Independent Senators?

    Nate Silver ponders, continued after the jump:

    Perhaps a bit far-fetched, but Romney actually has a decent amount of leverage, if he and one of Collins, Murkowski, etc. threatened to become "Independent Republicans" or what have you who caucused with the Democrats.

    — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 20, 2020

    That doesn't mean he'd ever in a million years vote with the Democrats on, say, taxes. But on basic good-governance stuff—letting Biden appoint a cabinet, protecting against future elections from being stolen—he would.

    — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 20, 2020

    I don't *quite* get Democrats' cynicism on Romney, Collins and Murkowski. They're Republicans! They're often going to vote for conservative stuff! But Murk/Collins voted with Trump only ~1/2 the time in the last Congress. And Romney voted to impeach Trump! https://t.co/hdJRgWVME7 pic.twitter.com/qQVJCQqcUi

    — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 20, 2020

    Comments

    I think: maybe a little less farfetched then he does, especially under a President Biden who knows the Senate best and how to work it.

    When I just posted this retweet by Michael Steele, a former head of the RNC, of The Lincoln Project (former Republicans who have not joined the Dem party) targeting the Trump sellout Senators. They aren't going to stop as long as Trumpism is a factor, they're angry at what their party became under Trump:

    #NeverForget those who failed to lead when leadership was needed most. https://t.co/KrNedCMRSZ

    — Michael Steele (@MichaelSteele) November 20, 2020

    And how supportive the people of Utah are of Romney and how he has complained about how Mitch McConnell's Senate gets nothing done.

    as well as a reminder of things he's done like marching in a BLM protest and how Obamacare is really just a version of Romneycare.

    When I see that the people of Maine are even more supportive of the independent ways of their Senator Collins no matter how much she is ridiculed:

    “She’s sort of like Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court. You’re going to have to work for it to persuade her.” https://t.co/fRiBP8QqxV

    — Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) November 13, 2020

    When I see articles like this

    Republican Senate signals it will confirm much of Biden Cabinet.

    Sens. Collins, Romney and Murkowski all say a president should get Cabinet, enough to confirm nominees with Democratic support even if GOP still holds the Senate on Jan. 20https://t.co/Ziwzkau1xC

    — Burgess Everett (@burgessev) November 20, 2020

    And suggestions that Biden is one of the few Democrats that Mitch respects:

    “He doesn’t waste time telling me why I am wrong,” Mr. McConnell said in a bipartisan parting tribute in 2016 as Mr. Biden presided over the Senate https://t.co/HWgDOqJo0K

    — Jonathan Martin (@jmartNYT) November 9, 2020

    not to mention Mitch saying this.

    When  the conservative Cato Institute also agitates against Trumpism

    When the neo-cons of The Bulwark are anti-Trumpism as well.

    When a Republican governor is saying on TV that Trumpism is bad for The Republican Party

    When I see the fatalism of liberals bemoaning how the obstructionism, it's always gonna be how it was during the Obama administration (and some even argue it was like that during the Bill Clinton administration, which I don't buy if you are talking about before the impeachment)

    AS IF NOTHING CAN POSSIBLY EVER CHANGE and things are always going to be the same forever--

    WHEN TRUMPISM ITSELF MAY HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE MOST RADICAL CHANGES OUR COUNTRY EVER WENT THROUGH

    How can you believe things can't change when you've just lived through the most radical change of most lifetimes?


    100% correct. . .

    How can you believe things can't change when you've just
    lived through the most radical change of most lifetimes?

    Elsewhere, I had a person question the feasibility of someone
    like this young upstart to become more than he is at this point
    in his career. Another person said he lacks the character to go
    far in the party.

    After what we all have just experienced, my answer to both was...

    NEVER SAY NEVER.

     

    ~OGD~

     

    embedded link: dagblog.com/.../face-future-trumphumper-party

    .


    Political scientist pointing out that winning GOP races for the House performed better than Trump, reads it as Trump populism not preferred by those type of districts:

    The persistent idea that Republicans doubled down on Trump populism is not correct. The top issues in final ads were taxes, economy, & health care. Trade & immigration were less emphasized. Rep House margins outperformed Trump & Reps continued using lots of conservative rhetoric.

