TPMDC
Plouffe's Return Gives Dem Supporters Hope For 2010
David Plouffe
Share
Send to a friend!
David Plouffe's official return to the Obama inner circle of advisors is as much to reassure nervous Democrats as it is to do the job he's been assigned to do.
Plouffe, who penned an op-ed in this weekend's Washington Post saying the party needs to emerge victorious and pass health care, has been regarded by Obama loyalists and supporters as a smart political outsider who helped the candidate make smart choices during the long presidential campaign. He will help oversee the White House effort to retain as many Congressional seats and governorships as possible for the Democratic party this fall.
The White House selectively leaked details of Plouffe's new "expanded" role to news outlets this weekend as Democrats are questioning Obama's decision-making. Congressional Democrats have called for Obama to take a stronger leadership role in the health care fight, political operatives say he allowed Republicans to win the messaging war over the bill and progressives say they haven't seen Obama demonstrate much if any of the change they voted for.
The Plouffe gig goes to the new "fighter" persona President Obama is putting forth following the Massachusetts election. Many of the supporters who are frustrated with the lack of results from Washington remember Plouffe's steady hand during rough patches in 2007 and 2008.
Supporters seem relieved, writing favorable comments on the DNC's Organizing for America site. Among them:
I am happy to see that Plouffe is back on board. He was surely missed at all levels.So glad to see David Plouffe in the midst of it all again we need all hands on decks.
But the advisory job sounds very much like the role always outlined for the former campaign manager once he concluded his book tour.
Plouffe's gig, which will have him mostly working out of the Democratic National Committee, also falls right in line with the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee's new push to conduct a "forensic" examination of all their campaigns for this fall.
"We still have much to do before November, and time is running short," Plouffe wrote.
He said campaigns "can leave no stone unturned" and that operatives must keep targeting those 2008 first-time voters that Obama first attracted to politics.
"We have to show them that their 2008 votes mattered, and passing health insurance reform is one way to start," Plouffe wrote.
And here's a flashback to some of the campaign secrets Plouffe detailed in his book "The Audacity to Win."
Among the revelations in the book are that Plouffe took great enjoyment from how much Democrats like his "no bed-wetting" quote in the New York Times in 2008. He repeated it in the Post op-ed:
"No bed-wetting. This will be a tough election for our party and for many Republican incumbents as well. Instead of fearing what may happen, let's prove that we have more than just the brains to govern -- that we have the guts to govern. Let's fight like hell, not because we want to preserve our status, but because we sincerely believe too many everyday Americans will continue to lose if Republicans and special interests win."Late Update: Organizing for America sent a note pushing State of the Union watch parties to the 13 million-strong email list this afternoon, signed by Plouffe.
"We've hit some serious bumps in the road recently in our march toward change. We always knew it would be difficult, but this past week has definitely been a hard one, for all of us," wrote Plouffe, who has signed several OFA emails in the year the group has existed.
Plouffe told supporters he would be on a conference call available to the watch parties "for a special strategy huddle before the speech."
Comments (70) | 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.
Maritza
January 25, 2010 11:29 AM
I like Plough's simple message of pass health care reform because you own it, defend the stimulus package because you own it, run top notch campaign, no bed wetting, etc.
He said you have the brains to govern but do you have the guts to govern.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
January 25, 2010 11:46 AM in reply to Maritza
I like it, too. And boy do they need it!
As to this, "He said you have the brains to govern but do you have the guts to govern,"
not really, he said let's prove that we have both.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 25, 2010 4:31 PM in reply to Overreach THIS!
Well so far they've failed at the proof part. It remains to be seen if bringing the campaign messaging man back will change the implementation side of things, but I guess one can always hope.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
January 25, 2010 5:16 PM in reply to Overreach THIS!
