TPMDC
After Mass. Loss, DSCC Launches 'Forensic Examination' Of 2010 Field
Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
Share
Send to a friend!
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is scouring each Senate race with a "forensic examination" of each campaign and candidate in the aftermath of the party's stunning loss last night in Massachusetts.
DSCC Chairman Sen. Robert Menendez told TPMDC in an interview today that Democrats running for and defending Senate seats can't afford to cede the "change" mantle.
The DSCC is immediately assessing each battle from New Hampshire to Colorado to make sure those campaigns are "calibrated to the volatility of this electorate," Menendez said.
"We've got to conduct a forensic examination of each of our campaigns and candidates," he said
Menendez is looking at a 59-seat majority and a political landscape far more competitive in purple states than Democrats were expecting a few months ago, but warned Republicans not to get to comfortable.
He said he is telling candidates to be aggressive and define yourself and your opponent pronto. Menendez pointedly avoided criticizing the Democratic candidate Martha Coakley, but said her loss proves the party must quickly play offense no matter which state they are going after.
I asked if he was telling candidates they can't go on vacation, since Democrats blamed Coakley's defeat in part on her being off the campaign trail during the holidays.
"There are only two ways to run: unopposed or scared," Menendez said. "There is no letting up on it."
Republican Scott Brown won in the Bay State by portraying himself as an outsider, Menendez said, adding that Democrat Robin Carnahan in Missouri already is doing that in her Senate bid.
"Elections have to be about choices and not just about Democrats," Menendez said.
Senate Democrats and the White House will shift quickly to more of an economic focus to reach out to independent voters worried about jobs, but "it is important to get health care passed," Menendez said.
Democrats must do a better job framing health care as an economic issue helping families that can't afford insurance coverage, he said.
Comments (40) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Schmed
January 20, 2010 12:43 PM
Horse. Out. Barn door. Lock.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hoppycalif2
January 20, 2010 6:34 PM in reply to Schmed
You beat me to this obvious comment - I suppose we should be reassured to see that someone is now at least looking at the possibility of oiling the barn door hinges, in preparation for calling a locksmith to......well, what you said.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
January 20, 2010 12:45 PM
The candidates should start with the questions most Americans ask:
What's in it for me?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 1:48 PM in reply to Viva!America!
I think candidates have been asking what's in it for them for some time now. Voters gave up voting their pocketbook back in the '80s.
"Trailer Trash for Reagan," or something like that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
January 20, 2010 2:13 PM in reply to Official A
I don't think you get my point or maybe I don't get yours, but I think Americans are selfish and aren't interested in policy unless it does something for them - something that will put money in their pockets.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 2:20 PM in reply to Viva!America!
And I think that's more true of our "representatives" than it is of the citizenry.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Silence
January 20, 2010 2:21 PM in reply to Viva!America!
W-r-o-n-g-o. NE just proved that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
January 20, 2010 12:59 PM
Get rid of Fisher in Ohio. Jennifer Brunner is the candidate to back there. Also Arlen Specter probably needs to retire - Sestak can be the outsider in that he bucked all pressure to get out of the way.
Hodes is terribly uninspiring in NH and Meek is invisible in Fla.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
January 20, 2010 2:33 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
Specter still has traction.
But I agree that Hodes is as uninspiring as white toast and that Meeks in Florida is a guaranteed loser against either Crist or teabagger Rubio.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Buckeye Terrorist Fist Jab Nation
January 20, 2010 4:53 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
Agree wholeheartedly on Brunner over Fisher in Ohio, and Menendez has been trying to grease the skids for Fisher.
We need new leadership with the DSCC.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
January 20, 2010 1:07 PM
Good God.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
January 20, 2010 1:08 PM in reply to EastWest
That was aimed at the article, not at you Walter....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sailormarlowe
January 20, 2010 1:18 PM
"Forensic examination"? Will that require a proctoscope?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CT Voter
January 20, 2010 1:19 PM
Richard Blumenthal? Did you pay attention to these results?
