
Surveying the 2010 landscape in the aftermath of the Massachusetts special election that cost Democrats their 60-seat supermajority, President Obama and the Congressional Democrats are going to have to defend more seats, spend more money and potentially concede key elements of their agenda.
In the immediate sense there is a big question about whether - and how - Democrats will be able to pass the health care bill they've worked on since July.
On a macro political level it already wasn't going to be a easy year before Republican Scott Brown captured the seat Ted Kennedy held for 47 years. And it just got a lot harder.
Democrats cringe at the obvious comparison between the sentiment among Americans today and what they were one year ago when Obama raised his hand before millions who'd braved frigid temperatures to witness history.
But for a White House that values symbolism, losing Kennedy's seat on the anniversary of Obama's inauguration and facing deep criticism from Democrats over Kennedy's signature issue of health care badly stings.
And Republicans who felt deflated one year ago are seizing the moment.
"We are waking up feeling like Republicans can compete anywhere," a former RNC official told TPMDC. "Every seat is going to get another look."
A source told TPMDC the National Republican Congressional Committee has steadily added races to its target list of battlegrounds, and more are expected in the coming days.
Republican recruitment will be in overdrive in purple districts across the country and the White House and party leaders are going to have to strain to stave off retirements from their side.
An administration official told TPMDC the Brown win affects the calculus of the Obama agenda but said the Massachusetts race was affected by the national landscape, not the other way around. White House aides also disputed reports that Obama was working the phones to prevent retirements.
But the NRCC sent a memo this morning that the race sent a message to Congressional leaders that "enough is enough."
"Vulnerable Democrats who continue to back their party's reckless health care push will make the Massachusetts special election look like a walk in the park," the NRCC press shop wrote.
While activists worry the gains they built during the presidential race could be erased, Obama loyalists point out that they changed the electorate in key swing states such as Florida and Virginia but didn't focus much effort in 2008 on Massachusetts because it was considered safe.
Still, a surge of Republican pickups in governors' mansions and statehouses this fall would allow the GOP to have a major say in redistricting, a potential game changer for the 2012 elections.
The former RNC official warned that GOP control of redistricting would be "catastrophic" for the Democratic party.
In California, the Republican candidates already were saying Massachusetts does not bode well for Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Republicans set their sights on Connecticut, where the Democratic candidate holds a solid lead over GOP challengers. It's a blue state and that lead could be intimidating, they say, until you remember that Martha Coakley once held a 30-point lead over Brown.
The already toss-up states (Nevada, Colorado and even Pennsylvania) are looking tougher for Senate Democrats to hold.
Democrats say they want the White House to fight harder for its agenda, and see Obama get aggressive. David Axelrod signaled this morning that's the direction they are headed.
Brown declared last night that "What happened in Massachusetts can happen all over America," a quote echoed by tea party groups in celebratory emails and tweeted out by GOP Senate candidates from Florida to California.
Scott Brown's win was "only the beginning," Republican candidate for Senate in Connecticut Linda McMahon said in a statement. "The people are just warming up."
A labor official told TPMDC the election should be a "sobering" reminder to candidates that voters want results from Washington. If Democrats want voters to keep backing them, they must pass health care reform and a jobs bill, the source said.
Working families "are sick of talk, they want action," the source said.
Liberals warn that moving to the center is "exactly the wrong lesson" from the special election.
"The party did nothing with their 60 votes and it's a testament to how out-of-touch and incompetent Washington is," said James Boyce, a Boston-based Democratic consultant who has been criticizing the White House as not progressive enough for months.
Alex Conant, a consultant and former Republican National Committee aide, said the Brown win sends a signal to any Republican candidate considering a run in states like Washington or California.
"If you're a conservative or a Republican and you ever wanted to run for public office this is the year to do it," Conant said.
Money will flow more freely to Republican coffers as well, while Democrats are behind from the get-go having had to spend more money than planned in Massachusetts and now suffering the loss.
Democrats considering bids may be thinking twice since the party will need to defend their incumbents.
For Brown, he'll be the darling of the Republican party for the time being. His stock is on the rise and party leaders already are eyeing him to deliver the response to Obama's State of the Union address next week.
Steaming Pile
January 20, 2010 9:42 AM
And yet, the DCCC/DSCC have rung my phone off the hook for money all through the month of December. Did I give them any? Hell no. Why should I, if they're just going to elect more do-nothings to sit in Congress and act busy while nothing gets done? Why should I, when they can't manage with a majority twice the size the Republicans had in the dark days of 2005 when, as Jon Stewart put it, they did whatever the fuck they wanted?
Prove to me you have a plan, that you can deliver the goods, and then you might get some money. Until then, you can experience for yourselves what it means to be the pre-2004 Boston Red Sox, whose most famous player is a certain first baseman who won the '86 World Series for the Mets.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 20, 2010 9:46 AM in reply to Steaming Pile
And yet, that attitude of petulence is part of the problem. Without public support -- solid public support that doesn't go weak in the knees when the GOP/MSM goes "boo!" -- they go soft.
Sending 'a message' a mere 12 months after the last 'message' is no message at all. Especially if the message is that we are divided and want big changes and are afraid to follow thru with them. Americans need to grow up and work at something for once. "Throwing out the bums" has no effect if it happens every election. Ooooh, Americans are "angry". Yeah, and stupid too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 10:10 AM in reply to AnswerFrog
It's not petulance to work your ass off to win a sweeping electoral vicory like 2008 and then be discouraged when the people you elected tell you that you don't matter. That's what progressives have been told and that's why progressives aren't working hard or giving money. I think it's time for the centrists to work hard and give lots of money and enthusiasm to get centrists elected. I think I'll send my money to progressives from now on.
And fuck Lieberman.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 20, 2010 11:01 AM in reply to Official A
Send your money to Liberals. Progressives are people who don't have the balls to call themselves Liberals because Republican call Liberals bad names.
We need people with guts, not people who have internalized Wing Nut talking points.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 11:34 AM in reply to henk
I've got a better idea.
Stop using "liberal" and "progressive" and stick to TRADITIONAL Democratic goals.
Like national health insurance, i.e. the public option.
Which was also, at one time, a Republican goal, too.
Hold so-called Democratic reps to ACTUAL traditional Democratic goals, and you won't have to use the fancy language.
These traditional Democratic goals?
Bank reform.
A jobs program when the economy is THIS bad.
National health insurance or universal coverage.
And an EVEN PLAYING FIELD wherein the kind of regulatory capture we've seen over the last 18 years is illegal.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 20, 2010 11:48 AM in reply to again
I've been a traditional democrat for 41 years. Liberal is what we are.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 11:53 AM in reply to henk
Since there is no such thing as a "liberal" party, I suggest you call yourself a TRUE DEMOCRAT.
But this liberal/progressive distinction is only muddying the water.
