless (and mostly incorrect) self-flagellation has made things seem more dire than they are economically. People wanted “change” and some middle class people want to punish other middle class people in unions, so here we are.
On the flipside, Dems maintained their veto-proof majorities in both chambers of the legislature and Durbin destroyed Oberweis. Obviously, the Gov’s campaign didn’t translate into votes whatsoever.
Or as Joe Klein would say: This is good news for Lisa Madigan
MomSense
@Mnemosyne:
It looks like women, especially white, married women voted Republican. This has been the case for a number of years now. Depressing. Maddening.
Citizen_X
@BGinCHI: Under the Tear-Each-Other-Apart heading, Ted Cruz poised to make life miserable for Mitch McConnell (warning: autoplay):
The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik
@samiam:
This isn’t just about Congress though. This is about everything, local, state, etc. And we got murdered from top to bottom.
Violet
@SenyorDave:
Silver lining for Brownback winning is that he’s got to deal with the mess he made. Usually the Republicans screw it all up and the Dems have to clean it up. Not this time. He gets to own it.
Mike R
@samiam: The shifts are unstoppable, true enough. The question is how much damage can a cabal of absolutely the worst people in the world do in the mean time. Hopefully we can at least slow the reactionaries down for a bit.
Belafon
@Served: I wish we would get Republican fatigue in Texas.
RaflW
@beltane in an earlier thread today:
We often think of the media as being very biased towards Republicans. But in fact they are really biased towards the deep myth of market capitalism. It so happens that Republicans are more linked to that message than Dems, but look at folks like Hillary. She’s in the tank for Wall Street. She’s acceptable to the market-fetishists who really make the decisions in our country.
A friend on FB this morning posted
Yup.
C.V. Danes
@Mnemosyne:
I agree, basically because I don’t think people really realize the depth of Republican mendacity.
Sherparick
Routinely the last 5 years it has been “the Senate failed to pass” on AP, NPR, and McClatchey wire stories. It will be interesting if starting next year it will “Democrats filibustered” (name bill). I am not sure what the Republicans agenda is accept being against President Obama’s “failed leadership.”
Alex S.
@Kay:
Yes, Guy Cecil, too… that GOTV operation was a total failure. And many will disagree, but Pelosi and Reid need to step down, too.
Anoniminous
Early turnout number: 36.6%
A collapse of ~5% from 2010.
The big GOTV we’ve heard so much about in North Carolina? 39.8% voter turnout in 2010, 40.7% last night.
Democratic government is a reflection of the Will of the People and the will of the people expressed last night is, “Fuck it. I don’t care and you can’t make me.”
Citizen_X
Some good new: the Demon Weed made a near-sweep! Medical pot lost in Florida, yes (had to get 60% & change the constitution, wtf FL?), but it won in Guam, and legalization won in DC, Oregon, and Alaska.
And you know we all need some kind today.
Kay
@BGinCHI:
It’s true to a certain extent but it’s such a political loser. I heard Republicans say it after Romney lost in Ohio. I thought “losers” then, and I stand by that!
Blaming voters when you’re a politician or a political party is just not a good idea.
There’s nowhere to go with that :)
Alien_radio
This was basically my first thought this morning.
Cacti
@Sherparick:
They really didn’t have one.
They ran on incumbent President fatigue and won.
El Cid
You know, if Democrats work with Republicans to try and get ‘stuff done’, they will be helping the country and they will be rewarded for it.
I learned this from Chris Matthews. He was really mad at Harry Reid for being so personal and destructive and bitter for not letting the Keystone XL pipeline up for a vote.
You know what would probably make voters really reward Democrats?
A good, mature Grand Bargain in which we finally recognize that we just can’t afford Social Security and Medicare like we used to, and we all need to tighten our belts and buck up.
Citizen_X
@Citizen_X: In general, progressive ballot measures did pretty well yesterday, including minimum-wage increases in a bunch of deep-red states.
So we got that going for us.
BGinCHI
@Kay: I know. I’m out of ideas….
Alex S.
The next two years will basically be the Republican machine against Obama. He’ll have a real bully pulpit now. With each veto, he can argue against them, if he chooses to do so.
Suffern ACE
@Mike R: I don’t see it happening. I see Republicans taking control of New York State long before we even get close in places like AZ or Texas. I think we’re done as a national party. And our regional strongholds are full of swingers.
C.V. Danes
@Citizen_X:
I think this is a forgone conclusion. No party that is ideologically aligned to southern conservatism is going to pass up the chance to hang a black man. They’ve been weaving the rope for six years, and their base is going to demand that they “hang that nigger.”
Sorry for my language, but having grown up in the South, I believe that is representative of the language they will be using.
gene108
@Mnemosyne:
I think the problems women have with name changes is an unintended consequence, rather than an evil plot of masterminds. Enough women vote Republican / move / get divorced/ get married that it could have been a detriment to them as well.
RaflW
@NonyNony:
I don’t see Obama behaving that way, though. Will he veto bills that ruin ACA? I think so.
But he’ll sign some shit-awful “tax reform.” Mark my words, he will. There will be other crap that oozes out of Congress that Obama will sign and we’ll see Democrats maintain the low crouch.
I’m f’ing sick of it, but I don’t see it changing. I’d love to be proven wrong. Maybe Liz Warren can get in the president’s face and tell him to man up. I dunno.
C.V. Danes
@Alex S.:
Actually, the next two years will be the Republican machine against Clinton. Which would be awesome if in two years she declined to run and left them standing with their dicks in their collective hands.
JWR
Did anybody else watch “CBS This Morning” today? Christ on a fucking stick… they were laughing and chatting away with Chris Christie and their newest contributer, Peggy Noonan! (Hell, I was surprised they didn’t bring out Bill O’Reilly to hear his take on “Killing Democrats” or some such.) Then they talked about a CBS “Exclusive” on the birth of ISIS, without once mentioning that said birth was a direct consequence of the clusterfuck that was the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
After they brought back serial fabricator Laura Logan, I changed my tagline over at Dailykos to read, “CBS: It’s the new Fox!” I think it’s time to change it back. So here ya go… “CBS: It really is the new Fox!”
Just had to get that off my chest. Feeling better now. Thanks.
El Cid
I predict that much of the Republican leadership has underestimated the venemous base id about to be unleashed upon them screaming for the impeachment of that great Constitution-breaker Barack HOO-SANE Obama.
pseudonymous in nc
@Belafon:
It’s not about ideology, it’s about being willing to a) stand with the rest of the party; b) call out the opposition as fruitloops. As Atrios said, “vote for this Dem, I’m not like all the sucky other Dems” is not a winning strategy.