You can argue brains. Guts they ain't proved one bit, no question.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 25, 2010 4:27 PM in reply to Maritza
Lets add the banking bailout to the list too. Obama keeping the Bushie economic team in place bought him that one too. He owns it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Eighthman
February 1, 2010 6:08 PM in reply to Maritza
I don't think anybody can help Obama. He is on a steep slide right to the bottom. Ploofe may be good in a campaign but Governing is different. For instance, Obama should drop Obamacare like a bad habit. It's a turkey and a good businessman knows when to cut his loses. I don't think Obama knows jack about running a business. How is he supposed to help us? Who wants to hire and expand when Obama has everyone confused? He is bad for our country at this time. I think he can't wait to declare Marshall Law. Something's very, very, wrong.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
holyhandgrenaid
January 25, 2010 11:51 AM
I understand fully that Plouffe needed time off after the campaign, both to rest himself, to be with his family and newborn son, and (I suppose) to work on and then promote his book. However, I wish he could have been back and involved somewhat sooner.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lucieann
January 25, 2010 11:52 AM
Pres. Obama should get rid of Rahm Emanuel and have David Plouffe be the White House Chief of Staff! Emanuel is doing great damage to this White House, and needs to go.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
January 25, 2010 12:07 PM in reply to Lucieann
Different skill sets. Rahm is perfect for what the Chief of Staff is supposed to do, which is run the staff, play the heavy and be the asshole everyone's allowed and expected to hate, but he's also been doing what Plouffle should have been doing, which is the strategy, vision and politics side of the equation. What Rove did, in other words, except without being evil and without insinuating raw poltics as the sole determinant for every issue.
In hindsight, it's clear Obama made a mistake by holding that slot in the T.O. open for Ploffle because it meant someone was going to have to take up the slack and Emmanuel was inevitably going to be the guy who did it. Emmanuel's weakness is that he thinks "strategy" is the result of stringing a lot of tactics together (hence his utter wrongness in his fight with Dean in 2006.)
On the other hand, people need to get the hell over their incessent simplistic urge to turn everything into T.V. melodrama by assigning black hats and white hats to people who are actual complex humans trying to do an impossibly complex job under the most difficult circumstances in decades.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
January 25, 2010 12:15 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
QFT!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 25, 2010 12:31 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
You have the patience of Job. Admirable. But after so many third-and-ten draw plays, the crowd is gonna boo the offensive coordinator. That's not the crowd's fault.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lulu Strauss
January 25, 2010 1:06 PM in reply to Official A
A sports analogy with similar meaning jumped into my head.
I've been a fan of the Cowboys as long as they have been a team. They have never played a game that I didn't hope they won and probably never will, but it has been a long time since they made me feel like I could bet on them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acanuck
January 25, 2010 6:13 PM in reply to Official A
FYI, up here in Canada, when it's third and 10 you punt.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbe1
January 25, 2010 1:25 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
If you can call what Emanuel has been doing vision and strategy, I'd like to sell you an ocean liner in the desert.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 25, 2010 1:35 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
"Rahm is perfect,,,"
Is that on his resume'?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 25, 2010 4:37 PM in reply to JEP07
Its got to be, because it isn't reflected in anything that's come out of this White House so far. Oh wait, he did cut some pretty good deals for his pals in PhRMA. Maybe that's a messaging thing they can straighten out. Many of us that the WE in all this stuff Obama talked about meant us when in fact it meant large Corporations. That's a messaging problem.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CranialRectalLoopback
January 25, 2010 8:06 PM in reply to henk
Rahm has been as successful as the "heavy" as Bush was as a "CEO".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 25, 2010 4:33 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Its hard work! Where have I heard that before?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
January 25, 2010 11:53 AM
If it means less Rahm-based political moves, then this is a good thing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lalo35adm
January 25, 2010 12:14 PM
Maybe he should have been the President instead.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gotalife
January 25, 2010 12:15 PM
There should be a we don't trust both parties movement:
"the United States Supreme Court handed a huge victory to the special interests and their lobbyists - and a powerful blow to our efforts to rein in corporate influence. This ruling strikes at our democracy itself. By a 5-4 vote, the Court overturned more than a century of law - including a bipartisan campaign finance law written by Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold that had barred corporations from using their financial clout to directly interfere with elections by running advertisements for or against candidates in the crucial closing weeks.