The Republicans don't have this pissing matches. They just veer as hard to the right as possible.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 20, 2010 12:14 PM in reply to again
Maybe we should veer and hard left as possible, but if you think that Republicans don't have pissing matches you aren't paying attention. Ross Perot was a good example. Ron Paul is another. It may not be as visible, but they've been arguing about the Religious Right's influence for years and now they have the Tea Party breathing down their necks.
Regardless. I'll stick with my label, you can have your traditional Democrat. Maybe it'll catch on, but then the Republicans will start saying bad things about it and you'll have to find something else.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 12:16 PM in reply to henk
I've done outreach with the Paul people. There's no comparison between their dissent and the epic pissing matches exemplified by even the minor posts above.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acf_ma
January 20, 2010 11:33 PM in reply to henk
I don't think I would suggest veering as hard left as possible. That would make us just as bad as the rabid right who have been preaching ideological purity and complaining the party leaders were not sufficiently conservative. Instead, we have to have leaders and elected officials who are loyal to their stated principles, and who stand and fight for them unlike our current representatives who cut and run at the first sign of resistance. They need a spine implant.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 11:58 AM in reply to henk
I agree that when a party's label has been turned into a perjorative that party has failed. Dems still run from the word liberal and nearly as fast from progressive. But the other poster is right, too: it's about policies not labels. I really don;t care what Dems call themselves as long as they get the job done. But, yes, this liberal terror is a symptom of a dysfunctional and insecure party that can't remember what it's supposed to stand for.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 3:57 PM in reply to henk
Call it whatever you want, you know what I'm talking about.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 20, 2010 11:18 AM in reply to AnswerFrog
"Without public support -- solid public support that doesn't go weak in the knees when the GOP/MSM goes "boo!" -- they go soft."
You've got this backwards. Its not Liberals who are going soft everytime the GOP/MSM goes boo. Liberals have been very consistent about what they wanted and expected from the Obama Administration. We wanted Single Payer Medicare for all, but it was the Centrists who said No we don't have the votes, give us have a loaf, (my favorite is Don't let the perfect get in the way of the good, that's great branding, but horseshit policy.) Now what have you got?
Its these "don't criticize Obamabots" who can't seem to pull their heads out of their asses long enough to see that the Policies Obama is following are alienating, not only us dirty fucking hippies, but the much sought after Independent voter.
The Banking Industry bailout is a great example, we've been saying for the very begining that keeping the Bushies on to ride herd on this thing was a mistake, but we weren't team players, Obama was playing chess, beating them at their own game and here we sit a year later. 10% unemployment, foreclosures still rising and the Banksters are handing out BILLIONS in bonuses. Obama owns that!
And don't get me started on looking forward not backward. If we'd done a little more looking back, a wingnut like Brown would have been laughed off the stage. We Liberals were very clear and consistent on where we stood on former Bushies and their crimes, it was the "Centrists" and Obama supporters who listened to the MSM/GOP and didn't want to prosecute, or even investigate, Bush crimes.
All water under the bridge now, but don't hang this fucking mess on Liberals and Obama's critics. It belongs on that year old carpet in the Oval Office.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 11:36 AM in reply to henk
They're trying to confuse the issue with different terms.
Just define what traditional democratic goals are.
Then you don't have to parse it to the average Democratic voter who doesn't care about the inside baseball stuff.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 20, 2010 12:07 PM in reply to again
The fact that Unemployment is 10%, people are losing houses and jobs but the banksters are handing out 40 or 50 times the total aid to Haiti in Bonuses is not inside baseball. Not only Traditional Democrats understand that's wrong.
Prosecuting Bush crimes is not inside baseball. People understand that crimes were committed and Obama let it slide.
Doing what is right and fair will appeal to ALL Americans, not just traditional Democrats.
Maybe you're right, Obama and his crew spend too much time on the inside baseball and not enough on traditional American values which, as it happens, are also traditional Democratic values.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:18 PM in reply to henk
Now why can't Obama say that?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Docb
January 20, 2010 10:21 AM in reply to Steaming Pile
This is about party infighting-non support for the candidate-and disgust with the Status quo ....The repub just slipped into the hole the Dems left open for them...This will continue to happen again and again---People hate the crap that Congress sends up as a bill for the people---when it is obvious it is for the corporate donors instead!
It is that they do not get that if they do not vote ---they are giving it back to the people that got us here! In the toilet on the economy, HCARE, deregulation and meltdown!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GermanyOrFlorida
January 20, 2010 8:28 PM in reply to Docb
Oh whatever, the candidate didn't even campaign. If MA was about infighting, it was Western MA vs. Boston, rather than progressives vs. party-faithful.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 9:46 AM
"Vulnerable Democrats who continue to back their party's reckless health care push ..."
amen to THAT. it's totally RECKLESS to craft legislation that will save lives and shrink the deficit. anybody caught doing so can just kiss their job goodbye.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SFCWallace
January 20, 2010 10:36 AM in reply to nova voter
"...legislation that will save lives and shrink the deficit."
Neither of which occur under the current proposed legislation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 20, 2010 11:21 AM in reply to SFCWallace
..but it sounds nice, eh?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 11:39 AM in reply to SFCWallace
agreed
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 11:50 AM in reply to SFCWallace
what?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgecs
January 20, 2010 9:50 AM
Why do these morons not get it!?
We handed them a mandate for serious change - to tell the Republicans to sit down and shut up for starters, to implement REAL health INSURANCE reform, to raise our standing in the world, to clean up the Bush economic mess, to rein in Wall Street, to kick some ass. And instead they've been playing nice-nice with 40 fucking Senators who could give a shit.
THAT'S WHY YOU IDIOTS LOST IN MASSACHUSETTS AND THAT'S WHY YOU WILL GET KILLED IN NOVEMBER.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 9:59 AM in reply to georgecs
why don't YOU get it?
no one is "playing nice-nice with 40 fucking Senators who could give a shit." they're playing nice-nice with a handful of conservadems and one POS "independent", so that they can get cloture.
this has nothing to do with the republicans, other than the fact that, on this issue (HCR), they appear to be unprincipled shitheads. it has to do with landrieu, lincoln, nelson, lieberman, et al. clearly, however, YOU know how to get those folks on board for single payer or a public option or whatever else it is you want(ed), but you're just keeping it a secret ... kind of like mccain's secret way to get osama that he STILL isn't sharing with us.
please don't keep it to yourself -- do share. it's too late now, but maybe we can use it next time "we" have 60.
but yes -- it's "they" who are the morons and idiots. not you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 10:13 AM in reply to nova voter
There is no "we". "Centrists" want it their way and have told progressives to fuck off. Enjoy the spotlight. Let us know when you're ready to talk.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Chris in Fargo
January 20, 2010 10:29 AM in reply to Official A
Sadly, THIS is precisely the problem. Republicans are able to frame the discourse AND create the vocabulary - an easy task in comparision, for all they are doing is safeguarding the status quo.
"Do Nothing" is easy to define. SOMETHING is more difficult to define, yet it is the very thing we are trying to accomplish - to do something. So, define the what, for God's sake!