And pardon me, I'm in a bitter mood right now, but it took this special election for Mendendez to realize this:
Goddam Democrats are worse than I thought possible.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
January 20, 2010 1:31 PM in reply to CT Voter
Co-sign. Maybe dems need to form a new party as well. Or maybe it's time for a constitutional convention and let's implement a parlimentary system. This government sucks and the way its set up it's designed to feed on voter anger to vote in bozos.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 1:38 PM in reply to Michael A
Bingo. When you have two choices (and pretty much identical ones, at that) 50% or so of the population has no one speaking for them, so they vote in anger. In a parliamentary system, it's not inconceivable that Ron Paulists and Howard Deanists could find common ground and overcome the corporatists.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
flounder
January 20, 2010 2:07 PM in reply to CT Voter
I would even reframe this. The way it is stated makes it seem specific to people who are uninsured. Unfortunately, the mood right now is "screw you I gots mine". And most people currently have some form of insurance.
It is people that have insurance right now that are more and more opposed to this. They are like my mom and (wrongly, for the most part) think that people with insurance are going to pay more so deadbeats can get insurance. These people need to be re-convinced that they can't afford the insurance they have unless we get reform.
I thought this had happened but obviously from what people like my family and the Mass electorate are saying it has not.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
January 20, 2010 2:17 PM in reply to flounder
People will never be convinced. It's been "screw you, I've got mine" for every issue since 1980 and the b-movie actor. That's what we're dealing with. Obama forgot to re-read sun tzu. Know your enemy before you know yourself. He played on that to get elected and he bailed on it, as did dems, after he got elected. Get back to basics for now.
People in this country do not give a sh*t about their fellow americans. They are more concerned about shooting muslims and keeping down minorities. It's everyone for themselves and for the poor and uneducated whites it's don't take more from the super rich because, based on the non-existent "american dream", I'll be super rich one day. It really is a travesty, but it is what it is. Recognize the dynamics and play to that dynamic.
Otherwise, dems will get slaughtered again and obama will be a one term president.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
flounder
January 20, 2010 2:28 PM in reply to Michael A
So hows about selling a health care bill by saying it takes the deadbeat that was sneaking into the emergency room in the middle of the night and stealing off of your insurance and makes them accountable?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
January 20, 2010 2:36 PM in reply to flounder
While true, people don't buy it. Too complicated and makes it sound like a handout of the hard earned money paid in taxes, which a large portion of the repuke base doesn't pay anyway, to them dirty non-whites and illegal immigrants.
Got to play to the greed and selfishness of americans. Repukes do it very well and con people while lining the pockets of the corporations and super rich. Dems just need to find a way to perform a con job, but by helping the other 99 percent of the country. They do that and they will win elections. Bottom line, the vast majority of americans are greedy, selfish and stupid. Know your audience and play to it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hoppycalif2
January 20, 2010 6:38 PM in reply to Michael A
One more year like 2009 and I suspect most Democrats will want Obama to be a one term president. Now is the time to find a candidate who can win, who is progressive, and who will be willing to challenge Obama in 2012. Obama needs to retire to a Boy Scout leadership position.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
January 20, 2010 1:27 PM
More like an autopsy is necessary. Dems are looking at a slaughter in 2010.
It's the economy stupid. There better be some massive high profile action by the dems concerning the economy or turn out the lights, the party's over.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 1:32 PM in reply to Michael A
It's the economy. It's two wars. It's a healthcare bill that mandates purchase of policies that people may not be able to afford. It's the cloak of government secrecy. It's the wanton disrespect for civil liberties. It's kicking out Howard Dean and ushering in Tim Keane and Rahm Emmanuel. It's triangulation. It's Clinton/Bush Redux. It's Politics As Usual.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 1:34 PM in reply to Official A
It's Stupid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EastWest
January 20, 2010 1:36 PM in reply to Official A
You nailed it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 1:41 PM in reply to EastWest
You know, I sympathize mightily with the people of Haiti, but just think about the yukky 20th-century symbolism of the Bush/Clinton rescue team. It says a ton about how atrophied we are politically.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Apphouse50
January 20, 2010 1:35 PM
Oh, yeah. This should be good.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 1:43 PM in reply to Apphouse50
Getting DNA samples is always easier when the vics are dead.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steve LaBonne
January 20, 2010 1:59 PM
DSCC to the rescue?? Talk about the blind leading the blind.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
January 20, 2010 2:19 PM in reply to Steve LaBonne
Why don't you fax them some of your ideas, Steve? Seriously. The comment threads is full of a lot of trashing of the leadership, but I don't see many people saying they are going to contact them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FluffyXP
January 20, 2010 7:37 PM in reply to Viva!America!