Eric U.
@C.V. Danes: I absolutely understand why Grimes did that, but she should have just said yes and had reasons why it is ok.
Belafon
@Citizen_X: And this might be where Republicans at all levels overplay their hand. All of the citizens progressive measures get killed by Republicans wouldn’t be good.
ellie
@MomSense: Well I have been thinking that it is time that these white Republican women feel some pain because of their votes. How is the best way to accomplish this?
coin operated
STOP thinking this way. You’re not paying attention…a new generation brought up on MTV reality drama and Disney’s new line of cut-throat sitcoms thoroughly enjoys the bitch-slap politics of the right. My facespace feed is full of them.
samiam
@The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik: So? That’s consistent with the low voter turnout so what is your point. How is any of this different from the last midterm? These are boomers voting and after they are mostly gone there is nowhere for the gop to hide.
All this doom and gloom is overblown. 2 more years and we get it all back and them some guaranteed.
Meanwhile over at the orange satan they are blaming Obama (of course) for not being progressive enough….lol. Just nothing but stupid from the left today.
Ruckus
@Kay:
This.
Someone commented last night that once President Obama’s crew was no longer involved it fell back to the old line standard dem party to run the midterm. And that’s exactly what it looked like. Dems in panic. Hell it looked like that here last night. As a party we seem to have no confidence in ourselves. And our issues. And many of the dem insiders seem to be worse than the voters. It seems like they don’t give a crap about the policies of the candidates or what little exists of the party policies. Any more it seems to be about what is the minimum we can get done. No one even going for the long shot. OK Sanders, RGB and Warren. Yes President Obama got the ACA passed. But none of these 4 were/are running.
JMG
It will be almost impossible for the Republicans to get enough votes among themselves for any legislation Obama could sign without humiliating himself. And there aren’t many Democrats in the Senate left for whom it’d be an advantage to roll over for the Republicans. Not gonna help Al Franken, not gonna help Patty Murray or Jack Reed.
pseudonymous in nc
@samiam:
Maybe 6-8 years. Gerrymandered redistricting doesn’t last the full decade, because district populations change, but the House and state legislatures are pretty much locked in for a while. That’s what happens when politicians get to pick their voters — especially if you bank on a midterm drop-off in turnout.
Cervantes
@gene108: In fact, if there is a differential propensity to adopt the husband’s name upon marrying, you’d think it would show up more among Republican women than among Democratic ones. Plus divorce and re-marriage are more common in “Red” states, especially in the South.
The Thin Black Duke
@ellie: Easy. Just wait.
El Caganer
@RaflW: They don’t want him to sign anything: the narrative is/will be that he’s vetoing bills because he’s being ‘obstructionist.’ That way they can flaunt the very nuttiest ideas they have and nobody will call them on it. That will be the lead-in for 2016 – we can’t have another obstructionist president preventing the government from carrying out its responsibilities.
Seanly
I have a new test case for the Crazification Factor! My own personal take is that the 27% is plus/minus.
In Idaho, non-state entities have to get 67% approval to pass bond measures. Last year, City of Boise wanted to do a pair of bonds. One was for enhancing public spaces and acquiring more land to protect & extend our wonderful Greenbelt. The other was to improve fire safety (important in a semi-arid high desert). A new state of the art fire training facility and 4 new/rehabbed fire houses would be built (in addition, additional fire fighting staff & better pay). All together it was around $30 million in bonds to be financed by ~$1 a month in increased property taxes for the average home owner (yes, only $12 a year for the average home owner). I worked phones a few times & there were lots of folks who bitched about even $1 a month. Fine, you cheap SOBs. Both votes for the bonds failed by a couple of percentage points.
Fast forward to this year. The mayor & fire chief figured out a way to pay for the fire safety bond without any new taxes. It would be financed by savings from debt reductions & reduced payments into an already fully funded fire fighter pension. So, no new taxes, no increased taxes, build a new state of the art fire fighter training facility, replace or repair 4 fire houses including ones in the growing sides of the city. Not passing would mean reduction of staff to pay for the needed repairs and increased response times in some areas. So I can’t see any downside to passing the measure. There was no reason to vote NO on it.
The bond passed this year 76% to 24%. One quarter of Boiseans voted against a fire safety measure in a semi-arid region prone to forest fires that would result in no new or increased taxes.
japa21
There is a part of me, the insane part, that wishes Obama and Biden would get and say to the country, “It is apparent that you want the GOP to govern this country, so both of us are resigning effective January 6, 2015 and John Boehner will be your President.”
That would almost guarantee that the GOP would lose everywhere in 2016.
But I love my country too much to really want that to happen.
Cacti
@JMG:
Yup.
Regardless of what happens with the filibuster, it takes 67 Senators to override a Presidential veto. There aren’t enough Joe Manchins in the Dem caucus to make that one a reality on any of the worst teabagger legislative policies.
El Cid
@Seanly:
We underestimate the lobbying power of Big Fire.
gene108
@kindness:
No offence, but the fabled Democratic liberal “base” does not stand up for Democratic policies. The freak-out over the lack of a public option or the fact Obamacare dooms universal single payer, in this country, are examples.
For ever liberal type success a Democratic President has there are millions of Lefties bitching it did not do enough and/or some how betrayed them.
I look at the revulsion DADT has amongst the left as an example. Bill Clinton was the first President ever to try and make gay rights an issue and did as much as he could, but the Left seems to hold him as some sort of traitor for it, as if the military was openly welcoming of gays and the Clinton Administration kicked the gays out of the military.
Who the fuck in this country is rock solid behind anything a Democratic politician does?
For everyone one thing you might like, I’m sure there are three things that piss you off, because Democrats are politicians after all and whether it’s drone strikes, NSA wire tapping, or whatever no Democrat will ever be good enough to get the undying support of the fabled “base”.
So who exactly should a Democratic politician appeal to?
I support the President’s tough stance on taking out Osama and targeted drone strikes? I’m sure it’d appeal to some folks, but not others.
I support Obamacare, would appeal to some folks but not others.
There’s no group that Democrats have to appeal to that has internalized anything the way the Republican base has internalized tax cuts are always good, abortion is always bad, any attempt at any gun restriction (goal posts keep moving, mind you) will lead to outright gun confiscation, gays are a sin and illegal immigrants need to be deported.
Corner Stone
@Alex S.: Did you forget to add a /snark tag to that?