We are in an era of fear - we want change, but WHAT change scares the crap out of us, as we lose our homes, our jobs, and our self-image. I too understand the ways of the Senate, and the power wielded by an energetic and disciplined minority, but what the Dems need is leadership - someone who can frame the problem, twist some arms, and change vocabulary - harness the anger to accomplish change, define change, and then work like hell to accomplish it. ...Easy? Of course not - but whining and complaining gets us nowhere either.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 11:03 AM in reply to Chris in Fargo
I can't tell whether you think I am the problem, my attitude is the problem, or I have expressed the problem. But in any case you are correct that what we need is someone to frame the argument and show some leadership. The trouble is that whenever a progressive leader steps up to speak out, they get lambasted by the centrists from their own party. Howard Dean (and whatever else you think about him, he get's it right most of the time) was made a pariah for suggesting the Senate insurance reform bill was too weak, but Lieberman is sucked up to mightily for demanding the rightist concessions that weakened it. You can only play that game so long without pissing off them what brung ya. Progressives are on the sidelines. Better get them back in the game before mid-terms or it's over.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 11:14 AM in reply to Official A
Put another way, you can't just play for votes in the Senate and ignore the constituencies that elected you. I am not in the Senate, but I am a voter, and I am pissed off. It's as if the Democrats said, "Thanks for helping elect us, we'll take it from here."
So the DNC needn't ask me for money or to call Massachusetts voters, because they've shown me in no uncertain terms that I am not important to them, that my views are less important than Lieberman's.
Maybe that's the way it's gonna be, but don't expect me to be enthusiastic about it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Chris in Fargo
January 20, 2010 11:16 AM in reply to Official A
I believe that Dems need an assertive leader. Get Obama out there - SELL IT! Corner the Repubs by forcing them to articulate not what they are against, but what they are for - then beat them over the head with it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Richardxx
January 20, 2010 12:58 PM in reply to Chris in Fargo
Among other things I think this is a rebuke of the apparently leaderless mob of self-serving politicians who have fought out the form of the health care reform bill in the Senate over the last eight months.
The horsetrading to get Ben Nelson on board was simply
disgusting. There were clearly no adults in the room and for damned sure no one with any interest in how the image of the Democratic Party was being effected. I'm not so unrealistic as to think that the horsetrading ("compromise" in civics-class-speak) but it needs to be done in privacy within the caucus and the when the results are announced they need to be supported by all Democrats.
It's that dog fight right out in public by each Senator to get what he or she can for themselves that I think has led to the impression that the Democrats have no leader.
That's not the only problem the Democrats have, of course, but it's a big one. It's why the Republicans have trained the media to report only what they are given by the politicians and to not bother with real investigative work. The Democrats are too idealistic. The media cannot and will not provide adequate coverage of politics such that the public can actually determine what is going on and what is really needed. The media is trying to publish stuff that gets ratings, and good governance does not get ratings. The Democrats need to learn to shut the leaks down, quit letting individual politicians speak for the party on and off the record, and then start crafting the media message the party wants to provide to the public.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 20, 2010 10:24 AM in reply to nova voter
Problem; "YOU know how to get those folks on board"
Answer; "Democrats Wake Up"
This was DLC elitist "myopism", plain and simple.
It is time to represent "The People", not just their employers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
georgecs
January 20, 2010 11:02 AM in reply to nova voter
Wow, calm down there. You really think the "conservadems" (you must've stayed up all night in mommy and daddy's basement thinking up that one) you decry would have the balls to pull the shit they've been pulling if Obama and Reid had kicked the Republicans' asses the instant they realized they were going to obstruct every thing? Playing pussy-foot with the Republicans only emboldened any Democrat who wanted to push back and play power broker. Believe me, if Obama had hit back hard against the Republicans, those pesky Democrats would have gotten in line plenty quick. Instead they realized they didn't have any reason to fear ignoring Obama and Reid. After all, if they were making nice with Republicans whose stated objective was derailing EVERYTHING, well hell, they could get anything they wanted - and a pony too.
Now sit down and shut up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 11:56 AM in reply to georgecs
yeah, that's the ticket. reid and obama shoulda gone down there and kicked their asses. wait, i have no idea WTF you're talking about. please describe what said ass-kickings would look like.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:03 PM in reply to nova voter
Here's a start. No vote, no committee chairs. Or no support from the DNC. Period. Or just a humiliating call-out by an enormously popular new president. Better yet, get Obama into CT, LA, AR, CO to take the heat and rally public opinion in these traitors' states. Then publicly dare these sychophants to defy their constituents' will. No magic wands. No ponies.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 1:25 PM in reply to wbgonne
look, i agree that kaine should have shook his fist at dems and promised them no cash and a primary opponent if they voted against the leader on procedural votes. ABSOLUTELY.
but the guy i was responding to said this:
my question to him/her is what, exactly, kind of "ass kicking" should reid and obama have put on the republicans? i don't even know what that would be.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 1:35 PM in reply to nova voter
I do think Obama had the power to demonize the Repubs they told him to drop dead. Obama chose not to. We'll see what happens next.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Scott in PacNW
January 20, 2010 11:58 AM in reply to nova voter
Funny, I remember Sen Baucus taking all spring and all summer playing nicey nice with his gang of six. Chewing up clock, thank you, and then bailing on him, so he was alone at his press conference announcing the POS we're now stuck with.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jah627
January 20, 2010 12:22 PM in reply to nova voter
How about, "If you do not get on board our bus immediately, we will find, fund, and enable someone to defeat you in your next Democratic primary. If we have to recruit a Republican we will. If we need to find a zillionaire in your state, we will. It doesn't matter -- you will be gone"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shooter242
January 20, 2010 10:00 AM in reply to georgecs
Heh. Sorry bud, but you can't lay this off on bi-partisanship. There hasn't been any. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that backroom deals, cronyism, more war, and joblessness are just a few of the problems your party embodies.
Nah, that would require abandoning the liberal authoritarian model. Oh well.
Keep up the good work.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 20, 2010 10:16 AM in reply to shooter242
You wouldn't know "liberal" if it lifted its leg on your hydrant. Obama isn't liberal, Rahm isn't liberal, Reid isn't liberal. What we have here is a failure of imagination, aka centrist milquetoast.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kfreed
January 20, 2010 10:33 AM in reply to shooter242
Right...
The high unemployment resulted from the economic mess created by Republicans... but then its convenient to forget that fact rather than come clean and try to turn it around. As for "cronyism"... well, that NEVER happens under the Republicans, does it?
If I were you, I wouldn't be gloating. I'd be ashamed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 20, 2010 10:41 AM in reply to kfreed
Shame is not in Hooter's vocabulary.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
January 20, 2010 11:42 AM in reply to shooter242
A few of the problems in the flaming bag of poo your Party left on the doorstep last January.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mophan
January 20, 2010 9:53 AM
LMFAO. That would be ingenious. Let's see. You suffer a major setback for not already delivering on major promises made two years ago, and what do you come up with? Let's just not do the rest of them. Hilarious.