This ruling opens the floodgates for an unlimited amount of special interest money into our democracy. It gives the special interest lobbyists new leverage to spend millions on advertising to persuade elected officials to vote their way - or to punish those who don't. That means that any public servant who has the courage to stand up to the special interests and stand up for the American people can find himself or herself under assault come election time. Even foreign corporations may now get into the act.
I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest. The last thing we need to do is hand more influence to the lobbyists in Washington, or more power to the special interests to tip the outcome of elections."Obama
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seeryer
January 25, 2010 12:15 PM
What does this say about Obama? To me it says the guy leads nothing and simply regurgitates what he is told. Obama showed zero spine all year (Stimulus too small and did not fight for the PO). So because of Plouffe Obama will all of a sudden display leadership charteristics that should be instinctive? This is all window dressing. Unless Plouffe is a chiropractor I doubt he helps this White House much.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
January 25, 2010 12:24 PM in reply to Seeryer
So, in other words, it confirms that everything you already suspected is absolutely correct.
It's funny. We all disagree about everything, yet everything everyone (myself not excluded) reads turns out to confirm that each and every one of us has been right about everything all along.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 25, 2010 12:43 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Correct. I knew you were right all along about this.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 25, 2010 1:04 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
well, we ARE some of the people all of the time...
or something like that...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
quinn esq
January 25, 2010 1:31 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
I admit, I was wrong once.
Remember that time I told you I'd thought about it, and you were right?
You weren't.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seeryer
January 25, 2010 4:00 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
It does not confirm it, but it certainly perpetuates it. I was worried about Obama from day 1. The way he dismissed the partisanship of the Clinton years as being about the Clintons instead of what it was really about; Republicans do not think Dems should ever have the opportunity to move the country in their ideolgical direction. Obama never realized that. He blew Reagan during the primaries and raked Bill over the coals. That should have been the red flag for everyone. Instead, it gave erections to Tweety and Olbermann and they piled on the Clintons while giving the lightweight Obama a free pass because he gives good speeches and sounds so smart. Too bad he never learned how to pass anything through Congress without completely selling out progressive ideals. Thanks president, the Dems would be in such worse trouble if Hillary were president. Because, you know, the Clintons are what poisoned bipartisanship in DC. Like Bill said what a "fairy tale".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
madmatt
January 25, 2010 12:19 PM
Yes put the guy who coordinated all the liberal BS Obama spewed during the election (and have proven to be lies!) At this point plouffe should be pilloried for sticking us with a gutless wonder.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 25, 2010 12:51 PM in reply to madmatt
"He's just a very skilled political hack. Obama is surrounded by those guys to begin with."
Obviously he's not. He's surround by shorterm tactical people who don't see the big picture.
"replaced or supplanted by actual Democrats who believe in and are willing to fight for the things Obama promised during the campaign."
Um, that's actually what this artical means. We need more Plouffe and less Emmanuel. The mistake was to hand things over to people who were not part of the campaign and who didn't get it.