    — Matt Grossmann (@MattGrossmann) November 21, 2020

    Edit to add: there's some interesting replies to his tweet, both agreeing and disagreeing with how he's reading the phenomenon



    First at this point it's all talk. We don't yet know how much resistance republicans will have toward Biden cabinet picks. And Sanders would have faced massive resistance if Obama or Clinton had picked him, even in the time of so called less polarization. Hillary didn't face such resistance because for all the talk of her far left views republican senators knew she was really at most center left. They might spread the propaganda to win elections but they didn't believe it for a second.  And third choosing Sanders would make a likely republican senate a sure thing even if both democrats won the run off in Georgia. Sanders as labor secretary would be powerless so why would he want the position? 


    this that you point out

    Hillary didn't face such resistance because for all the talk of her far left views republican senators knew she was really at most center left. 

    is a great example of what I am talking about in my new comment below. This was Senators doing their duty as the elite grownup body.

    So it wasn't that long ago that they could do that, in spite of populist Hillary and Obama hate.

    In the Trump years, we had too many of them taking advantage of Trump populism and pumping it rather than tamping it down as they are supposed to.

    And Mitch goes along with it all, devil's bargain, because it's the only way to get some conservative policy things done that he wants done.

    Go to John McCain's dramatic vote on health care as an example. Likewise when the grownup GOP Senators put their foot down on certain foreign policy things that Trump admin was doing.

    Don't forget that besides McCain dying, there was Bob Corker and Jeff Flake leaving in disgust in 2018. Enter Romney. Now new moderate bipartisan president. Next?


    here's a major problem, maybe THE major problem:

    Donald Trump lost the presidency, but showed Republicans a way to win the culture wars with working-class Hispanics.

    Despite four years of being defined as a racist for his rhetoric and harsh immigration policies, Trump improved his margins in 78 of the nation’s 100 majority-Hispanic counties. And he did better with Latinos in exit polls of each of the top 10 battleground states, a POLITICO review of election data found [....]

    from Politico Culture wars fuel Trump’s blue-collar Latino gains

    In the past, there was the tendency to attribute this whole thing to a white working class that is dying off. BUT it's not, because it also includes lots of Hispanics and they are growing, not dying off!

    Then go for a minute with the simplified classic view of the original intent of the Senate and the House. Where the House is supposed to be the big messy unruly populist body and the Senate is supposed to be the elite grownups checking the populist fervor.

    We currently have a significant noisy minority of Senators on the right side of the aisle who don't fill the role of elite grownups that they are supposed to and stoke populist culture wars, i.e. the Rubio types. All you have to do is form a majority block of the grownup Senators to counteract their demagogic populist culture war crap which should stay in the House where it belongs. Dis them to take their role as Senators seriously or run for the House instead.


    It's becoming clear that someone in the GOP has to become the anti-Trump leader. Don't know if it's from the Senate but a cross-link to this certainly fits here.

    TRUMP THREATENS TO WREAK HAVOC ON GOP FROM BEYOND THE WHITE HOUSE

    By artappraiser on Sun, 11/22/2020 - 1:32pm |

    His attacks on Republican governors since his loss offer a sample of what's in store.


    this reminds me of how we've always had examples of happy bi-partisanship amongst members of different parties, especially in flyover but it always seems it only happens once they are no longer running for office:

     

    Patriotism means putting country first and accepting the election results: Carol Moseley Braun and Deborah Pryce https://t.co/ftWqkYJ4jQ

    — Rick Hasen, Mr. Practicing Attorney (@rickhasen) November 22, 2020


    Well whaddya know, crabby old Carl is still good for something besides kvetching! MOST EXCELLENT!


    Addressing the cynical:

    I just think this time might be different because many voted AGAINST the a childish Trumpian nightmare of stoking partisan divisiveness for narcissism's sake. They didn't vote FOR passionate angry left politics either (see downticket results). Those Senators with similar natural inclinations might just take this as a chance to approve sausage from the House once they have a clearer message that "angry and obstruct" is a minority.


    Nate Silver said: That doesn't mean he'd ever in a million years vote with the Democrats on, say, taxes. But on basic good-governance stuff—letting Biden appoint a cabinet, protecting against future elections from being stolen—he would.

    Is pretty much same thing here, now that he sees Trump out of the way:

     


    Latest Comments