On a side note, there's some truth to the old saying "all politics are local." There are MANY reasons why voters abandoned the Democrats in this election. Local corruption not being the least of them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
January 20, 2010 11:08 AM in reply to mophan
Agree. 2010 doesn't have to be a repeat of 1994, but that approach will make it one.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rb6
January 20, 2010 9:55 AM
I am so disgusted with the continued spate of over the top headlines here. In addition, this just isn't reporting, it's every bit as much "stenography" as TPM and other blogs accuse the MSM of spewing. It's hard to fill up space, isn't it?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 10:04 AM in reply to rb6
I agree. Many of the headlines are misleading, as well. I come to TPM for more depth than the MSM and Huffpost, et. al. But the headlines (and accompanying photos) have got to improve.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mophan
January 20, 2010 10:27 AM in reply to ilovebacon
I actually get a kick of some of the selections of photos they decide to you use, but the ones they've been finding of Orly are just too creepy. ; )
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 10:30 AM in reply to mophan
I like the Lou Dobbs pic (over-thawed sausage).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Joppoi
January 20, 2010 10:07 AM in reply to rb6
Agreed on all counts.
Maybe Christina and Brian are paid per article, and that's why they simply regurgitate MSM/GOP talking points? I mean, yesterday TPM proclaimed that healthcare reform had come "SCREECHING TO A HALT!", despite Josh's own analysis that there are a number of realistic alternatives.
It's a shame TPM has chosen to do our opponents' work for them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kfreed
January 20, 2010 10:37 AM in reply to Joppoi
"It's a shame TPM has chosen to do our opponents' work for them."
Truly. We don't need more trumpeting of deafitism and Republican talking points. Thanks a lot TPM.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 20, 2010 10:02 AM
From a poster at dailykos
My Mom is a Democratic machine operative in Boston - here's her explanation
Tue Jan 19, 2010 at 07:50:30 PM PST
My mom has been a Democratic machine operative in Boston since the 70's. She knows about Massachusetts politics, and she knows about this election. Here's what she says happened:
First of all, this is not a referendum on Obama or Washington.
This is about local infighting in the Massachusetts Democratic Party, plain and simple.
In this particular race, there has been a great deal of conflict between the Democratic insiders in Western Mass and the Democratic insiders in Boston.
During the primary, Western Mass backed Martha Coakley (who is from Western Mass) because her primary opponent, Mike Capuano, a current U.S. House Rep from Somerville, was from Somerville not Western Mass.
According to my mom, the Western Mass Democrats got a lot more momentum in the primary because no one in Boston believed that Capuano could lose. Western Mass turned out, Boston and vicinity did not.
Mom says Capuano would probably have won easily had he not lost the primary (he never has a serious challenge when he runs for his House seat).
Coakley, on the other hand, not only dropped the ball as everyone knows, but no politicians in Boston wanted their names associated with her after she won the primary. My mom isn't high enough up the chain to know why this is (or maybe she is holding out on me because she doesn't want anyone to read this and recognize her dishing the inside scoop - she is old school and thinks she shouldn't be talking publicly about this).
As the race went on, she (mom) asked around as to why she hadn't been called out to phone bank, check lists of registered voters, etc, for the campaign as usual. She was told "we're not backing anyone" by "someone on the committee" (she is not telling me what committee because this blogging thing is making her uneasy).
Menino never backed her publicly ("Don't name names!" says mom. "Everyone knows he's the mayor!" I say). He never backed her secretly either, the machine was not turned out for Coakley.
"Nobody likes her" says mom. What she means is, Coakley had no friends in politics. The Democrats in Massachusetts let this happen because - "I don't know" says mom.
Maybe they weren't about to let Western Mass manipulate them. Maybe it all comes down to nothing more than who is friends with whom.
All Scott Brown did was see an opportunity and turn it to his advantage.
There is no deeper national implication. This is not a death knell for the Democratic party or Obama. This is a story of a domestic spat between "parochial divisions" in Massachsetts.
The proverbial house divided among itself, fell.
UPDATE: Rec List! Thank you everyone, for listening to my mom's perspective.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 10:19 AM in reply to lousgirl84
Glad to see this post. Thanks... That said, will conservadems like Webb and Bayh listen? No, they panic. And I think it's time to replace Reid with Schumer. Not that Reid's bad, but he's unpopular, perceived as a quasi Mr. Rogers, and is seen as tepid and timid (which is really isn't).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 20, 2010 10:28 AM in reply to lousgirl84
EXCELLENT overview!
APIL! (All politics is local!)
Elitism = factionalism
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
go2goal
January 20, 2010 11:15 AM in reply to lousgirl84
This the 3rd major (recent) loss for the Dems....NJ, Virginia, and now Mass. How can this not be partly (and maybe even major) a referendum on Obama's 1st year belly flop?
We wanted CHANGE - and Obama mostly kept the Bush doctrine and programs in place. Not in his pretty speeches but in his listless actions.
- Bush tax cuts for the rich remain
- Bush wars of choice remain in Iraq & Afghanistan
- Bush bail outs to banks & insurance remain
- Bush nation building in Iraq remains
- Bush economy remains
- Don't ask, don't tell remains
- Using Air Force One to vacation on the backs of US tax payers remains. Presidents need to stay in DC and work - or get out - especially when we are in a deep economic crisis. Hawaii....oh sure, Obama is one of us - NOT!
- Layoffs continue and offshoring operations and jobs continue. Obama has no idea ow to motivate corporations to expand US operations and to keep the jobs on US soil for US workers.
I'd like to see Obama pull a Palin swan song and let Joe Biden take on the congress - at least Joe isn't naive!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nova voter
January 20, 2010 11:59 AM in reply to go2goal
i'm a liberal who approves heartily of obama's first year, and the thought of voting for deeds made me want to vomit. so i didn't. it had nothing to do with obama, and everything to do with the fact that deeds is a republican.
as for NJ, i don't live there, so i don't know the dynamics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
January 20, 2010 11:45 AM in reply to lousgirl84
While this post may capture some of the truth about last night, it doesn't tell the whole story AND even so, it is NOT good news for the Democrats. Instead, it provides a palatable excuse for the national party to continue to do whatever they've been doing. After all, "MA was a local problem, a result of family squabbling, an abberation that means nothing to the national agenda."
The problem was both the messenger AND the message. Coakley couldn't even sell herself, let alone a tepid, milquetoast-centrist (nice phrasing), "change you can believe in somewhere down the line" load of policy that doesn't even pay tribute to the ideals of the '08 campaign.
I live in MA. I am registered in the Unenrolled party. I did NOT vote for Martha Coakley or the bucket of DC warm spit that she was peddling.
I voted AGAINST Scott Brown, pure and simple. It was a defensive vote, a vote of disgust and abhorance. It was an anti-vote.