Violet
@ellie: There really isn’t a way for the white women to feel the pain. Maybe occasionally having trouble voting because of a name issue. The few who need an abortion because the fetus has some terrible medical issue and they can’t get one. Outside of that, I don’t see a lot.
Now if Hillary or another women runs for president and the GOP ramps up its misogyny to another level, which will probably happen, I think that might change the situation a bit.
Tone In DC
@SenyorDave:
They almost always overreach. And they usually pay for it. You haven’t forgotten 2000-2008, and how insane things got. In both chambers of Congress, and the executive branch.
You recall Bob “love some more gifts” McDonnell and his ultrasound initiative for women who want an abortion.
You remember Wendy Davis’ filibuster not too long ago (and the winger reaction to her doing so).
You remember the SOPA, just a few years ago.
You remember (waaaay back in 2005) when Dubya wanted privatize Social Security and AARP et al. stopped that brain-dead idea in its tracks.
Overreach doesn’t happen every single time, but it happens enough.
pseudonymous in nc
@Ruckus:
The amount of money involved in presidential campaigns gives them the power to overrule the old state party apparatus and also the DC campaign “professionals”. The people who did the tech and activism and grassroots stuff for Obama in 2012? They’re doing broader civic work now, like Code for America. They’re not working on campaigns. The GOP’s wingnut welfare operation has a campaign wing that never shuts down, because there’s a fuckload of money available for putting state houses and local government in the hands of ALEC.
Again, Atrios has been writing his sucky blog long enough to have spent time with “the professional left”, the people who tell candidates how to run campaigns and book ads and so on, and get paid (amply, from your donations) no matter what the outcome.
50 State Strategy or bust.
Corner Stone
@El Caganer:
An obstructionist Dictator.
Botsplainer
@Citizen_X:
That’ll make about as much of a positive difference in the vast majority of voters lives as gay marriage.
Kay
@Ruckus:
I think they made a decision to downplay income inequality because it was “too negative” and that just seems like a very DC thing to decide to me.
Because they ended up sounding like they were blaming working and middle class people for the fact that their wages are stagnant or declining. The sounded like they were lecturing them, at BEST offering them advice. I found it unbearable, and I’m a partisan Democrat.
I like the Secretary of Labor. But don’t send him to Cleveland to tell people he’s the “Match Dot Com” of employment. They don’t need an employment agency. They don’t need career advice. They need an advocate. Someone who takes a side. Their side.
It’s not even. It’s not a level playing field, where the Dept of Labor has to broker an agreement between huge companies and people who make 12 dollars an hour and weigh in on “both sides”. Huge companies will be FINE. They don’t need a government assist.
Nom de Plume
So seriously, what are the prospects for 2016? I keep hearing that this was the worst map the Dems would have to face for some time to come.
Tone In DC
@Suffern ACE:
If this were the case, Bill DeBlasio would have had an actual close race, last time. If the Democrats (lame as many are, especially Andy Cuomo) are done as a national party, the GOP would have 60 seats in the Senate, after last night.
The situation was worse 14 years ago. Now, at least there is an adult in the Oval Office. Hopefully, Obama’s got his veto pen ready to go.
The Thin Black Duke
@Botsplainer: If it means a black kid won’t get arrested for smoking a joint, I’ll take it. African-Americans have always been the “collateral damage” in the War On Drugs, y’know?
El Caganer
@The Thin Black Duke: “Collateral damage?” Looking at sentencing disparities, I’d be more inclined to think “primary target.”
Cacti
@Nom de Plume:
Considerably better.
Presidential years bring out a different electorate, and Rs will be defending seats in the following states that Obama won twice: Illinois, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, and Colorado.
Matt McIrvin
@C.V. Danes:
That would be stupid. Thing one will be the total repeal of the ACA. “Let my single greatest legislative achievement, which is popularly named after me and that I ran for reelection on the basis of, just go away without opposition? Sure, whatever.”
boatboy_srq
@Belafon: Dem fatigue is expressed at the ballot box. GOTea fatigue is expressed in court, where the gerrymandered districts designed to keep them in office get thrown out and an (exteranal) resource draws up equitable districts for the next cycle. See DeLay, Tom, for how well that works.
Tone In DC
@RaflW:
I think (and certainly hope) we’ll see much less of the “reach across the aisle” BHO for the next two years. In the first six years of the Clinton administration, Big Dog triangulated and compromised all the time with Newt and the g00pers. Then, in 1998, those brain donors changed tracks from Whitewater to Monica. The impeachment flew through the House. And it pissed Triangulatin’ Bill off. Bill had more resolve after they went there and got his dander up.
Obama is no less of a politician than Bill is. Though he is the adult in the room, I truly believe these idiots have pissed off BHO, and that he reacts like it.
Matt McIrvin
…I mean, a year ago I was convinced the ACA was going away, but even I thought it would actually require election of a Republican President first.
Alex S.
@Corner Stone:
A day before the election Obama said that he is not the problem, but polarization is… we all know that he’s been lacking in the polarizing part, so he’s effectively blaming the republicans for the polarization, by accusing him of being a dictator, muslim, terrorist and all that. For him, the worst part must be that the electorate has supported the GOP.
I have a dream…. that Obama uses these final two years to let it all out, all his frustration with the people, the system, the media, and so on… I’m obviously projecting my feelings onto him, but yeah, I want him to forget all manners and let it all out.
dr. luba
I am to the point where I don’t really care any more if the GOP gets rid of Medicare or destroys Social Security. I mean, what the hell? Give those old white Fox viewers what they voted for.
Snark, yes. I’m not evil. But I would love to see the GOP try to do both. Maybe that would wake up a few Fox zombies….if it’s their benefits that are at risk. Because, you know, they “worked for them” and “deserve them.”
I had an argument with a really stupid woman on FB last night. A friend had posted something about a millionaire who had adopted a school and provided day care for the moms and scholarships to the kids if they worked hard and made it though high school. Nice uplifting story and graphic, no? She found it objectionable because “Is that what it takes, free stuff? Sorry, as one who worked in Human Services 15 yrs., free stuff is crippling and definitely doesn’t give people incentive to do better.”
So a retired government worker on Medicare is bitching about free stuff? I suggested to her we abolish Medicare and incentivize those lazy retirees to get off their asses and be productive. She didn’t take it well, and kept denying that the government subsidized her health care. When I pointed out the math didn’t work (by comparing to my costs), she called me toxic. And then she blocked me.
Small favors.
This is the mindset we are dealing with. My HS chemistry teacher (and mentor) was right. We won’t have a progressive country until the old white people die off. And she was an old white person.