Heck, how about working on a campaign or two?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
January 20, 2010 2:19 PM
Make sure they are hot and look American.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 2:25 PM in reply to Viva!America!
What we really need is more glib, photogenic, spineless milquetoast.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Progressive Party
January 20, 2010 2:24 PM
They need to begin by looking at Tim Kaine. He has lost elections and has been invisible to lead on any calls for action and the people see right right thru his appraoch. Fund raise, dance with lobbysits and play Rahm's game of fuck the base. Oh how I miss Howard Dean at the DNC; he wouldn't have been asleep and lost Ted Kennedy's seat. Kaine has got to go!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 2:27 PM in reply to Progressive Party
Cosign. But let's add Rahm to that mix, eh?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Dicktator
January 20, 2010 2:31 PM in reply to Official A
Everyone blames Rahm and Kaine, but Obama put them there. Obama's a bright guy. He's not like W. blindly following Rove and Cheney. Everything they do is with Obama's blessing. Don't blame Rahm, blame the guy in charge.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mjshep
January 20, 2010 11:33 PM in reply to The Dicktator
Blame them all. Rahm is a disaster, Kaine a nothing, but Obama is the one who is ultimately responsible.
More candidates like Coakley and Deeds and Meek and maybe the Dems should just go home now.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Dicktator
January 20, 2010 2:27 PM
It's really pretty simple. Dems rode into power on a theme of "Change you can believe in". What we got was no change, just Bush policies on steroids. Nobody voted for bank bailouts with no reform. Nobody voted for escalation of war or Pentagon budgets. Nobody voted for secret deals with big Pharma. Nobody voted for giving Health Ins. Cos. more business.
If Obama had run on this platform, Palin would be our vice president right now. He didn't run as being big business' lackey, but he is sure acting the part now. Quite frankly, I'm so disgusted with the Dems, I can't see supporting any of them again except for Grayson and Weiner. None of them in the Senate has any balls. Change? The only difference between Obama and Bush is that Obama has escalated the war.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lastmarx
January 20, 2010 9:06 PM
Almost a million MA voters who came out in November '08 stayed home this time, ignoring the frantic efforts of Obama, the Kennedys et al to persuade them that electing Coakley was so important. Then consider why that argument was unconvincing--despite claims that the pathetic 46% of eligible voters (53% of registered) was a "historic" turnout
>
Other than briefly being the topic of panicky gassbag commentary in the media, what actual political difference would a Coakley election have made? She would probably have looked to Kerry for advice and rubber stamped Obama's war budgets,Wall Street welfare, foreign occupations, for-profit insurance health "reform" and protection for war criminals (see
> http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368 for the latest scandal).
>
> Maybe those million voters had voted for change, were disappointed in the outcome and didn't want any part in perpetuating it.
>
> visit my website www.michaelmunk.com
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bluestatedon
January 21, 2010 8:43 AM
I think the only sensible thing for the Democratic Party to do is to declare unilateral surrender to the Republicans and disband. It has no interest in taking the fight to the GOP in any real and sustainable fashion, crumbles at the first sign of trouble, can't be bothered to anticipate and plan, and forgets lessons in retail politics that enabled it to capture the White House and Congress in the first place. As long as it stays alive, it will sop up money, energy, and organizational resources like a parasite on a host. Once it's dead and gone, those things will be available for those who are interested in creating a party that actually has an interest in taking its own side in an argument.
I'm only partially saying this in jest. With a very few notable exceptions, the Dems really are profoundly useless.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?