(And off topic but we need more Howard Dean and less Tim Kaine -- what a msierable failure that guy is. Where is he? Has he been kidnapped to a CIA blacksite?)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acanuck
January 25, 2010 6:21 PM in reply to AnswerFrog
Despite being appointed DNC chairman more than a year ago, Kaine has been serving out his term as the lame-duck governor of Virginia. His term ended only last week. Welcome to the bigs, Mr. Kaine.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
oleeb
January 25, 2010 12:34 PM
Why would Plouffe being more involved encourage anyone? He has absolutely no experience that translates into assisting the President get out of the mess he's in. He's just a very skilled political hack. Obama is surrounded by those guys to begin with. What we need is to see that the crew that has called the shots the past year and nearly wrecked Obama's presidency doing so is replaced or supplanted by actual Democrats who believe in and are willing to fight for the things Obama promised during the campaign. But surprise, surprise! Nobody sees any such thing coming down the pike. It's just more of the same.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mrut
January 25, 2010 12:48 PM in reply to oleeb
In other words, we need a very skilled political hack back in the White House.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 25, 2010 1:12 PM in reply to mrut
Or Oleeb, whichiver comes first...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
anna am
January 25, 2010 1:29 PM in reply to oleeb
Who are they?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
anna am
January 25, 2010 1:32 PM in reply to anna am
Meaning -- "actual Democrats who believe in and are willing to fight for the things Obama promised." Curious who you have in mind, Oleeb.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
oleeb
January 25, 2010 4:32 PM in reply to anna am
Personally, I don't have a particular lineup in mind, however, I'm sure there is a considerable pool of talent currently blacklisted from service in the White House because they are too liberal/progressive. The kind of folks I'm thinking of would come from the Robert Reich or Bernie Sanders mold.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
felix
January 25, 2010 12:44 PM
Wow, I've never seen a presidency unravel so completely so quickly.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Official A
January 25, 2010 12:47 PM in reply to felix
1977?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mrut
January 25, 2010 12:49 PM in reply to felix
Calm down, Felix. Remember that bit about "no bed-wetting."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 25, 2010 1:06 PM in reply to mrut
For the politically incontinent among us, there's either Pull-ups or Depends, you decide which...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 25, 2010 1:11 PM in reply to JEP07
Felix, what's your opinion?
Depends of pull-ups?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 25, 2010 1:11 PM in reply to JEP07
OR
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 25, 2010 4:44 PM in reply to felix
We were watching it during the summer of 2001, but then September came along and "saved" the day.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bk
January 25, 2010 8:21 PM in reply to felix
I think it's because they expected Obama to solve all our problems on day one, to be bold and pass legislation immediately.. but the president can't pass legislation, only Congress. Therein lies the rub.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bk
January 25, 2010 8:24 PM in reply to felix
I think it's because they expected Obama to solve all our problems on day one, to be bold and pass legislation immediately.. but the president can't pass legislation, only Congress. Therein lies the rub.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cawleybo
January 26, 2010 7:34 AM in reply to bk
That's right. ThePresident is just a spectator and he carries no more weight with the members of his party in Congress than any of the rest of us. He just administrates. "You guys over there pass the laws. I don't care what they are, I'll just faithfully execute them once they get to my desk."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
readytoblowagasket
January 25, 2010 12:48 PM
Speak for yourself.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 25, 2010 1:08 PM in reply to readytoblowagasket
OK.
Plouffe gives me hope for 2010.
And I'm a Democrat.
That work OK?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lulu Strauss
January 25, 2010 12:56 PM
Reads like a guy who could give a good speech.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dem4life
January 25, 2010 1:07 PM
Sometimes a little law & order is needed.
WE ALSO NEED THE UCKING HLTH CARE REFORM.
LET'S GO DEMS!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JEP07
January 25, 2010 1:09 PM
And occasionally one of the younger fellows in a crowd of political wonks proves to be the only responsible adult.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jim43
January 25, 2010 1:37 PM
All this means is a big shift to the center. The Obama presidency is about to become a Clinton-style centrist regime.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
martis
January 25, 2010 1:42 PM in reply to jim43
FFS they've been "centrist" since day 1.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seeryer
January 25, 2010 4:09 PM in reply to jim43
If Obama can accomplish what Clinton did then he will be re-elected and regarded as a great president. If not for blow jobs, Clinton would be viewed as the best American president since FDR.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 25, 2010 4:49 PM in reply to Seeryer
Yeah that NAFTA thing and the repeal of Glass Steagal worked out real well for us. More of that please!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seeryer
January 25, 2010 4:59 PM in reply to henk
Actually, NAFTA was negotiated and the heads of the countries involved signed off on the agreement in 1992. Who was president then? "In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to "fast track" the signing prior to the end of his term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing into law to incoming president Bill Clinton. Prior to sending it to the House of Representatives, Clinton introduced clauses to protect American workers and allay the concerns of many House members. It also required U.S. partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own."