FlipYrWhig
@kindness:
Depending on where you are, running as Democratic Hungry Man XXL probably won’t get you elected either. That’s the problem. If you’re running in a “red state” full of white people who prefer Romney and McCain by lopsided margins, it doesn’t matter if you try to obscure your Democrat-ness or let your freak flag fly. You’re not going to win. Until someone tries it and unexpectedly wins — like if someone ran on economic justice and racial solidarity and took a Senate seat in, like, Tennessee that way — no one is going to risk it because it’s so likely to end in failure.
Alex S.
@Nom de Plume:
Well, in 2016 it’s the 2010 map. Mark Kirk defeated Alexi Giannoulias by 2% or something like that. He should be gone. Ron Johnson is an idiot, he should be gone as well. Kelly Ayotte and John McCain, good targets… Patrick Toomey…I think Corbett has destroyed any republican chances in the next 4 years, that was at least one good result from yesterday. Marco Rubio might be gone as well, but that needs a Clinton bounce and a good candidate, but the Florida Dems are a disaster.
Matt McIrvin
@gene108: The “liberal base” you’re talking about are a tiny part of the electorate. They’re a small minority of Democrats. They make outsize noise on the Interwebs.
A lot of them aren’t even liberals, really. The one- or two-issue voters who care about nothing but drones, weed and the NSA (subjects on which I generally agree with them, but I care about other things too) are often temperamentally techie libertarians; they may have voted for Obama as an antiwar/civil-liberties candidate in ’08, but are upset that he wasn’t that to the degree they wanted. They don’t give a damn about women’s rights or minority civil rights or economic policy, or they actually are more in agreement with the Republicans on those things.
These are not the mass of Democrats. Often, they are not Democrats.
KXB
@BGinCHI:
Quinn was governor of IL for six years. He had strong Dem majorities in both houses of the IL legislature. Yet, for six years, he did nothing about the minimum wage. Suddenly, in an election year, he decides to put a non-binding referendum on the ballot, hoping to drum up support from traditional Dem groups.
Six years – and that was his pitch to the voters.
wenchacha
sonofafeckingbetch
Patrick
@FlipYrWhig:
And this is why I never ever donate money to the Democratic party. I don’t want any chance of my money going to candidates, like Grimes, that ran away from Obama. I choose my own candidates, who stand for what I stand for, to donate money to. Jon Stewart captured the Dem strategies very well last night. They had simply decided to give up before the election even started. Way to run a campaign!
mai naem mobile
Well, theres some interesting posts here. Part of me wishes Obama would just go on vacation.anf flaunt it. Nice expensive vacations to all of Europe, South America, Asia. Go to Angkor, Chile, the Arctic,go see the northern lights. Have the kids come on a separate plane. Just because. Have Michelle come on a different plane. Take Eric Holder along. Really be a moocher.Spend $70 billion dollars like he did on the Indian trip. The other part of me wishes he pull the very angry black man and veto the shit out of everything and use gangbanger signs to tell the GOP to fuck off and die.
FlipYrWhig
@Matt McIrvin: On top of all that, IMHO it’s important to acknowledge that the “Democratic base” somewhere like Arkansas or Missouri or Tennessee is not a _liberal_ base. They’re loyal, they vote, they organize, they volunteer, and they’re not liberals. There are liberals in those places, of course, but catering to them is a one-way ticket to Palookaville.
GregB
I haven’t read the whole thread yet, so if this has been said, sorry.
Now the media can report on all of the great things happening with the economy!
catclub
@SenyorDave: yes, Now it is “What the fuck IS the matter with Kansas?”
FlipYrWhig
@Patrick: But what good do you think embracing Obama would have done? What if repudiating and celebrating are both losers, because the number of persuadable people is minimal and the number of diehard loyalists is also too small to prevail? I think in Hypothetical America, where Democrats run on how proud they are of their president and their role in his accomplishments, they still get walloped, because that doesn’t sufficiently galvanize the people who stayed home, and it also doesn’t convince the people who turned out for Team Elephuck.
catclub
@mai naem mobile: I thought that too. It would not help for 2016. Luckily, Obama appears to be much less childish than you or I am.
C.V. Danes
@gene108:
Yes, because that’s how you get things in a bargaining situation. If you negotiate a bargain having already negotiated the deal down with your self, you will lose more than you gain. If the “lefties” just shut up and went along then (a) they wouldn’t really be lefties and (b) the country would be a lot farther right than it is even now.
catclub
@FlipYrWhig: But doing that provides a much better base to grow a future electorate. Repudiating what the Democrats have done builds nothing.
Mnemosyne
@MomSense:
White, married (usually upper-class) Republican women find it easy to track down their marriage certificate and/or divorce decree to prove who they are. Non-white or non-upper-class women? Not so much.
There were many reasons I didn’t change my name when we got married in 2006 (including laziness) but one of them was that it became very obvious in the wake of 9/11 that any kind of name change — even a “normal” one upon getting married — was going to make it a giant pain in the ass to prove your identity later.
Matt McIrvin
@FlipYrWhig: We always make a point of disagreeing with the characterization of the US as a “center-right nation” but, relative to a liberal blog commenter, it is. And the Democrats are a center-right party, so they can win some of the time. But it’s important not to identify them with the median person who writes on Daily Kos.
Mnemosyne
@gene108:
Republicans never have a problem doing something that hurts people other than rich white men, and the “gender gap” has been ubiquitous since at least Reagan.
Insisting on voter ID also hurts elderly voters who don’t drive anymore, and Republicans didn’t give two fucks about that, either. They’re willing to take some collateral damage on their own side in order to cause massive damage on the Democratic side.
Patrick
@FlipYrWhig:
Just speaking for myself who lives in a blue state. The GOP tried to nationalize the election by claiming how bad Obama was. Candidates like Grimes played right into it with her stupid triangulation of whether she voted for Obama or not. Candidates like Hagan refused to campaign with Obama. They helped the media create a national narrative that impacted Democratic candidates nation wide.
I always vote. But the poor campaign strategies made me feel like I don’t even know why I bother. Not even our own candidates could tell me why I should vote Democratic. And I am supposedly part of the base. Imagine how folks who normally don’t bother voting feels. A senate candidate in Kentucky can have an impact on elections in other states, especially in today’s world with internet and cable news.
FlipYrWhig
@catclub: In theory it’s something to build on, but you can’t build that high on 33% of the electorate.
The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik
@Matt McIrvin:
I’m not even convinced it’s a ‘center-right’ nation anymore. I’m convinced it’s full on frothing right-wing and never coming back.
And predictably, all I see outside of safe havens like here essentially boils down to the idea that someone like me doesn’t deserve to be American and the election proved that.
