
Vice President Biden attended a fund-raiser in Hartford today for Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), who's facing a tough re-election campaign next year -- and he didn't sound too optimistic about his friend's chances.
"Chris is getting the living hell beat out of him, the living bejesus beat out of him,'' Biden said, according to the pool report. "Why? Because he's being a leader. This is going to be a hell of a race and it's an uphill race, but Chris Dodd will prevail.''
Dodd was scheduled to attend the $500-a-ticket fund-raiser, but stayed in Washington instead for votes.
Dodd has taken a big hit for his role as chairman of the banking committee through the time of bailouts and TARP. He had also been accused receiving sweetheart mortgages from Countrywide, although the Ethics Committee found he did nothing wrong.
In the wake of his dwindling popularity, four Republicans are now challenging the longtime senator. A recent poll showed Dodd trailing two of those challengers.
Biden called Dodd, who chairs the banking committee, "the single most gifted legislator in Congress, now that Teddy Kennedy's gone."
ericf
December 11, 2009 4:41 PM
I hope this encourages Dodd to go hard after Wall Street. Being seen to have done so is his only hope.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BohemianBill
December 12, 2009 12:43 AM in reply to ericf
I wish this were true, but the dismal news coming in would ordinarily push a legislator in the exact opposite direction. If Dodd has no earthly chance of winning reelection because disaffected low-information voters are pissed at him for things he didn't do, why should he bother to work in their interests? Any rational person at that point would be working to guarantee a future for themselves. If Dodd is presented with no future out of ignorance (which I believe it is) he would be better of working to secure a job in the financial services industry rather than screwing it, which is what I believe he'd rather do. I fear more than anything, as a CT resident, that he will reach that decision in January or February once the HCR debate is finished and the financial services legislation is being debated. I don't see how Dodd's coming down hard on the financial services industry will save him at this point. The ignorati have already made up their mind, so don't confuse them with the facts. It will be more fun watching the owner of a make-believe sport spout on TV for six years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
December 11, 2009 6:01 PM
I hope Dodd does what's right for the party and retires. Blumenthal would easily win the seat.
Look at what the GOP did - they forced retirement on any incumbents that would be in for a battle. Voinovich in Ohio, Bond in Missouri, Martinez in Florida, Bunning in Kentucky and Gregg in New Hampshire are all retiring. If they all stuck around to run again the Dems would have had real shots at 3-4 pick-ups, however with the GOP getting to run a fresh candidate the incumbent stink will not effect them and they'll probably hold on to four if not all five.
Not only Dodd but Lincoln should get out of the way as well. No chance of that happening of course, but the Dems should primary Lincoln out if they have to.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
December 11, 2009 6:59 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
Walter,
I agree.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
El Puerco
December 12, 2009 11:37 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
I'm sorry, but if Gregg or Voinovich did not retire, they would have been favorites to retain their seats. Their retirements are what give Democrats a chance of picking up these two seats.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
December 11, 2009 6:57 PM
As much as I dislike saying it, I hope Dodd loses his seat. However, I do hope another Dem takes it. Too many long term Dems have, to use McCain's words, lost their way, and they too often feed the money bags interests before the rest of us get represented. I think this is what happened to Dodd, he got too friendly with the Wall Street bankers and the Corp. execs.
Schumer is also a creature of Wall Street bankers, everytime they wanted some form of tax break or deregulation Schumer was there for them.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/12/12/business/20081214-schumer-table.html
Nothing will change in the Democratic party unless some old hands get kicked out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
December 11, 2009 11:00 PM in reply to JohnW1141
And your opinion on Reid is?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
December 12, 2009 11:01 AM in reply to AJM
AJM,
Reid seems to me to be the epitome of the weak leader, at least from my liberal/Democratic point of view. I never liked the idea of having a Democratic Leader of the Senate or House majority/minority that comes from a red state.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SqueakyRat
December 12, 2009 3:26 PM in reply to JohnW1141
The Dem caucus in the Senate likes a weak leader. It gives each Senator more leverage.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
December 12, 2009 1:36 PM in reply to AJM
I think pretty much everybody in America is correct when they say Reid is a chump.