Anyway, the House passed the law and Clinton signed it. The extent of his role in NAFTA however, was to make it worker and environmentally friendlier than it was previosuly. Glass Steagal was repealed by the Congress. The same Senate that can't pass a health reform bill with a public option in it despite 60 Dem votes is the same Senate that voted to overturn Glass Steagal. What has Obama done to bring it back? Hell, if we wanted Larry Summers running our economy again we definitely should have elected a Clinton. At least when a Clinton was in the White House the middle class was thriving, not barely surviving.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cawleybo
January 26, 2010 7:38 AM in reply to Seeryer
Oh please! Enough with the revisionism! Clinton pushed NAFTA hard - over the objections of much of his own party.
You're as bad as the "Presidents don't make laws" crowd. Like he was obligated to follow through on ratification of the treaty HW had signed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Seeryer
January 26, 2010 12:07 PM in reply to cawleybo
It was where the country was at the time. Again, what has Obama done to alter NAFTA now that we have seen the results? What has Obama done to alter the TARP bills that W first put into play? Give me a break, Obama appears to be about as incompetent as they come. Clinton never enjoyed the legislative majorities Obama has had and he can't even get a health reform bill, much less one with a PO. The guy is an empty suit. You can whine about Clinton's triangulation all yopu want but look at the middle class during the Clinton years. Obama would give his left testicle to produce the same results.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
brewmn61
January 26, 2010 10:12 AM in reply to Seeryer
The PUMA is strong in this one, my friend.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
martis
January 25, 2010 1:40 PM
Great let's kick into campaign mode with the big speeches and populist nonsense! WTF. People are past that and now they want ACTIONS. Demonstrable steps toward the meeting all those campaign promises. Obama and the Congressional Dem's just don't get it. I fear that they have botched it for good and now the Republican dipshits will roll into the vacumn.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
January 25, 2010 1:56 PM in reply to martis
What currency do the Republican dipshits have with the disaffected?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
January 25, 2010 2:00 PM in reply to Schmed
Being out of power gives them cheap cred with disaffected people. The fact that the American electorate seems to have the collective memory span of a goldfish helps, too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
January 25, 2010 2:10 PM in reply to agio
I get that saying "hey, it's not our fault -- we're not in the driver's seat" gives them some cover. However, they still need to answer the question, "so, what are you going to do that's different from what you did before -- and how's that going to be better for me?" I've got to give some credit for brains to anyone who's got enough stomach to go back to the polls after being screwed from both the left AND the right (well, that would be the right and the center-right).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
agio
January 25, 2010 3:11 PM in reply to Schmed
Except... who's going to ask the question. Not the media, it seems.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
brewmn61
January 25, 2010 2:59 PM
"However, they still need to answer the question, "so, what are you going to do that's different from what you did before -- and how's that going to be better for me?""
This is why I'm less concerned about 2010 than some. Once it's campaign season, all Democrats should need to do is remind voters of how bad things were as of 2008 with the R's in charge. I'm as cynical about the intelligence of the average voter as anyone, but even I find it hard to believe that the public has already completely forgotten how historically awful the Bush years were..
Of course, actually passing some good legislation wouldn't hurt, either, but the D's as a party seem more concerned with NOT passing legislation and blaming each other for the failure.
Of course,
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
January 25, 2010 3:19 PM in reply to brewmn61
Of course, actually passing some good legislation wouldn't hurt
Particularly if that legislation puts those voters back to work, back on top of their mortgages, gives them a fighting chance against financial institutions, etc....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
January 25, 2010 4:53 PM in reply to Schmed
And doesn't force them to spend an arm and a leg on Health Insurance.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jorge
January 25, 2010 3:30 PM
Christina, FYI on TPM's editing
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/1/25/830088/-Editing-on-liberal-websites-has-suffered-lately
The White House selectively leaked details of Plouffe's new "expanded" role to news outlets this weekend as Democrats are questioning Obama's decision-making.
Tense disagreement - "are" should be "were," since the sentence is past tense.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CranialRectalLoopback
January 25, 2010 8:02 PM
You want to reassure Democrats? Start by not behaving like Republicans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Eighthman
February 1, 2010 6:38 PM
Ploofe is aloof! Obama is a lost cause already!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?