And what’s worse, I’m starting to believe that. I don’t have a country anymore, because the country doesn’t want me or anyone like me.
Corner Stone
@dr. luba:
The main problem with that is they’d do it on some kind of vote where a D casted a Yes and then they’d campaign on “The D’s want to cut your SS and take away your Medicare! We’re the party that’s here for you!”
And that would be that.
Omnes Omnibus
@Patrick: Mary Burke had Obama come and campaign for her. She didn’t run away from him. I am sure that is why she won.
C.V. Danes
@dr. luba:
The “Fox zombies” are never going to wake up. Brownback nearly destroyed Kansas and his punishment was this:
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=kansas+governor
Every county red except for seven. If the Republicans destroy Social Security, all you will end up with is a bunch of starving seniors voting in more Republicans to fix the problem.
Cervantes
@The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik:
Can you guess how often people have said that over the decades?
FlipYrWhig
@Patrick:
Their pollsters clearly were telling them that playing it this way was better for their chances at getting elected than playing it your way. And it was probably true. The “OK, I’m a Democrat, but not the bad kind of Democrat” strategy kept Democrats being elected narrowly in places like Arkansas and Louisiana for 25 years. They’re going to keep using that tattered playbook until someone else’s playbook produces a winner, and then they’ll copy that.
Corner Stone
@Patrick:
They didn’t *try* to nationalize the election, they clearly did so. They made every race about him and the rubber stamp for him they were running against.
It’s the same thing we did in 2006 to GWB. C’mon, people.
Cervantes
@C.V. Danes:
The map is misleading. I don’t think Brownback even has a majority of votes cast.
Corner Stone
@Cervantes: How often, or how many times?
Is this like guessing how many marbles are in a jar on the countertop at the reception desk?
I’m going to go with, “surprisingly often” and “692”.
Patrick
@FlipYrWhig:
And that’s fine. They can do whatever they want. Just like, as I said above, I will donate money to whoever I want. Thus, I never donate to Dem party. I always select my candidate.
And like I said above, in today’s world, what a candidate in Kentucky says does have an impact on races elsewhere. I voted, but I sure as hell didn’t volunteer as I usually do.
Caravelle
The filibuster is anti-democratic and getting rid of it would be a good thing, even if it means unfettered GOP nonsense for a few years. Ideally, the Democrats would obstruct the Republicans to the max, forcing the GOP to threaten to get rid of the filibuster, and then… Is it “calling their bluff” when you aren’t betting on a bluff, but the threat is what you want to happen in the first place? Either way, win-win.
What’s more likely to happen is that Democrats don’t dare obstruct for fear of the GOP threats that they’ll get rid of the filibuster, thus taking away any incentive for the GOP to actually do it, thus keeping the filibuster alive for another cycle and maintaining the trend of it being used more for conservative ends than progressive ones. Sigh.
Elie
@Kay:
Totally agree
What ever happened to Debbie Wasserman Schultz? She was totally invisible. Sure, she is the national chairman instead of states, but wouldn’t she have some influence over the shape or tone of the campaigns?
If not, then why have a chairman…
Cervantes
@Corner Stone:
Just looking at the last fifty years or so, do you remember the howls of despair when Nixon was elected? And then re-elected? When Reagan was elected? And then re-elected? And when Bush was elected … with Quayle?
We survived all that.
Republicans being elected is bad enough but it is survivable, whereas when people begin to feel this sort of thing:
That’s when the bastards really win — and it’s a victory we should never give them — never.
Corner Stone
I guess I just never cared much because I was never a fan of Orman, but he got crushed in KS.
All the time the media was fellating him and begging him to just whisper it in their ear who he would caucus with when he brought down Old Man Roberts. Please…pretty please?
Cervantes
@Caravelle: You have a gift for game theory!
Howlin Wolfe
@Alex: I hope he does invoke the 60-vote threshold for every piece of shit law the GOOPers try to pass. And every law the Rethugs try to pass will be a POS.
boatboy_srq
@dr. luba: Epistemic closure, and the conviction of their
propagandabeliefs. There are days I despair of a reasonable opposition. Thank Murdoch and Ailes (among other wingnuts) for this.C.V. Danes
You know, a definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. So I’m going to propose something different:
Switch parties and go Republican.
Wait, what?!
Yes. Switch parties. If the Tea Partiers can disrupt the Republican party, why can’t we?
Just throwin’ it out there.
Matt McIrvin
@The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik: Were you around in 1984?
Corner Stone
@C.V. Danes:
It’s what the Republicans did to the Democratic Party.
But I’m afraid that’s a little too close to the TV mini-series V for my liking. What happens when they try to peel the skin off your face so they can see your true lizard form?
Matt McIrvin
I mean, geez, as far as I can tell this midterm wasn’t even as bad as 1994 or 2010 (unless you look only at Senate seats, but you have to consider the map there), and we’re talking about how we can never ever win and we don’t have a country and we’re considering shutting the Democratic Party down now?
This is politics, folks. I think I choose well to have my fits of insane pessimistic moaning off of election season.
C.V. Danes
@Corner Stone:
This is true. I didn’t think about that. At some point you’re going to have to say “nigger” while in a group of Republicans without reflexively cringing, or kick someone who’s poor in the face. Kind of like how the mafia weeds out government agents by forcing them to murder someone or shoot crack. And if you can’t do that, then it’ll be like Donald Sutherland at the end of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
Joel Hanes
@kindness:
Running as Republican Lite won’t get you elected.
“Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time.”
Harry S Truman
Which is why the choice of Blue Dog Steve Israel as the DSCC chairman has been a complete disaster for two election cycles in a row. DSW is no god-damned help either.
Bring back John Dean!
Omnes Omnibus
@Joel Hanes: John Dean?
Corner Stone
Everybody’s fav punching bag D Weigel has this happyfungoodtimes to share:
“All of this represents a threat to the great Democratic hope of 2012—the demographic future that would change the country and make it impossible for Republicans to win. And it didn’t just break in Texas. In Nevada, Republicans swept the state legislature and took a swing House seat thanks to a collapse in Democratic turnout. In 2008, 2010, and 2012, Democrats had outperformed the final polls. They collapsed this year. In New Mexico, the GOP took the state House; in Colorado it took the state Senate. The party has not yet figure rout how to turn out an Obama coalition without Barack Obama at the front of it. And that was supposed to be the point of Battleground.”
The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik
@Matt McIrvin:
Barely. And yet arguably you can say we never really left. This pretty much still is Reagan country, or at least the myth of Regan. And I can’t see it changing ever.