It's not the kind of vote that will pull me to the polls again anytime soon.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 11:54 AM in reply to lousgirl84
I believe the tribal infighting is a bit overstated (by Mom) but there is no question that Coakley was on her own. I saw NOTHING by way of Coakley supporters or signs anywhere. MA loves politics and I see people outside the polls holding signs when there is an election for dogcatcher. All that said, there is no doubt in my mind that this was a repudiation of Obama's first year. To begin, like Mom said, Capuano should have been the candidate and would have except that the D.C. Dems didn't want a progressive who might rock their boat. So, instead, the boat sunk.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
KdNicewanger
January 20, 2010 1:55 PM in reply to lousgirl84
I have no doubt that Coakley isn't popular with Democrats, but the claim that Menino never publicly backed Coakley is simply untrue: http://news.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1226209
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kenga
January 20, 2010 4:39 PM in reply to KdNicewanger
And you're citing the Boston Herald as proof of that?
Umm - why don't you Google some Howie Carr columns, or find some issues from the past month.
Then take a look at the framing of that article.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
January 20, 2010 10:03 AM
The post above coincides with what I heard last night from the political reporter from the Boston Globe.
Unfortunately with our MSM, they would rather call it as a referndum against health care and Obama. I don't believe it for a minute.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 11:45 AM in reply to lousgirl84
Come on, Lousgirl, to be fair, it's a combination of the three:
1) MA Dem leadership arrogance
2) the Obama admin (she was after all their preferred candidate since Capuano was too rough on the banksters)
3) the Obama admin's lackluster policies
People voted for change, but they got a higher rate of regulatory capture from Obama.
Ain't no denying that when you look at this POS health care legislation, the increased contracts for military contractors, the Treasury appointment, Larry Summers, the inability to discuss REAL bank reform when we had banks on their backs, AND SO ON.
You're in a good deal of denial, and I think you know it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
GermanyOrFlorida
January 20, 2010 10:04 AM
I called Stephen Lynch's office this morning (D-MA) to tell them how PO'd I was that he was out in front saying how the health care bill is going to die even before the Coakley votes were counted. The sense I got from talking to his aide was that they won't do Plan B and the House is going to act dumb and pretend like passing the Senate bill in the House isn't an option. I started telling the aide about how they should pass the Senate bill in the House and she started giving me this rigamarole about how Scott Brown is against it, deflecting my statements into "can't do anything because the Senate won't vote for it".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:07 PM in reply to GermanyOrFlorida
Steve Lynch probably voted for Brown.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 20, 2010 10:07 AM
Voters punish wimps and incompetents, the spineless and the unprincipled.
Democrats have to wake up and start fighting -- in unison -- for working families and for their values. That means passing health care reform -- even the Senate bill hopefully strengthened through companion reconciliation legislation -- to show that they can actually deliver and to improve health security for tens of millions of Americans. That means fighting to pass a strong jobs bill even at the risk of increasing the deficit further. That means standing up to Wall Street with a much stronger regulatory regime and new taxes on investment banks.
If voters see the Democrats as fighting for them, 2010 will not be a disaster. If they see the Dems as incapable of governing and unable or unwilling to stand up for what they believe in then 2010 will be a repeat of 1994. This really should be a no-brainer.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 10:16 AM in reply to Moose49
You put it well. That there are several "Dems" rushing to the mic. to cry over the imminent "failure" of the HCR bill, or to demand that Brown get seated before voting, is disheartening. Obama is going to need to smack these "Dems" down. We need people like Grayson, Dean, and other firebrands. Ted Kennedy is dead. Paul Wellstone is dead. Webb and Bayh are NOT the future. They are proponents of Democratic group suicide.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 20, 2010 10:23 AM in reply to ilovebacon
Thanks. If health care reform dies, the Dems will have no one to blame but themselves. Activists will sit on their hands. Dem turnout will plummet. And 2010 will be catastrophic.
And when Barney Frank starts talking like Lieberman and Bayh, we're really in trouble.
Who is out there showing they have some fire in the belly and plenty of fight left in them?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 10:33 AM in reply to Moose49
The sad thing is, if Dems would start talking and acting like Obama (the candidate) or Dean, Grayson, Wellstone, Ted Kennedy, then they'd get more support. Left-of-center voters LIKE to see spine and courage--even if it doesn't always yield results (usually it DOES). Webb and Bayh are fighting for the other side (and they may not even know it).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 11:48 AM in reply to ilovebacon
You are kidding no one. Obama hasn't been talking or acting with spine and you know it.
And that's why we lost last night.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seeryer
January 20, 2010 3:34 PM in reply to again
I think he was stating Obama the president has not acted with spine. That is why he noted Obama the candidate. It is sad what he has turned out to be. Really, Obama governs as president worse than John Kerry campaigned for president.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:10 PM in reply to Moose49
Barney Frank doesn't lack for guts. Or brains. He knows what's happening. If the HCR was a good progressive bill -- expanded Medicare, robust public option --- Frank wouldn't say this.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 20, 2010 1:48 PM in reply to wbgonne
Perhaps. He's still wrong, though. Wrong on the policy implications and wrong on the politics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 20, 2010 10:30 AM in reply to ilovebacon
"We need people like Grayson, Dean, and other firebrands."
FRANKEN/GRAYSON 2016!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 20, 2010 10:33 AM in reply to JEP07
...just getting out ahead of the curve.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 10:40 AM in reply to JEP07
I like Franken, but he hasn't been as fiery as I thought he'd be.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 20, 2010 10:43 AM in reply to ilovebacon
...sometimes a slow, controlled burn is better, doncha think?
Although this MA thing might ignite a few big bonfires.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 10:53 AM in reply to JEP07
Intellectually I agree. Emotionally I want progressive fire!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 11:51 AM in reply to ilovebacon
This from the guy who last week, within the space of a single minute, called Weiner
"too machiavellian"
and
"too idealistic"?
I don't know who you are, but I'm not buying it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 3:12 PM in reply to again
Weiner is a media hound. A progressive Lieberman. Who ran straight to the mics after Brownie got in--to say that HCR is probably dead? Weiner.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:16 PM in reply to ilovebacon
At least he had the guts to smack Lieberman down on the Senate floor. It was priceless watching Lieberman wince, "Oh, reaaallllllly."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kfreed
January 20, 2010 10:29 AM in reply to Moose49
I prefer to have Democrats in Congress who at least give it a try as opposed to Republicans who have demostrated that they prefer to sit on their hands rather than stand up for the electorate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 20, 2010 10:54 AM in reply to kfreed
Exactly right. I mean, why go out and spend time and money trying to elect someone who's going to fold the moment the going gets tough? Why would anyone?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cassady
January 20, 2010 10:24 AM
As a lot of you have said, the way forward is more, not less progress. What they need to do now is:
1. Pass the goddamn Senate health care reform bill through the House, and if any members object destroy them. Destroy their careers. Destroy. No mercy. Pass the bill (and fine, pass an immediate follow up to tweak whatever they want to tweak).
2. Kill the filibuster. I had previously thought that Harry Reid should just force real filibusters as a way of deterring them, but at this point that would give Republicans too much air time looking sanctimonious. So just kill it, because it's not being used fairly.