Dodd is just another of these so-called "progressives" who are owned by monied interests. They feel secure in the belief that just because they have a "D" after their names we'll vote for them. Primary the bastards out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SqueakyRat
December 12, 2009 3:31 PM in reply to EastWest
Dodd actually has tried hard on the public option. He's taking heat for TARP and the bailouts, but no one has a plausible story about how we'd have been better off without them. Sure, he depends on corporate backing. So vote for St. Francis of Assisi next time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BohemianBill
December 12, 2009 12:37 AM in reply to JohnW1141
John, I would agree with you, as a resident of CT, except for one very important fact: all of your facts are wrong. If anything, Dodd was representing financial services industry interests as part of his job because so many investment banks, insurance companies, and hedge funds are located in CT. But, for all of that, Dodd is being pilloried for legislation which was passed under Republican leadership, not Democratic. Dodd is being blamed for Bush administration failures and the emergency bail-out from last year, when Paulson was holding a gun to Dodd's head about providing the emergency loans to the banks and investment houses who were about to disappear up a black hole of greed and excess. Yeah, Dodd wasn't able to get the deals he would have liked, but he never was given the time to craft the detailed legislation which was necessary. However, despite all of that, I can tell you Dodd has been far more accessible to public opinion about all of the issues affecting this nation than that weasel Lieberman, who has sucked off the financial services and insurance teat more than Dodd ever did. Lieberman made a studied effort to avoid meeting with constituents this past summer of discontent and I know, because I contacted his office to find out when Lieberman would be meeting with CT voters and was lied to about Lieberman meeting with voters in anything resembling a town hall setting. Dodd's chances don't look good in large part because the meme disseminated by the brain-dead MSM to the low-interest voter bloc combined with the anger due to the continuing economic disaster we're facing is preventing any countervailing message from penetrating. None of the Republicans has idea one on how to fix any of these problems and all of them are guaranteed to screw CT voters the way Lieberman has done. For Christ's sake, Simmons is a card-carrying member of the Bush Incompetence Brigade and he leads the pack. Does anyone think he cares at all about improving the lot of CT voters? If they do, I'd like to know what chemical refreshments they use.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cujo359
December 12, 2009 1:24 AM in reply to BohemianBill
I don't understand Connecticut voters. Expecting Chris Dodd to buck the finance industry is like expecting Washington's Senators to tell Boeing and Microsoft to take a flying leap. And trust me, they never do. Yet Dodd seems to be making an honest effort with these financial regulations.
Dodd was the guy who was trying to stop telecom immunity, even going against his own majority leader to do it.
I read the Cook Report entry on this race yesterday, and all the issues they mentioned that seem to make him unpopular back home sound like the sort of made-up nonsense opponents use when they don't have anything. He was in Iowa for a few months? So what? He's in DC most of the time. Massachusetts didn't hold that against Kerry. Heck, Pennsylvania didn't seem to care when they found out Rick Santorum didn't live in his house in PA. He was supposed to fix the bank failures before they happened? Talk to the GOP, and President Clinton. They passed the law that made this collapse possible.
Yet they seem to love that lying prick Lieberman, even though he votes against their interests most of the time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Richardxx
December 12, 2009 8:07 AM in reply to Cujo359
It looks to me like the Democrats are taking on two major American problems, the failed Wall Street financial system and the failed health care system. Dodd is providing leadership to the Democrats on dealing with Wall Street (hasn't always, but is now) and Reid is heading the Democratic charge on health care.
So the Republicans have targeted them both in behalf of the failed financial system and the failed health care system. Why?
Either Dodd and Reid will get removed, or they learn not to buck the existing system. Either way, the other Democrats in the Senate will get the picture. Don't buck the system if you want to stay in the Senate. And it is important to stay in the system because newcomers can't get much done.
The Senate is designed to give power to Senators with seniority. Taking on the powerful systems prevents getting seniority. Lesson. Don't buck the system. Besides, they'll be nice to the Senators who support them.
Please note that the way Senators are going to have to behave in order to get enough seniority to actually accomplish anything has nothing to do with working the way their voters want them to act. In fact, the Senators who actually listen to their mere voters will never last long enough to become powerful enough to take on the big anti-consumer systems like finance and health care. At best a maverick Senator will be an isolated individual like Kentucky's crazy Sen. Bunning. No single Senator is going to get anything significant done. So all the Republicans have to do is focus threats on the Democratic leaders (in which the Democratic Progressive voters will probably help them) while the rest of the Senators who are going along to get along will get large campaign contributions and offers of under the table wealth building opportunities for the Senator and his family.
Ever wonder why it looks like the Senate is actively working against the needs of the average Americans? It's designed that way.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
December 12, 2009 11:28 AM in reply to BohemianBill
Bohemnian Bill,
Dodd voted for NAFTA, the IRAQ war and repeal of Glass-Steagall to start with. Although investment banks and insurance companies are part of his constituents, where does the individual citizen come in? Its the same with Schumer who has a history of pandering to Wall Street bankers, again, where does the individual New Yorker come in? This economic tsunami happend because Democrats have become too business friendly and joined with Republicans on too many issues. They forgot who they are supposed to represent.
I see today's Democratic Party as sitting at a table with the Republicans, Wall Street and the Corporate Execs. What falls off the table is what we get, trickle down economics from the Republicans and trickle down government from the Democrats, a little minimum wage, a little environmentalism.
I watched Dodd conduct hearings of financial institutions and he seems just too friendly to the witnesses who represent these institutions.
And don't ignore that I said I hope Dodd loses the seat to another Democrat.