Corner Stone
@Joel Hanes:
And all of his delicious sausage!
Cervantes
@Joel Hanes:
I expect you meant “DCCC” and “DWS.”
NonyNony
@RaflW:
I only see this happening if enough Dems vote for it to give it a bi-partisan sheen. If they do that then he’ll probably sign it because it’s “bipartisan”. But then the filibuster wouldn’t matter anyway because there wouldn’t be enough Dem votes there for a filibuster in the first place.
Corner Stone
““Born and raised Republican,” Robin Evans, an eBay warehouse packer who was grateful for new Medicaid coverage, said of herself. “I ain’t planning on changing now.””
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!….oooohhh, mercy. That is some good shit.
Joel Hanes
@Omnes Omnibus:
Jeebus. My brain doesn’t work.
Howard Dean, of course.
I blame Republican victory for reducing my intellectual acuity.
Kay
Yay! We’re basically governed by the GOP base.
Awesome job, Democrats. Good strategy.
Valdivia
so funny, I just argued about this on twitter and I was told that Republicans will be held responsible by the media. Ha ha ha. Yeah, right.
Out today NRO piece on how governing is a trap so Republicans shouldn’t. What? so what is the purpose of getting elected then?
Joel Hanes
@Cervantes:
Yes. Apparently I am incompetent to compose simple sentences today.
I’ll enter lurker mode until such time as I can think straight.
Keith G
@Mnemosyne:
That is certainly a factor, but I’m thinking it’s a relatively small part of the reason. I think that another large reason is that some Democrats just got complacent and thought that reproductive choice issues, as important as they are, would be enough to create the type of turnout that happened the last election.
Democrats lacked an aggressive and coherent message on many of the topics that are as important to some women reproductive rights are.
FlipYrWhig
@Joel Hanes: Howard Dean got a shitload of Blue Dogs elected. It was kind of how there was a Democratic majority in the first place.
boatboy_srq
@Matt McIrvin: I’ll agree with “right” – but not “center”. “Center” to the wingnuts is deigning to admit rape-and-incest exceptions to abortion bans, suggesting that employers who fire expecting mothers because Work Schedule are bad people (without actually going to the effort of assessing legal/financial penalties for it), grudgingly admitting that federal LOEs have jurisdiction over some things (even as they stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Bundy-esque ammosexuals), suggesting that the “small” in small business means something less than RJR Nabisco, admitting that the UN might just serve a purpose other than Destroying Ahmurrca, and saying those icky hoamseckshuls are OK living together in “their” places like the Castro or the East Village just so long as they don’t get [gasp] conjoined in [un]Holy Matrimony.
I for one am sick of Reichwingers sequentially griping first that Gubmint doesn’t need to act on Issue X because Ahmurrcan Ingeenewitee™ will solve all the US’ problems and then that the product of said ingenuity that addresses Issue X is somehow unAhmurrcan because it changes something about The Way We’ve Always Done Things. Lightbulbgate, for example, was one of the singularly most boneheaded faux-scandals, yet it’s catnip to the wingnuts. Until they are fringe again, and not sitting in the seats of power making what they call “policy,” there’s no center for them to claim adjacency to.
Sherparick
1. Its not just the media, but the Presidency is a quais-elective kingship and the King gets the blame for everything that goes right or wrong on his watch. Hence, it will have to a constant and continuous effort to fix responsibility for events on Congress, in the teeth of media and public belief in Green Lanternism about the Presidency.
2. Vetoes don’t particularly hurt the popularity of Presidents, and often help because they show “strong, decisive leadership.” Particularly a veto of a budget bill put together by Jeff Sessions and Paul Ryan should have tons of unpopular things in it, which just has to be highlighted.
3. I would go the max on the Executive Order on Immigration. The Village will tut-tut about the President spoiling the possibility of compromise, but really his job is to preserve what was enacted the first two years now and its time he kept as much of his promise to his Hispanic supporters. It might also cause the Right to go “impeachment,” which I hope will get the Democratic base motivated in 2016 (although that did not happen in 2000).
Valdivia
@Sherparick: the chorus of Obama must compromise is quite deafening in the Village today. Hope he goes full Veto on everything and EOs galore.
Corner Stone
@Valdivia:
How awesome would it be if at the presser today he walks up to the podium, straightens his tie, dusts off his shoulder, grabs the mic, looks into the camera and goes, “NOPE”, drops the mic and walks off.
BOOM! Goes the dynamite!
Omnes Omnibus
@Valdivia: He has absolutely no reason not to do it. If he wants to protect his legacy, it is really his only option. The GOP will be gunning for every law passed during 2000-10.
Valdivia
@Corner Stone:
I was hoping Luther the Anger Translator would the presser instead :)
Valdivia
@Omnes Omnibus: totally agree. Waiting and seeing.
Patrick
@Caravelle:
Considering that the Dem Party is worse than a little league team when it comes to strategy, I wouldn’t be surprised if the above comes true.
Obama can veto anything, so the Dems should love getting rid of the filibuster since the Dems will win back the senate in less than 2 years.
Elie
@Corner Stone:
I would LOVE that! Fuck conciliation and fuck the rest of the Democrats who tripped and fell running away from his policies. You gonna have all of me and I jes don care if you like it or not.
O course, he will get impeached, but bring it on!
cckids
@The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik:
Sadly, yes. The quote that made me get away from the internet last night was from my Rep. Joe Heck (R-NV/Corporate America): “We’re turning the country red”. As a doctor, Joe, you should know that red can equal blood, which is pretty much how I see it.
And to all the Dems running away from the “unpopular” President Obama? Funny how when he was on the ticket these bloodbaths didn’t happen. Maybe he’s liked by actual voters, regardless of what the media are telling you. Jerks.
Elie
@cckids:
The turnout was LOW everywhere! There is no “red country” — only stoopid blues who stayed home picking lint out of their navels. What were they waiting for? Why?
Matt McIrvin
@The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik: Reagan won 49 states with about 60% of the vote. Can you imagine that happening in a presidential election today?
Mitt Romney performed pretty much the same in 2012… among white people. You can’t win the presidency with that coalition now. But you can carry a midterm.
Liberty60
The GOP might like to eliminate the filibuster, but cooler heads probably realize their Senate majority may be short lived, and they will miss it when they are in the minority. Its the only thing that kept Reid from doing it, IMO.
Cervantes
@The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik:
And that’s where you have to start (yes, again).