3. Without sucking up to conservatives in the Senate, pass a raft of legislation on a jobs bill and finance reform (in that order).
If they can do that by September, I see them doing better in the mid-terms, not worse. The Republicans' main weapon is scaring voters with lies and distortion when bills are being debated so as to prevent passage. But once they pass, people won't want to give them up.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 20, 2010 10:40 AM in reply to cassady
"Without sucking up to conservatives in the Senate, pass a raft of legislation on a jobs bill and finance reform (in that order)."
That may be one of the unintended side effects of this "change", the Dems will push through nuts and bolts job-creation legislation under the Republican radar, and pose it as an imperative (which it most certainly IS) so every R or Red Dog opposing it is effectively postured against the very element that elected Brown.
This will make it easier to get "JOBS" legislation passed, because it is obviously the working class that is determining these little rebellions. Ignoring that working class is obviously a terminal choice for any candidate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 20, 2010 11:35 AM in reply to cassady
1. YES
2. YES
3. YES
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kfreed
January 20, 2010 10:24 AM
A House divided indeed. Sounds like the problem we've had from the start. While Republicans in Congress march along in lockstep against every possiblility of progress, the Democrats are busy in-fighting from the halls of Congress right down to mainstreet. Who, before this year, ever heard of the Blue Dog Coalition? Until now, I certainly hadn't realized that such an animal existed. Until we can clean up our own house, progress will remain on the back burner. Until we can learn to stick together, we'll lose every round.
On the other hand, I don't understand how voters can hand the reins back to Republicans, the very people who were responsible for decimating the country in the first place. Insane.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
OhioGuy
January 20, 2010 10:27 AM
At risk of stating the obvious, what we need now is some better data on why this election turned out the way it did. Apparently no exit polls were conducted. Hopefully some polling will be done now that helps clarify the situation. Without data this blame game is pointless.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SFCWallace
January 20, 2010 10:42 AM in reply to OhioGuy
Dude, you don't need exit polls for this one.
Dems proposed an overhaul of the entire heathcare system to cover everyone... They ended up with a compromise (of only their own party members) that pissed off more than 60% of the country (and about 50% of their own party), spent trillions and only covered 1/3 of the uninsured that this was all supposed to help. With 3 trillion dollars you could pay AFLAC to cover twice that including those with preexising conditions. Pissed off voters are reliable voters...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
January 20, 2010 11:51 AM in reply to SFCWallace
Dude, you don't know the first thing about MA politics. HIR didn't piss off anyone here. HIR is irrelevant in a state with universal health insurance. Think again and this time, try using your brain.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:20 PM in reply to Schmed
That's the kind of thing that's gonna happen when you have a teabag for a brain.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SFCWallace
January 20, 2010 12:27 PM in reply to Schmed
It's the fact that the Dems sole focus has been force feeding the electorate a BS healthcare bill instead of focusing on jobs and the economy. I happen to believe their approach to stimulating the economy is wrong too, but the fact that they are wasting time and political capital on HCR is what's driving the discontent.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
January 20, 2010 12:33 PM in reply to SFCWallace
Where in MA do you live (I thought it was GA)? Let's meet up for a beer in Framingham and I'll buy you a beer and a clue about MA politics.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SFCWallace
January 20, 2010 12:56 PM in reply to Schmed
My bad...I didn't realize you were only allowed to express opinions on political activity with your own state...I'll have to check those TPM rules again...next time I'm heading to Southbridge I'll let you know and you can buy me that beer though.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
January 20, 2010 2:02 PM in reply to SFCWallace
Expressing an opinon is quite acceptable. Expressing an informed opinion is preferable.
Hope you like stout.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:34 PM in reply to SFCWallace
No. The plan was to get HCR done before August but the Dems kowotowed to the Conservadems and let Dick Armey unleash his teabagging hordes. It was all downhill from there. Had the Dems finished HCR by August, we'd be well into energy/climate change by now. Maybe even finished with it with the momentum HCR would have given Obama. That was the plan.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sailormarlowe
January 20, 2010 10:45 AM
Democrats must open their eyes & hearts, and embrace the faith & morals of populist role models such as Sarah Palin & Michele Bachmann. Only then will this great nation return to prosperity & power.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SFCWallace
January 20, 2010 10:49 AM in reply to Sailormarlowe
...or stand for what they believe in and try to convince the majority of America that it's the right path.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
January 20, 2010 11:22 AM in reply to SFCWallace
Geez, I can't believe it - a SFC Wallace post that I actually agree with! Sarge, that's gotta be a first.
You're right, it's time for "Live on your feet, or die on your knees.". I'd disagree with you on whether or not the bulk of the American people want the HCR bill, or not. I think that most people don't want what they've been told by Fox and the rest of the GOP mouthpieces what the HCR bill is. I don't blame them, I wouldn't want it either.
Of course, what they're being told the bill is bears little relation to what it actually is. I also think that they're fed up with Corporatism, both the GOP far-right and Democrat center-right varieties. This wasn't so much a vote for Brown as it was a vote against the status quo.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:25 PM in reply to cwnidog
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:26 PM in reply to wbgonne
Oops on the formatting.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Chris in Fargo
January 20, 2010 11:28 AM in reply to SFCWallace
Sailor-man, you've invoked the name of evil. I shudder at the notion such folks are both moral and righteous. To calm myself, I presume everything you write is ironic.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
January 20, 2010 11:04 AM
I say the threat of a "potentially brutal 2010" is a good thing. Maybe Democrats will wake up and realize that they need to get something done.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Chris in Fargo
January 20, 2010 11:04 AM
Our system isn't broke. The battle between the forces for change and the forces against change shall continue to wage. It is an inherent, and likely wise, check and balance.
That isn't to say we can't ACT revolutionary! Progressives and Dems alike need to present a compelling argument, persuade the public, and pass the bills. It is not a secret how this is done...
If we don't have a sufficiently strong leader, let us find one...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Captain
January 20, 2010 11:13 AM
Well, I tried to get upset by this, but I just can't care about what happened in massachusetts, since as an actual liberal, and someone who wanted a single payer system (or at least a public option) I couldn't care less. Besides, they've had a 60 seat majority for a year now and couldn't pass anything anyway. Most ineffectual modern political party ever.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mjtrac2
January 20, 2010 11:37 AM in reply to The Captain
"Working families 'are sick of talk, they want action,' the source said."
Ooooh, a deep throat at Democratic headquarters. If the Democrats ever get confirmation of this and start doing things for the working people of this country, maybe they'll win two votes in a row for a change.
But, no, I'm sure they need to move closer to the center and shove Limbaugh out of there. I've got a plan: why not let the Republicans write the health care bill, and then rubber-stamp it? Hey, if the Republicans line up more juicy gifts for Pharma, you can take credit, since they're your contrib... owners, too.
Don't thank me, folks, it's just triangulation, DNC style.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
January 20, 2010 11:58 AM in reply to The Captain
You're not an "actual liberal" - you're a traditional Democrat in the model of FDR and Truman and LBJ.