By the way, Dodd voted with many other spineless Democrats in cutting funds off for ACORN. Look how that's working out, a judge put a halt to the cutoff and we now find out the videos were doctored.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
December 12, 2009 11:32 AM in reply to JohnW1141
Bohemian,
I'm not saying that Dodd hasn't done a lot of good over the years, but its my opinion that in certain areas, areas that directly affect the public, the moneybags people get first dibs.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BohemianBill
December 13, 2009 2:36 PM in reply to JohnW1141
Yes, you're right, Dodd has a legislative voting record and he hasn't voted 100% with the policies you'd like. I don't like his votes on the items you've picked out too. In hindsight (and I would emphasize the hindsight) those votes have been pretty bad. Of course, in virtually every case the legislators were lied to in some capacity to get their vote. NAFTA was supposed to have side agreements tightening up some provisions (never happened), Glass-Steagall was all glitzed up with pretty promises, and the Iraq War vote was wrapped in lies about WMDs (as we NOW know for certain). Despite all of that, Dodd has been working hard to fix both healthcare crisis and the financial services industry problems while being slimed by his opponents with lies. Replacing him will not improve the prospects for fixing this problems and will likely set the effort back. Besides, I do not want to have to call Joe Lieberman the "senior Senator from Connecticut." I gag when I think of that prospect. You should too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hollywood
December 11, 2009 7:06 PM
Hanging on to every Dem seat is very important! I do not like how the conservadems seem to relish fucking up every progressive idea they can but it is better to have them in the room with some bargaining power than have another Rethuglican with no help whatsoever.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
December 14, 2009 2:31 AM in reply to hollywood
I tend to agree, but that's only part of the picture in this case. The conventional wisdom is that Dems will get killed in midterm elections and lose effective control of the House if they can't pass health care, not to mention what it will say about Obama's legacy. And it's not just legacy: health care is important, and we're looking now at throwing the baby out with the bath water.
When the Dems are swamped in 2010 and we have no health care and Obama is being laughed at, what exactly is the bargaining power worth?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sunnysteve
December 11, 2009 7:44 PM
TARP is turning out to be not so much of a real cost, as most of the funds will be repaid. The House is originating reform of the financial sector that is the most comprehensive since the 1930's. Dodd can take on a leadership role in the Senate on this legislation. The successful end to TARP, plus continuing economic recovery, will serve to lessen the background noise. Dodd and other Dem candidates may have tough elections, but they can prevail.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Veritas78
December 11, 2009 8:00 PM
No one can represent Connecticut without being twisted by the insurance racket. I supported Chris Dodd in his campaign for the Presidency (and even contributed to help retire his post-campaign debt) but he's had to make too many deals with the devil.
His heart's in the right place, but the ground is spongy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
destor23
December 12, 2009 7:42 PM
Did Dodd actually filibuster the domestic spying bill (that Obama unfortunately voted for) as he promised (a promise which helped him raise lots of primary dough) or not? If he did, then we Democrats owe him our support. If not... then eh... who cares?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jollyroger
December 12, 2009 8:39 PM in reply to destor23
I believe he actually had a Jimmy Stewart moment, and his pressure (tho ultimately futile, of course) did at least temporarily put a stick in the spokes of the wagon wheel.
(disclaimer:I didn't google, so I could be misremembering, but it was the heat of the presidential primary, and all sorts of Potemkin backbones were on display (hint: you can use paper mache and it almost looks like you have a spine--alas, like the evil witch in munchkinland, a little rain, and...)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jollyroger
December 12, 2009 9:11 PM in reply to destor23
I believe he actually had a Jimmy Stewart moment, and his pressure (tho ultimately futile, of course) did at least temporarily put a stick in the spokes of the wagon wheel.
(disclaimer:I didn't google, so I could be misremembering, but it was the heat of the presidential primary, and all sorts of Potemkin backbones were on display (hint: you can use paper mache and it almost looks like you have a spine--alas, like the evil witch in munchkinland, a little rain, and...)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
December 12, 2009 7:54 PM
primary challenge NOW!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sommers
December 12, 2009 9:24 PM
From where I sit Dodd is a crook. He has been there too long and is part of the problems the country is burdened with now.
Besides, you've got Peter Schiff running there in CT. What else would you want for honest, truth telling representation ?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BohemianBill
December 13, 2009 2:25 PM in reply to sommers
Right, I'm going to want to replace Dodd with a buffoon (trust me, I've seen him on TV in CT), who is a major trust-fund baby but who has never grown up. Yup, that's the way to fix the problem. Schiff will do nothing to fix the financial services industry in this nation and his free-booter philosophy will merely drive this nation into another Depression.
What evidence do you have that Dodd is a crook? All of those allegations about his financial dealings have been shown to be smoke, blown up the skirts of no-nothings. I've seen the interest rates on the deal Dodd is supposed to have gotten for his CT residence. You know what? The interest rates are market rates and I know because I also refinanced around the same time. Dodd got no special deal. Let me repeat that - Dodd got no special deal. Take that claim away and you've got no substance for your charge that "Dodd is a crook."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GTFOOH
December 12, 2009 11:14 PM
Joe is sounding more and more like his character on SNL.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
priscianus jr
December 13, 2009 1:54 PM
Dodd is far from perfect, but I really don't understand the extreme reaction against him. It seems completely stupid, given the circumstances.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Scott in PacNW
December 14, 2009 11:56 AM
Dodd voted against Gramm-Bliley in 1999 and bankruptcy 'reform' in 2005.
So, IMO, he can't be that deep in the pockets of banks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?