Consider:
That’s the last paragraph of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals (1971).
cckids
@Violet:
True. Though I know people who gave that as a rationale for voting for W. in 2004. “He should have the chance to face up to his policies & clean things up”. And THAT worked out just GREAT.
At least in Kansas, its just Kansas, not the entire country. I’m sick for the people there with disabilities, like this.
That quote about if he has a problem with his trach, he can wheel himself over to a neighbor & they’ll be glad to help him. Jesus. Trained nurses won’t touch a trach unless they have to.
Shit like this will kill people, who have no earthly way to get the f*ck out of Kansas. I empathize because this could be my son. Medicaid keeps him going, though Christ knows it has gotten bad here in NV since they hired a private company to run it.
Corner Stone
Damn. Even Sandra Fluke lost? What was that about?
Another Holocene Human
@Belafon:
The RW will again troll working class whites as they decide that Senate Dems don’t have their back because they didn’t.even.try.to filibuster after the R’s write that out of the rules.
ETA: I guar-rone-T you that they will think it’s in the constitution and not be aware it’s part of rules set at the beginning of each Congress.
Pat Leahy has a lot to answer for.
Cervantes
@Corner Stone: She lost to another Democrat.
Another Holocene Human
@KG: I disagree about Dems running away from their accomplishments. The economy SUCKS for the Dem base. It’s not 2008-9 bad, but what’s been awesome for the donor class (did they lack for money this time? ah no) has been pits for the working class who are still be asked to take less wages, weirder hours, wage theft, less healthcare, dropped coverage, cut pension, etc.
The 90s economy playbook doesn’t work because it isn’t that economy.
Corner Stone
@Cervantes: Thanks, just heard it in passing and didn’t look into it.
Patrick
@Elie:
And today’s Congressional Democrats, who seem to be afraid of their own shadow, would probably join in.
Elie
@Cervantes:
Beautiful,if painful. It SHOULD be painful. We finally halfway got the things we thought progressives wanted — healthcare for all (mostly), progress on gays, immigration, true moral leadership and THIS is how we show… by ceding these very hard won – and in fact incompletely won victories to racists and rednecks? Really?
We have to be better than this. The progressives who stayed home — that dream and those stars are YOURs as well as ours… You have to help us fight it every election —
Lordy, I am so sad.
Corner Stone
I love how the word cooperation means the president shouldn’t take any action on issues he’s interested in. That would be insulting to the R’s and just be a bad faith deal.
Another Holocene Human
@Eric U.:
Yes, he was already mistrusted. And then he PROMISED executive action in September and then held it back. HUGE mistake. He’s a smart guy, I’m sure he realizes that.
I thought maybe he had “the numbers” in Sept showing that he needed to hold back but obviously whatever he was being fed (by Pryor, allegedly) was hogwash. Maybe he was worried about the Northeast, two, but Ebola came anyway. The media was very ready to whip up hysteria and keep the corporate cronies in power.
He should have taken executive action, put those youth Latino butts in gear (some of the activists who end up GOTVing aren’t even citizens themselves, I mean that’s dedication), and put some REAL fear in the fear party. Oh well. Easy in hindsight, I guess.
AZ and CA are NOT a bloodbath, maybe Obama was weighing that vs rust belt, Northeast. But we lost WI anyway, IL, IA due to lousy campaigning, and SW TX was terrible. They are ground zero for our failed immigration policies. FL, big fuckup.
Elie
@Another Holocene Human:
… ok, I will grant you that the economy could be better for our base. But it is way better than it was after W and the Wall Streeters tanked the economy. The solution was to elect a full slate of republicans to both houses by staying home on our blue asses. Really?
boatboy_srq
@C.V. Danes: There’s enough dogwhistle phrases to cover saying anything icky. “Welfare mom”, “young bucks and T-bones”, “forced busing”, “Illegal immigrant”, “right to work”, “special rights”, “tax-and-spend”, “entitlements”, etc have all filled in nicely for “niCLANG”, “M3xican”, “labor union”, “f#g”, “lazy beggars waiting for their handouts”, and various other less-than-honorable sentiments. It’s at the point now when you can spout off a bunch of seemingly-innocuous phrases and the volk in the know will nod and smile (maliciously). Death Eater Newspeak is fast taking over the public discourse. You’ll still have to deal with narrow-minded, cynical, greedy bigots thinking you’re one of them, but at least you don’t have to actually say anything despicable just to fool them. Atwater was right after all.
Corner Stone
So, the takeaway from Turtle’s presser is to invest in companies doing business in fracking and pipelines, and of course financial entities.
boatboy_srq
@BJFPers: why did comment 190 go through OK, but comment 165 is still “awaiting moderation”? Help, please?
Corner Stone
The balls on this fucking clown. Not one of these simpering idiots in the press are going to ask him about his statement about making Obama a one term president?
Corner Stone
Repeal the individual mandate. Get ready to see a lot of that.
Someguy
The problem with the filibuster is Reid opened the door to straight majority procedural rule with the “nuclear option,” or “nukular opchin” as Republicans will call it. That only affected nominees, though give credit where it’s due, he did an awful lot with other Senate rules to make it pretty much impossible for Republicans to maneuver. Sure, what the Republicans will do to put the Dems in bondage isn’t at all the same as the nukular opchin, but do you really think a voter will distinguish between modifications to cloture (thass a French word, aint it?) and blue slipping? The Repukes will just holler “nukular nukular” and that will be the end of the debate.
And that is the problem with Reid opening the door and getting rid of a longstanding procedure that senators in both parties liked. I didn’t think the Republicans would ever again hold the senate, but sure as shit, the voters pulled the wrong levers all day long and here we are. Can we get somebody serious and smart to take over minority leadership, somebody who gets it like Elizabeth Warren?
Another Holocene Human
@Mnemosyne: Without a doubt there are some ugly truths in Texas. 600,000 was the estimate prior to election day.
Alex S.
I have no idea about the polling on this, but I guess the Keystone pipeline is something moderate democrats probably support.
boatboy_srq
@Alex S.: Most do – until you describe it (accurately) as a huge pipe carrying dirty tar sand crude down from Canada to a location where it’s loaded on tankers for export (not domestic consumption), right through their back yards. Then suddenly NIMBY kicks in and they don’t like it anymore.
danimal
I’m getting out of lurker status to throw something out there, in the grand tradition of post-election circular firing squads. First, hell yes, I voted Dem. Second, I received about a thousand emails from Dems asking for money. VERY few of them asked for my vote, and that pissed me off. Third, the incessant email requests for my money enraged me. When I can contribute, I do. But I couldn’t this cycle. Dems:don’t try to sell me that Nancy Pelosi is staying up all night waiting for my five bucks. Day after day, all I got were fundraising appeals; they made it clear that my $5 was all they cared about. Instead, they triple matched my anger as I deleted each email.