It's the conservadems who want to separate you from the best traditions of our party.
They want you to believe that the POS Senate bill is somehow "Democratic" or in the tradition of our party.
THEY are the pretenders. YOU are the real thing.
I don't care what you call yourself, just CALL THEM OUT on their fakery.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Captain
January 20, 2010 12:26 PM in reply to again
Oh well that was where the mistake was made then. Since I didn't grow up during FDR, Truman or LBJ, I've never seen a liberal party in this country so I wasn't aware we ever had one. (That's a joke).
But joking aside, when you think about it most people alive today have never seen these "best traditions of our party". They've only seen the modern democratic party which is the centralist, unprincipled, and comically ineffectual party we've had for what, the last 50-60 years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jim43
January 20, 2010 11:25 AM
A watered-down centrist bill didn't work, so why isn't this the time for single-payer? Americans want action, not GOP-lite.
http://www.sunstateactivist.org/ssablog
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Gopherit
January 20, 2010 11:28 AM
Bah to anyone who looks at Brown with fear. He's an empty suit. No one will be worshipping him 3 months from now. All I saw yesterday was a barely competent, second string republican politician whoop the ass of the incompetent bastards the Massachusetts Dem party have become during the 40 years of Teddy's dominance. you can't phone it in, Dems. And if you can't get something done with the largest party majority in decades, it says more about the competence of the Dem party leadership than of the fearsome spectacle that is the Republican minority.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 20, 2010 11:34 AM in reply to Gopherit
Second this.
Brown is now in a trap: Vote lockstep with the scorched earthers in the GOP, and you have a series of "no" votes to campaign on in 2012. Vote with your state, which is fairly liberal, and you are persona non grata in the teabagger party. He will not be able to avoid a track record, and the partisan lines are so stark.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:29 PM in reply to AnswerFrog
I give Brown 6 months before MA voters turn on him. Three years from now, we'll get an ass-kicker to kick his ass and let Ted Kennedy get some peace.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
KdNicewanger
January 20, 2010 2:36 PM in reply to AnswerFrog
This is absolutely the case. This is a state that wrung a corporate tax increase and (near) universal healthcare out of a Romney administration. Not to mention that the whole gay marriage thing went down during his term. The net result - pickups in the legislature, and the governor's office.
Compounding your point is that his victory depended on huge crossover support from pissed off Democrats and left-leaning independents. That's not a base he can build support from for reelection. Unless Obama and congressional Dems keep fucking up, which unfortunately seems to be a distinct possibility.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 20, 2010 11:31 AM
"On the other hand, I don't understand how voters can hand the reins back to Republicans, the very people who were responsible for decimating the country in the first place. Insane."
Insane indeed. Well the petulant Mass. voters certainly sent a message: "We're angry and we don't know what to do!! Change but not too much, or maybe more aggressive change!!! Less partisanship, or maybe more rabid partisanship!!!!"
Mass. voters said: "We don't like the daudling, so do more of it!!! I'm angry, and we need jobs, so go to washington and obstruct new job bills!!!!!!!"
Brilliant stuff. I think for a "message" to work, you have to be a little less incoherent.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mjtrac2
January 20, 2010 11:39 AM in reply to AnswerFrog
This is not some mysterious message.
The most liberal state in the nation just sat on its hands and told the Democrats to do something for their votes.
That could not be a more straightforward message. It just looks mysterious to the MSM and the DNC.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
January 20, 2010 12:01 PM in reply to AnswerFrog
Well the petulant Mass. voters certainly sent a message:
Oversimplify much? Brown got 52% of the vote, meaning he didn't get 48% of the vote. Yet, "the petulant Mass. voters" sent a message. From my seat, that's close enough to a 50-50 split to mean exactly this (repeating myself from above): the problem was both the messenger AND the message. Coakley couldn't even sell herself, let alone a tepid, milquetoast-centrist, "change you can believe in somewhere down the line" load of policy that doesn't even pay tribute to the ideals of the '08 campaign.
I live in MA. I am registered in the Unenrolled party. I did NOT vote for Martha Coakley or the bucket of DC warm spit that she was peddling.
I voted AGAINST Scott Brown, pure and simple. It was a defensive vote, a vote of disgust and abhorance. It was an anti-vote.
It's not the kind of vote that will pull me to the polls again anytime soon.
Get the message?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
wbgonne
January 20, 2010 12:22 PM in reply to Schmed
I voted for the same reasons and feel just as you do.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kenga
January 20, 2010 3:12 PM in reply to wbgonne
Phooey. I do as well, but I'm not foolish enough to believe I won't drag my ass to the polls again under similar circumstances. I've said that to myself before and made a liar of myself, to myself, every time.
If I really want to follow through, I am going to have to incapacitate myself before the polls open.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dick c
January 20, 2010 11:33 AM
"... potentially concede key elements of their agenda."
WTF!? That's why Cloakley lost! Obama has been conceding since he took office. If Dems want to concede any more they ought to all switch parties. They would be a party of all Liebermans.
They never had 60 votes for anything worth doing. Health care was proof of that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seeryer
January 20, 2010 11:45 AM
Obama is not a leader. Lets face it. He is the first post American Idol president and it really feels he was the most popular person around in 2008. But now he doesn't seem so cool as he seems clueless. I will never vote for a Republican in my life but damn this president makes it hard. HE stays on the sideline until 2 days before the election in MA. He lets the Republican Party control the Health Care meme since AUG. And he bends over backwards so people like him but they still don't like him. HE needs some shit in his neck and become a leader. A leader doesn't find consensus, a leader leads and everyopne gets in line or gets burned. He is a frickin wimpy dork. I am not asking for Bush, I am asking for FDR's, "I welcome their hatred".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 3:14 PM in reply to Seeryer
In the primaries Obama never showed a fightin' side. Why would he now? If you wanted a boxer, why didn't progressives nominate Hillary? I voted for Hillary, but quickly jumped on the Obama bandwagon after he won the nomination. Still, she should be VP.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seeryer
January 20, 2010 3:30 PM in reply to ilovebacon
I started out supporting Edwards but quickly ran to Hillary. My biggest fears about Obama have come true. He cares more about being liked than governing as a liberal. His red flag moment for me came when he said he wasn't going to DC to fight the battles of the '90's. That to me was a shot at the way Clinton governed. Instead of realizing that regardless of who you are, the only ID that matters is the letter after your name and before your state. He didn't get it then and he doesn't get it now. Politics in DC is about playing hard ball. Look at Joe Wilson, that man called Obama a liar on national TV in front of the American people in front of a joint session of Congress and the next day Obama accepts his apology. Are you kidding me, imagine if Alan Greyson had said that to Bush at a joint session? He would have been forced to resign immediately and Rush Limbaugh would have wanted treason trials set up. Do't get cool Mr President, get pissed off. AND GET WHAT LIBERALS WANT DONE, DONE. If not, YOU CAN LOSE IN 2012.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ilovebacon
January 20, 2010 9:00 PM in reply to Seeryer
On many points you are right. Obama is simply an authentic Christian who loves his enemies. It's the only explanation I can think of.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dem4life
January 20, 2010 11:46 AM
Good we deserve it......Those who have it, don't want it or know what the uck to do with it.