I can’t be alone in feeling pissed off at the Beltway Dems and the way they handled this election. I’m willing to bet it was at least a small factor in the Democratic turnout dropoff.
Alex S.
@boatboy_srq:
Any democratic back yards there in Kansas, Nebraska and the like? I mean, the negative impacts are only there for a tiny minority. If there have to be concessions, then this one strikes me as pretty acceptable.
dr. luba
@Alex S.: Can we route it through Brownback’s yard?
dr. luba
@boatboy_srq: “lazy beggars waiting for their handouts”
I like that. I will be using it to describe GOPers/conservatives on Medicare regularly now. And pissing them off by explaining why they are.
mai naem
I don’t frankly know what the big deal about the filibuster is now. You have Obama there to veto any legislation. You have to worry about it in ’16 and,yes, you would like it to be around in some form but even if the Republicans win everything in ’16 I guarantee you’ll see the Senate change in 2018. I am just tired. I’ve been voting for around 25 yrs and in ’08 I finally felt like we have turned a major corner and then in ’10 we got fucked by teabaggers and death panels. We win in ’12 but then get the shit beaten out of us last night. Jeezus. And fucking Rick Scott and Scott Walker win? And they’re just such an unattractive pair. Ugly. Odious. I just feel really dispirited right now.
Corner Stone
Dog but I can not describe how much I despise Tweety.
Corner Stone
@mai naem:
The big deal is we didn’t include the judiciary. We gave them all the bullshit they needed to completely fuck us when they got back the majority, but got short term rewards for it.
It was complete incompetence. Judicial nominees are the prize here Harry, you fucking fuck.
BruinKid
If McConnell is stupid, he’ll get rid of the filibuster altogether.
Mnemosyne
@danimal:
Here’s the problem, though: it’s now obvious that the reason the Dems were begging for money is because they were being outspent on even little piddly races by the Koch brothers. One of the commenters from San Diego said that his Democratic city council candidates were outspent 3-to-1 by the Republicans, and the Republicans swept those offices.
Money matters. It matters a lot.
Ruckus
@Kay:
Yes.
And this just amplifies my point. We actually have so many issues that need positive attention, labor and jobs and the money therefore, women’s rights, minority rights (like the right not to be fucking shot for being one), idiotic wars on drugs and crime and poverty (drugs and poverty-we lost those long ago, crime we just transferred to the police although that one is still ongoing), one that transcends some of the others-voting, getting religion out of the lives of people who don’t give a shit about it, climate, big corp/finance, fucking guns, real healthcare. And I’m sure I left out a few.
Ruckus
@FlipYrWhig:
I wonder if the 62 or whatever % that stayed home was 1/10 as excited as the people that voted maybe this wouldn’t have actually been such a rout. And how do we actually know that people wouldn’t come out and vote if all they ever see is bland people running away from their ideals? We elected a black man, twice, in a pretty biased country. But he energized us, even if it wasn’t all true. Few if any other dems seem to have even tried. And it shows.
Corner Stone
More ladders of opportunity. That’s what’s needed!
Ruckus
@FlipYrWhig:
Yes they will. And what was that saying about insanity? Keep doing the same thing over and over, hoping that the results will change.
Someguy
@danimal: VERY few of them asked for my vote, and that pissed me off.
That’s because they have sliced and diced the data about you and they know damn well you will *never* as in never never ever ever ever ever ever ever vote for a Republican. So they take it sort of for granted, and there’s a good argument to be made that it is an effective tactice to just assume the sale.
El Caganer
I’m sure everybody here will be thrilled to know that one of the headlines in today’s Fundraising Success online magazine is: “DCCC Touts Historic Fundraising, Advertising.”
lou
@Belafon:
I think what it is Democrats tend to have a strategy of trying to appeal to the broadest group of people. That works fine in a presidential election year if you have someone inspiring with long coattails (John Kerry, anyone? I campaigned for him, but he just told me what he wasn’t, instead of what he was). But what Cruz and his evil cohort has going is they *energize* their base to get out there and f@#&%ing vote. Democrats are so busy trying to appeal to people who will never vote for them in a million years that they forget you have to motivate your base, too.
So until Dems figure that out in off years, this will keep happening. If they had campaigned on raising minimum wage more effectively, and immigration reform, and student loans and had a clear message, maybe it wouldn’t have ended up such a depressing mess.
b
@Another Holocene Human:
The timing really sucked. The border crisis, with all of the kids coming in droves, had the media and the right in a frenzy. Any move on immigration in that atmosphere would have escalated that insanity. But, one of the arguments was, it would have motivated the right’s base but could it have been any worse than what actually happened. Might have saved Colorado for Udall and Florida for Crist, but who knows.
And as for turnout-California had 29% turnout and Los Angeles County-23%
Alex S.
@El Caganer:
Did the Romney scammers find a home at the DCCC?
boatboy_srq
@dr. luba: No, no, no: you’ve got it backward. If you want to discuss that particular set, talk about “entitlements”, “SNAP”, “Welfare” and the like. They mean the same thing, but they sound nicer (to people not fluent in dogwhistle, that is).
LanceThruster
“The receptivity of the masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.”
― Adolf Hitler
boatboy_srq
@Alex S.: For those volk, remind them that the crude is being shipped through for export – and not to a refinery somewhere in Louisiana or Texas so the US can use it. Big bucks for Big Oil, zip for energy independence. It’s the AntiDrillBabyDrill. The potential for a messy Superfund-grade spill is secondary.
cckids
@Corner Stone:
I’ve seen a t-shirt that reads “Teamwork is a lot of people doing what I say.”
McConnell needs one, it is obviously how he intends to “govern”.
boatboy_srq
@Ruckus: Not convinced about the turnout %age. Remember this is The Year of the Voter ID, and voter discomfiture is a Reichwing specialty. I haven’t seen numbers on this, but I’d bet good money that a substantial portion of this year’s (and most years’) “disengaged voters” simply couldn’t either get to a polling place that enabled voting within a reasonable timeframe or got whalloped with the obscene identification requirements. But since none of those voters are especially visible we’ll probably never hear good analysis on that.
I know I’ve said (before and elsewhere) that an energized Dem base is necessary – and that’s still true – but one of the reasons it IS necessary is that it seems we need 1.6 Dem voters per Dem vote. That’s a horrible ratio, but not one we can fix without getting the extra turnout first.