When you loose it, don't complain.
To those 12 blue dogg arse holes.....uck off and I hope you take a beating like MA just took.
The dems ucked around, and ucked around, including you Mr. President Obama, we elected you to fight for shit we have not have a chance to fight for and what happens...you water the darn thing down waiting for one of the klansmen men or the two klanswoman 9Ugly arse Snow or Collins) to do some sort of majical vote.
Guess what....you waited and this is what the elected dems got....more water on a bill that has taken of 1/4th of the 4 yrs Obama was elected.
Let the clowns figure this out but Make it fucking quick.
JOBS, JOBS, JOBS
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sam the Fisherman
January 20, 2010 11:55 AM
Jobs works for me
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
xargaw
January 20, 2010 1:01 PM
I have voted every election for 40 years and voted Democratic every time. Perhaps, I am naive, but I was optimistic in '08. Bush and the GOP had trashed the country and nearly the entire globe as well. Everyone across the country was reved up, young and old, for new leadership and a populist aggenda. Obama had the people and the wind at his back. He had the majority in both Houses. All he had to do was articulate (something he has the ability to be good at) and fight (something he apparently is not at all good at) for what he campaigned on. We were with him. Instead, he loaded his cabinet with corporate whores and tried to appeal to the thugs in the beltway abandoning every principal and everyone in the country that worked tirelessly to put him in office. Now, we are all beyond fatigue and exhaustion from the repeated betrayal and disappointment in him and the Congressional leadership. He kicked us all to curb. This morning, the Administration's spinners are all pointing fingers and rationalizing the MA defeat. It is really all so simple. After the Presidential election, we were told to sit down, shut up, and go along. Pointing out campaign promises made us extremist radicals not worthy of inclusion. We got the message and so did the voters in MA. They sat down, shut up and stayed home. They were just too tired, too disappointed and too betrayed to do any lifting for the Party that has shown so little regard for them. Americans turned on the Bush Administration as the lies became more obvious and the pile of lies stacked up higher and higher. Thanks to Bush, Americans have gotten better at recognizing lies and corruption. It has taken up less than year to catch on this time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
xargaw
January 20, 2010 1:06 PM
I have voted every election for 40 years and voted Democratic every time. Perhaps, I am naive, but I was optimistic in '08. Bush and the GOP had trashed the country and nearly the entire globe as well. Everyone across the country was reved up, young and old, for new leadership and a populist aggenda. Obama had the people and the wind at his back. He had the majority in both Houses. All he had to do was articulate (something he has the ability to be good at) and fight (something he apparently is not at all good at) for what he campaigned on. We were with him. Instead, he loaded his cabinet with corporate whores and tried to appeal to the thugs in the beltway abandoning every principal and everyone in the country that worked tirelessly to put him in office. Now, we are all beyond fatigue and exhaustion from the repeated betrayal and disappointment in him and the Congressional leadership. He kicked us all to the curb. This morning, the Administration's spinners are all pointing fingers and rationalizing the MA defeat. It is really all so simple. After the Presidential election, we were told to sit down, shut up, and go along. Pointing out campaign promises made us extremist radicals not worthy of inclusion. We got the message and so did the voters in MA. They sat down, shut up and stayed home. They were just too tired, too disappointed and too betrayed to do any lifting for the Party that has shown so little regard for them. Americans turned on the Bush Administration as the lies became more obvious and the pile of lies stacked up higher and higher. Thanks to Bush, Americans have gotten better at recognizing lies and corruption. It has taken up less than year to catch on this time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
akfred
January 20, 2010 5:16 PM
I am a little lost on this great bill, insurance run by the gov and it will be run by the GOV.
This will be brought to you by the same people that run social security, HUD, medicare/medicaid, education and the list goes on. All of which are billions in the hole. The gov can not run itself and people want to give over their healthcare so it can be run by, well idiots.
This plan will save billions. Ok lets put the breaks on and think about this for just a minute. Show me where it will save billions, heck just show me where it will save hundreds. Someone will have to pay for this, taxing industry probably will not work. From just a business stand point, no business pays taxes, the consumer does. Raise taxes on business and you only raise taxes on yourself. I understand the health insurance industry is out of control, but letting the gov run a health care insurance program is like trapping a fox then saying "just to punish you I am going to put you in my hen house, because I know you will not kill my chickens". Then you are surprised when you open the hen house, all your chickens are dead and the fox is gone.
This is not rocket science, fix the health insurance problem, do not add a gov program that once it fails, it can not be reversed and that is what this is. Once in place this bill will never go away no matter how bad it is.
I hope I am wrong, but history says otherwise.....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hoppycalif2
January 20, 2010 7:26 PM in reply to akfred
I suggest you give up your Social Security benefits, give up your Medicare benefits, and go back to being the Republican you obviously are. That didn't take rocket science to figure out either.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acf_ma
January 20, 2010 11:24 PM
"Working families want action"? How about action against Republicans that have been obstructing every attempt to improve things? Their stated strategy has been to block everything to destroy the Obama presidency. Class act. Instead of working together to solve the country's problems, they want to destroy this administration and regain power so they can resume the very policies that put us in this hole in the first place.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
KevinCT
January 20, 2010 11:49 PM
Last night was disappointing for sure but overall I am happy that we occupy the WH, are in position to make further SCOTUS appointments, conducting foreign affairs, investing and supporting science and technology, not waging war against Iran or anyone other than the Taliban / Al Qaeda in Iraq, Afhanistan and Pakistan (McCain-Palin may have committed troops by now) and are making (however slight) inroads into stabilizing the economy (10% may not be great but do you hoestly think McCain-Palin would have fared better) and hopefully bringing meaningul reforms and controls on Wall Street and the banking industry to avoid a repeat of the financial collapse.
All of these issues would be markedly worse if McCain were your president. I cannot for the life of me envision any single issue which would be better under GOP leadership.
Further, HCR is not (yet?) dead and in comparison to the prior effort during Bubba's tenure in the WH this is literally light years further along the path.
Recall also that the GOP appears to have learned well from the Dems since W's preposterous partial privatization of Social Security was met with utter resistance from the Dems with no alternative plan offered up. Rather, the Dems smartly let W's proposal wither and die of its own accord. I fully believe that was a great outcome especially since the very idea of placing the "safety net", or any part thereof, into the hands of those who would find a way to exact every last dime of profit from such an opportunity - consequences be dammedn - was so utterly crazy. The sad outcome with HCR is that the result of the GOP's intansigence is that more Americans will wither and die due to lack of access to health care.
Keep your heads up and don't start thinking after 1 year of Obama that all is lost! Keep things in perspective and be sure to enjoy your victories when they come!! Also, for me, I think it will be fun to watch the GOP fall so far short of where they now myopically think they are going to be in November and spend so much money in the process!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?